Prince of Persia: The Forgotten Sands Review

By Dan Whitehead Published 18 May, 2010

Do you remember the time?

Version tested: Xbox 360

If you make a mistake, rewind and try again. That's been the implicit motto of the Prince of Persia series since 2003, but now it seems that life is imitating art as the ambivalently received 2008 reboot is unceremoniously ignored in favour of this "interquel", squeezed in between The Sands of Time and its angsty 2004 follow-up, Warrior Within, in the official canon.

This revisionist approach is likely to appease the fans who felt the new direction was too easy, since in almost every respect The Forgotten Sands both looks and plays like The Sands of Time. That's a good thing, clearly, since The Sands of Time remains a fine game. But it's also a disappointment of sorts, a worrying sign of creative retreat that suggests that having had its fingers burned with criticism of the 2008 game, Ubisoft's Montreal studio has stopped trying to find new ways to develop the series and has decided to fall back on elements that they already know will find favour with players.

The result is a game that's easy to enjoy, but almost impossible to be passionate about. In fact everything that deserves praise is the same as it was in 2003, when the praise came not only because it was fun but also because it was fresh. The Forgotten Sands offers familiar comforts over thrilling surprises, and inevitably misses its potential because of this overly cautious approach.

'Prince of Persia: The Forgotten Sands' Screenshot 1

The big guy lobbing fireballs is the villain of the piece. Sample dialogue: ARGLE BARGLE GRRRR DIE.

Almost everything is much as you'd expect. We're introduced to the Prince as he returns to his homeland, only to discover the family palace under attack by an invading army. The early stages find you racing through the battle, pulling off the usual acrobatic flourishes as you try to reach your brother, Malik, who leads the defending army. Finally reunited, and with no options left, Malik decides to unleash Solomon's Army, a mythical fighting force that he hopes will turn the tide.

It doesn't, of course. It makes things worse. Solomon's Army turns out not to be a supernatural ally but a demonic threat, named after the king it destroyed. Mummified ghouls burst from the ground, turning soldiers to sand with a touch, and the stage is set for what amounts to a game-long chase as you try to prevent your brother from being corrupted by these creatures.

'Prince of Persia: The Forgotten Sands' Screenshot 2

Boss encounters look awesome, but all require the same dodge-and-slice tactics that you use for normal foes.

So you leap, scramble and balance your way through the crumbling palace, which falls apart in pleasingly helpful ways, leaving obstacle courses of shattered stone and exposed timber for you to navigate. Every wall-run, every tightrope-walk, every jump feels instantly familiar, thanks to controls honed by years of experience. More familiar still are the traps that spring into deadly life: swinging blades, roving saw blades and hidden spikes. It's Prince of Persia alright, but the warm breath of nostalgia risks turning into an ambivalent sigh as the game offers little to mark the five years since we last played in this universe.

The biggest addition is the ability to solidify water, transforming horizontal jets into swing bars, vertical torrents into pillars and waterfalls into scalable walls. Later still, you gain the additional ability to restore missing parts of the scenery, but only one at a time, and the game has some fun mixing and matching the possibilities - particularly towards the end where the timing required to pass certain sections is sure to cause frustration.

You might, for example, have to jump through one waterfall, solidify the next, double-wall-jump back through that wall (now turned back into water) before solidifying things again to swing from a water jet, landing on a platform that you summoned out of thin air, replacing that platform with another as you jump, and then performing a series of jump-and-solidify moves to navigate spluttering pipes that only provide enough water in a certain sequence.

It's maddening, but also the closest the game comes to actually seizing and building on its long legacy. A couple of lever-and-cog-based puzzles aside, too much of the game finds you simply following the camera to the next exit, the scenery all but telling you which buttons to press, demanding engagement that is more instinctive than intellectual. Wall run, jump, jump, swing, grab and climb - it's the sort of thing that will be second nature to anyone with prior experience of the Prince, and it's easy to slip into autopilot, casually performing what should be daredevil actions from a comfy slump rather than the edge of your seat.

Combat, meanwhile, has sadly been reduced to predictable button-mashing, the increase in on-screen enemies (often dozens at a time) forcing a decrease in the number of distinct fighting skills available to you. Rather than the block, thrust and parry swordplay of old, this is essentially God of War: Arabian Edition, only without that game's combo depth and over-the-top melodrama.

'Prince of Persia: The Forgotten Sands' Screenshot 3

Navigating this clockwork cosmos is one of the few memorable puzzle set-pieces in the game.

Bad guys swarm you, you hammer the attack button and point the left stick at the nearest foe, and they crumble to dust as you carve through them. A few enemy types require slightly different tactics (shield-bearing creatures must be kicked before the hack-and-slash commences, for example) but a relentless one-button assault gets the job done most of the time. Boss battles are similarly afflicted, with some impressive, towering foes brought down simply by rolling and hacking away at their ankles until they die. Towards the end of the game you get a magical sword that renders even this level of nuance obsolete, offering one hit kills against pretty much every kind of enemy.

A quartet of magic powers help with crowd control, but their elemental nature - earth, wind, fire, ice - should give you an idea of how imaginative their uses are. Accessed via the directional pad, you can upgrade them by collecting experience from each enemy slain, but none of them evolve into anything that will really impress. They're certainly handy but, like so much else here, the implementation is functional rather than fun.

It's a short game as well, or at least one of those games that feel far shorter than they actually are thanks to the almost total lack of storyline or character. The connection to The Sands of Time is non-existent, with the events of that game never referenced and the lead-in to Warrior Within reduced to a broad and not very convincing justification for how the likeable rogue from the former became the scowling death machine of the latter.

Apart from the Prince and his brother there's only one other speaking part - a sexy female Djinn who I like to call the Ethnic Exposition Lady. You run into her at regular intervals so she can dump another load of back-story in your lap and grant you another magical power before sending you back for another few hours of beige, trap-laden corridors and massive brawls. The villain of the piece is just a giant monster that stamps around and bellows incoherently, and the pithy banter that gave The Sands of Time its endearing matinee charm has all but vanished.

It'll take a few evenings at most to finish the story on the default difficulty setting, and then all you've got to draw you back are a perfunctory time trial offering and a challenge mode that offers eight short waves of enemies to defeat as quickly as possible. Given that you'll be using your powered-up Prince from the completed game, it takes less than five minutes to exhaust the entertainment potential of this half-baked morsel.

'Prince of Persia: The Forgotten Sands' Screenshot 4

Whirlwinds are just one of the self-explanatory elemental powers at your command.

It's so frustrating. Revisiting the beloved Sands of Time should be a recipe for success, but this is one of those games that squander their potential not through bad design but passable functionality, hours of moderate amusement merging into a soporific whole where no single moment stands out. No matter what powers you wield in the game, time hasn't stood still in real life and such complacency is dangerous, the swashbuckling mantle already inherited and evolved by the likes of Uncharted and Ubisoft stable-mate Assassin's Creed. Indeed, the Assassin Tombs in Creed's vastly improved sequel are practically a template for how Prince of Persia should look today.

By focussing so intently on what players responded to in 2003, there's no room to develop the ideas that might resonate in 2010. For all its flaws, the 2008 version refused to stand still. What we get here feels like a place-holder, a nostalgic diversion that exists so there's product on the shelves to coincide with the movie, rather than something driven by a flash of inspiration as to where the series could go next. For all its basic surface pleasures, The Forgotten Sands seems content to indulge our fondness for the past without ever giving us reason to be excited about the future.

6 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Dan.

About Dan Whitehead

Dan has been writing for Eurogamer since 2006 and specialises in RPGs, shooters and games for children. His bestest game ever is Julian Gollop's Chaos.

Read more articles from Dan by visiting the Dan Whitehead archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (95) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • bifbert #1 2 years ago

    And Alan Wake only got 1 better than a movie tie in video game movie tie in............whatever it is??????? What's happening Eurogamer. This is a JOKE BTW

  • mr_shoe_uk #2 2 years ago

    Reads pretty harsh, hope there's demo to see if I find it so 'soulless'.

    "too much of the game finds you simply following the camera to the next exit, the scenery all but telling you which buttons to press, demanding engagement that is more instinctive than intellectual. Wall run, jump, jump, swing, grab and climb - it's the sort of thing that will be second nature to anyone with prior experience of the Prince, and it's easy to slip into autopilot, casually performing what should be daredevil actions from a comfy slump rather than the edge of your seat."

    I don't really have a problem with that, if it's done well and looks cool. I enjoyed the 2008 game.

  • thedaveeyres #3 2 years ago

    A disappointing Paneer, when it could so easily have been Feta.

  • reelbigkris #4 2 years ago

    I personaly read the review as a good rent. I'd like to see the puzzles where you solidify liquids to complete them. The last prince of persia outing was terrible, but this reads like it's better thann that but the lack of innovative features brings the score down considerably. Any news of a demo on PSN or live though?

  • lordofthedunce #5 2 years ago

    Saw an ad for this on TV last night, thought it 'looked' ok.

    What else is good for a bit of a platforming/action fix?

  • Beano #6 2 years ago

    Bummer... I had high hopes for this :(

  • coomber #7 2 years ago

    WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH TOW TRUCK SIMULATOR?!

  • Nodebug #8 2 years ago

    @lordofthedunce

    I've heard Rocket Knight is really good albeit short

  • VicViper #9 2 years ago

    Sha Boom! well that was that then which is annoying as the trailers where starting to make it look cool, only three spoken characters though? really? at least their well done right? as they have to live up to sands of time.

    If nothing else perhaps they'll pick up the sequel to the 2008 game faster, I'm blaming the movie for this of course.

    Prince "Wait, thats not how it went.."
    /Rewinds time

  • David_Richardson #10 2 years ago

    "What we get here feels like a place-holder, a nostalgic diversion that exists so there's product on the shelves to coincide with the movie, rather than something driven by a flash of inspiration as to where the series could go next."

    Exactly the problem with most media releases these days.

  • laudy #11 2 years ago


    It's possible that there are some folk out there who haven't actually played Sands of Time. For me, the review read like a comparison the whole way through...

    I don't think it would have made a lot of difference to the final score, but maybe he could have saved the comparison to the last paragraph?

    Answers on a postcard...

  • bad09 #12 2 years ago

    Another Ubisoft game not even in the running for my money thanks to stupid DRM.

    *sigh*

  • Sonic_D #13 2 years ago

    I enjoyed POP 2008, but no way near as much as I enjoyed POP:SOT. POP 2008 was still better than WW, which was crushingly disapointing. I suspect I will buy this when the prices drops (as I did for POP 2008, it's hard to be too annoyed when a game costs £15 new) and will probably enjoy it.

  • INSOMANiAC #14 2 years ago

    Look forward to playing this when it inevitably drops in price, going back to the original sands of time can only be a good thing assuming the combat s better.

    The only trouble is the depth of Assassins creed 2 now makes POP feel like Assassins creed lite.

  • tripitaka #15 2 years ago

    I'd pay for a God of War style HD remake of Sands of Time.

  • Retroid #16 2 years ago

    Oh well :(

  • Waldo #17 2 years ago

    So, it's better than ______ but not as good as ______?

  • Darren #18 2 years ago

    So when's Beyond Good & Evil 2 out...?

  • mister_moo #19 2 years ago

    So basically, Ubisoft are damned if they do and damned if they don't?

    EG failed to appreciate the new direction the PoP took two years ago and lamented the loss of the more complicated Sands of Time kickstarter.

    But now that Ubisoft try to appease EG and gamers, they get slandered for not being fresh..

    ITS A TOUGH OLE WORLD OUT THERE

  • TheJuriel #20 2 years ago

    Damn. I actually wish they had built upon the last Prince of Persia's cell-shaped prettiness. Just adding challenge and game to the pretty visuals.

    Looks like they decided to get rid of even the pretty.

  • kekz23 #21 2 years ago

    just add +2 points to the score and you get a realistic score that normal review sites would give. Just like every EG review.

  • Gunzberg #22 2 years ago

    I liked the 2008 version....

  • naffgeek #23 2 years ago

    Watched the trailer for this and the voice acting of the Prince alone put me off. Screams cheap cash in to me.

  • Darren #24 2 years ago

    So Prince of Persia: The Forgotten Sands becomes Prince of Persia: Best Forgotten?

  • AnsemsApprentice #25 2 years ago

    I think we all new this would be rubbish, no matter what this review said. It was pretty clear it was going to be nothing like Sands of Time, so they basically lied to us. I personally think Ubisoft are going downhill, Assassins Creed is the only authentic thing they have left. Splinter Cell Conviction was just shocking imo, and as soon as I saw this in motion...Well, it's just a darn shame *Shakes head* There are certain games where more of the same is not a bad thing. Rejuvenation just doesn't work out with PoP or SC, the formula was almost faultless in both, leave it alone.
    Edited by 1 at 18/05/10 @ 18:00

  • beastmaster #26 2 years ago

    I was looking forward to this and wanted it to be great. But this score has placed it into the "wait a while pile". It's almost a relief as I'm planning a 3 game purchase this Friday.

  • sfp_noodle #27 2 years ago

    POP 2008 also got a 6/10 and I loved it. In fact, most games EG scores 6/10 and 7/10 I thorougly enjoy. This will make a good weekend rental once my exams are over.

  • Nazo #28 2 years ago

    Games based on films are usually poor. Films based on games are nearly always terrible. What chance did a game based on a film based on a game have?

    Pity though, I kinda liked the last game.

  • sneetch #29 2 years ago

    @sfp_noodle
    POP 2008 also got a 6/10 and I loved it. In fact, most games EG scores 6/10 and 7/10 I thorougly enjoy.

    Just thinking that exact same thing.

  • Beano #30 2 years ago

    "Games based on films are usually poor. Films based on games are nearly always terrible. What chance did a game based on a film based on a game have? "

    The game was not based on the film.

  • hiddenranbir #31 2 years ago

    I saw this coming. Honest.

  • Demiath #32 2 years ago

    Didn't have high hopes for this game, but the popular idea that AC2 somehow is the next evolution of Sands of Time-style platforming strikes me as remarkably wrong-headed and empirically unfounded. The marvelous sense of context-sensitive imprecision which so thoroughly suffuses every skill-based moment in Assassin's Creed 2 might be a sublimely stupid experience worth remembering, but it certainly ain't worth emulating...
    Edited by 1 at 18/05/10 @ 18:27

  • drumbaby #33 2 years ago

    A 3 page review to give it 6/10? Almost as if EG feel sorry for the developers.

  • JayKwon #34 2 years ago

    I don't think a 6 is that bad a score to be honest. High enough to be allowed to consume my time. And I think worth a purchase if you're a fan.

  • Progguitarist #35 2 years ago

    NOOO! I wanted this to be good!

  • photoboy #36 2 years ago

    Saw this fail coming. All the clips released for this game looked like a hacked up PoP 2008 engine rushed into service to make a fast buck for when the PoP movie comes out. Frankly, I'd rather they ignored the Warrior Within and just made a sequel that ignored it.

    The fact that all the dialogue that made the Sands of Time so good is missing just shows they still haven't got a clue what made the original so good. Also, the Dagger of Time is just Elika mapped to a button. You can't control how long it rewinds for, you just rewind to the last platform you left, just like Elika dropped you on the last platform you left. A lazy hack-up to make a quick buck.

    With the DRM Ubisoft recently infected all their PC titles with, I think they're making a good attempt of being more evil than Activision.

    I'll carry on getting my PoP kicks playing the assassin's tombs in ACII then...
    Edited by 1 at 18/05/10 @ 18:47

  • spekkeh #37 2 years ago

    So basically, Ubisoft are damned if they do and damned if they don't?

    No they're just damned if they do. Five pretty much identical games in seven years is way too much (especially as you can more or less count the Assassin's Creed games in there too). Ubisoft strangled their own franchise, I sincerely hope this bombs.
    Edited by 3 at 18/05/10 @ 18:48

  • Pasco #38 2 years ago

    "I'd pay for a God of War style HD remake of Sands of Time."

    The God of War collection for the PS3 are not remakes, they are exactly the same games rendered in a higher resolution and they were not even 1080p which is dissapointing for PS2 games on the PS3. You can have the same thing with Sands of Time if you buy the PC version and have a 6 year old video card.

    +1 on being dissapointed that Ubisoft haven't tried to better PoP 2008 instead of doing another Warrior Within.

  • Dylbot #39 2 years ago

    So you criticise this for playing like a game seven years its senior but you praise Halo Reach?

    Hmm.

  • MaFlippinHeadHurts #40 2 years ago

    FFlipS, another cracking franchise down the tubes....again!

  • TRUTH #41 2 years ago

    Game gets released near the film - the film is SHIT SHIT SHIT!...the game is SHIT SHIT SHIT!...but the developers/producers know that people are stupid and will go and watch the movie, and buy the game.

  • FooAtari #42 2 years ago

    @kekz23
    just add +2 points to the score and you get a realistic score that normal review sites would give. Just like every EG review.

    Define normal.

  • Gambit1977 #43 2 years ago

    Guessed the score before I read anything :D

  • OrgasmicMutton #44 2 years ago

    What with the obligatory -10 for PC based DRM nonsense this gets a hearty -4.

    Damn you Eurogamer why must you always be so negative!
    Edited by 1 at 18/05/10 @ 19:15

  • cozeny #45 2 years ago

    Paneer > feta, wtf.

  • Deckard1 #46 2 years ago

    so a 6 off eurogamer... so that's like a 7 or 8 in the real world then?

  • dsmx #47 2 years ago

    Only -10?

  • alimokrane #48 2 years ago

    This smelled like a rushed job from day one, just like you put it in the review:

    "a place-holder, a nostalgic diversion that exists so there's product on the shelves to coincide with the movie, rather than something driven by a flash of inspiration as to where the series could go next.."

    Well said, very well said.
    Edited by 1 at 18/05/10 @ 19:39

  • Der_tolle_Emil #49 2 years ago

    I was really hoping this would be good. Oh well, I haven't been playing Sands of Time for ages, might dig it out again.

    By the way, I didn't really follow it: Is the Wii version a different game or pretty much the same? Maybe the Wii version will turn out to be more fun.

  • jimboton #50 2 years ago

    too much of the game finds you simply following the camera to the next exit, the scenery all but telling you which buttons to press, demanding engagement that is more instinctive than intellectual. Wall run, jump, jump, swing, grab and climb - it's the sort of thing that will be second nature to anyone with prior experience of the Prince, and it's easy to slip into autopilot, casually performing what should be daredevil actions from a comfy slump rather than the edge of your seat.

    How can someone complain of handholding in a game (even to the point of playing in 'autopilot')... then go on to praise Uncharted and Assassins Creed 2 as better and more 'evolved' examples of the genre?

  • dsmx #51 2 years ago

    Presumably because it feels like it's holding your hand in this game and in AC2 and U2 you always have a choice on how to approach something.

  • jimboton #52 2 years ago

    I don't remember much choice at all in Uncharted 2 and the handholding in that game goes well beyond pointing the camera to the desired goal.. as for Assassins Creed 2.. well there's 'choice', agreed. But I still can't think of any other game for which 'autopilot' is a more fitting description of the gameplay. You just push towards the dot (of your choice) in the minimap and watch the game play itself.

  • DanMW #53 2 years ago

    No wonder I've hardly heard anything about this one. What a shame.

  • byakuya83 #54 2 years ago

    i thought the recent prince of persia game was excellent. the only real downside being that many areas prevented you from getting to ground level. i have to say this review was the first i knew of this latest prince of persia game. reading this i don't think this one really appeals to me at all.

    ^ beyond the tutorial level i don't think i remember any hand holding in uncharted 2, other than a simple nod in the right direction. due to their design, in any linear game that doesn't feature a sandbox environment there's always going to be a small element of hand holding, it's in their nature.
    Edited by 1 at 18/05/10 @ 20:25

  • cianchristopher #55 2 years ago

    I quite enjoyed the 2008 game, it was pleasantly relaxing (the type of game you could enjoy while a nice bottle of wine sits nestled in your belly)...

    But Sands of Time is one of the greatest games ever made, IMO. It's in my all-time top ten...

    If this is somewhere between the two, it'll do me nicely...

  • seasidebaz #56 2 years ago

    the scenery all but telling you which buttons to press,

    I don't know about you but I quite like my A, B, X and Y tiles from B&Q. They really set off the walls in the bathroom.

  • andywilkie35 #57 2 years ago

    This game became an absolute no buy the second they announced they were dropping 2008's style. Why not make a direct sequel to one of the best games this generation? Plebs.

  • M4RV #58 2 years ago

    Having in mind how much I loved - not enjoyed - the PoP game released in 2008, please forgive me for ignoring the text and the final score... All that comes to mind is pretty much:

    Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Would you kindly make up your mind...?!
    Edited by 1 at 18/05/10 @ 21:33

  • penhalion #59 2 years ago

    Oh well I guess I expected this from Ubisoft. They never listen and it was so bloody obvious that only the original sands of time creator could do the princes story justice. All they had to do was ask the guy and pay him a fair price to write a sequel.

    Maybe next time they will actually dig into their pockets rather than destroy their own franchises. I'm saying that but, after the recent disasters (yes I'm even counting the latest splinter cell) they really are headed for the receivers at warp speed in my opinion.

  • UncleLou #60 2 years ago

    Still shocked how bland and uninspired this game looks in screenshots - every PoP game so far, even the weaker ones, at least had a ton of style. This just looks generic and dated. Might have to do something with the lighting, it just looks as if something's missing.
    Edited by 1 at 18/05/10 @ 22:20

  • LowEnergyCycle #61 2 years ago

    Dear Ubisoft

    Hmm. 6/10? Ouch. I bet that's gonna put a lot of folk off. I mean, I'm still tempted... But... well... Y'know... 6/10 is a big turn off.

    But maybe we can come to a deal, yeah? Me and you? If I knew for certain that there was a Beyond Good & Evil 2, and that my purchase of Forgotten Sands would be DIRECTLY contributing to its development, then maybe...

    Look. All's I'm sayin' is... Confirm BG&E2. And then we'll talk.

    Unless you'd rather I gave my money to, oh I don't know... Gamestation, in a few months time? I'm not so proud that I can't take a little bit of sloppy seconds y'know. Just ask your pal Activision.

    /blackmail
    Edited by 1 at 18/05/10 @ 22:26

  • Koborover #62 2 years ago

    Back to the Prince of California and Elika then, Ubi? I for one would like to see that universe evolve.

  • Markitron #63 2 years ago

    Since when was the 2008 PoP considered bad? Having read the reviews on other sites, and some of the comments here, that now seems to be the prevailing impression that game has left. A year and a half ago that game got solid 8-9 scores from most places. Personally I loved it (obviously) and found it a decent challenge toward the end. Honestly the only difference between being saved by elika and 'dying' in the traditional sense is the lack of a screen saying 'you died. reload?'. If anything it was a time saver!

  • Tuffty #64 2 years ago

    "Watched the trailer for this and the voice acting of the Prince alone put me off. Screams cheap cash in to me. "

    I don't see how, considering the VO also did the voice for the Prince in Sands of Time & The Two Thrones.

  • abot #65 2 years ago

    Where did everybody go only 64 comments. Come on everyone this game got a 6/10 and not a 9/10 or 10/10. Where are the complaints about the horror and inhumanity of how another review on EG was not a 9 or10.

  • telboy007 #66 2 years ago

    Only one better than Daikatana?

  • BBIAJ #67 2 years ago

    @ nafgeek:

    I'm pretty sure that's the original voice actor of the Prince from Sands of Time...

  • man.the.king #68 2 years ago

    I liked the 2008 PoP, and haven't played any previous PoP games before that. Sounds like this will be fresh enough for me.

  • 3william56 #69 2 years ago

    If you haven't played Sands of Time, it sounds like you'd be doing yourself a favour to go dig it out of the bargain bin (along with an old PS2 if required) rather than this.

    Shame. Had hopes it would rekindle the SoT magic.

  • Haloboy #70 2 years ago

    6/10 will do me fine. Read like a pretty rock solid 7 to me though.

  • muscleblade #71 2 years ago

    I played the first levels and this game seems rushed. Its not a bad game but its feels unpolished and unexciting. Alan Wake, Split Second or even 6/10 LP2 is better choises imo. The 2009 Prince was a much better and more exciting game imo. I loved that game.

  • DoctorFouad #72 2 years ago

    thats what happens when reviewers downplay the importance of innovation in video games...I hate the fact that innovation almost doesent account for video games review scores....(call of duty modern wafare 2 vs Prey) just an example...MGS4 vs assassins creed 1...another example....

    and than when we get the same ideas again and again...reviewers began to be worried (ohh really finally ?!! thats why you gave MGS4 a 10/10 score and gave assassins creed 1 a 7/10 score ?!!!!! thats why you gave COD MW2 a 9.5/10 score and gave Prey a 6.5/10 score ?!!!!!!!!! thats why Mod nation racers is given a 7/10 score vs thje NFS shift 9/10 scores ?!!!)

    seriously reviewers must review their reviews methodology and accoount more for innovation...

  • OllyJ #73 2 years ago

    hmmmm I was really just hoping for nothing but a decent platformer like Sand of Time, the recent ones just water the mechanics down.

    I'm still interested in this!

  • chub #74 2 years ago

    @designerheadache
    I don't see anything.

    /hugs Adblock Plus

  • erp #75 2 years ago

    photoboy: "the Dagger of Time is just Elika mapped to a button. You can't control how long it rewinds for, you just rewind to the last platform you left, just like Elika dropped you on the last platform you left. A lazy hack-up to make a quick buck."

    No, say it ain't so!! *SAD FACE*

    This is pretty much a deal-breaker (and should probably also have been mentioned in the review).

  • reality_cheque #76 2 years ago

    Looks like a rental to me - I loved SoT but I'm not paying full price for a short game (although short games do suit my minimal free time)

  • Sniper_007 #77 2 years ago

    Why do I get the feeling that I was one of the only people to enjoy the first game? Maybe it was because I hadn't played Sands of Time but I found it so fresh and at times unpredictable (especially the ending).

    I even loved the relationship that developed between the Prince and Elika as it added a bit of character to what otherwise would have been a lonely game... plus I think that appealed to Miss Sniper, although she was disappointed she couldn't "be" her in a co-op mode.

    I'm disappointed that this is only a 6, but after playing the last game I know I'll end up either renting this or picking it up cheap and not regretting the decision :)

  • Max_Powers #78 2 years ago

    "So basically, Ubisoft are damned if they do and damned if they don't?

    EG failed to appreciate the new direction the PoP took two years ago and lamented the loss of the more complicated Sands of Time kickstarter.

    But now that Ubisoft try to appease EG and gamers, they get slandered for not being fresh."

    Right on. Also this review focuses way to much on comparisons with games I never played. I have never played a PoP game since the Sands of Time or AssCreed so this type of gameplay is still fresh to me.

  • neems #79 2 years ago

    Honestly, if you haven't played Sands Of Time, go get it now. We'll wait...

    Oh, get the PC version, it'll run on practically anything these days.

  • Buggs #80 2 years ago

    "casually performing what should be daredevil actions from a comfy slump rather than the edge of your seat."

    POP 2008 was the first POP game I have ever played and I loved it for exactly this reason. It was so relaxing to play and it was fun too. And the fact that I have never played Sands of Time is a clear bonus as much of the criticism seems to be that it is too similar.

    "almost total lack of storyline or character"

    This, however, worries me. Despite the cheesey acting, the story and character was one of the reasons I loved POP 2008.

    Hmm... maybe a rental is the way to go.

  • Buggs #81 2 years ago

    Glad to see a bit of love for the 2008 POP in the second page of this thread. I liked it so much I actually wrote a review for it: POP Review
    Edited by 2 at 19/05/10 @ 12:24

  • RedPanda #82 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • jamesworkshop #83 2 years ago

    SoT was easily the weakest of the original trilogy, I expected the villian of this to be the Dahaka since it was the main story thread tieing SoT to WW and timeline wise it makes sence to put this story directly in the middle between the two.
    Plus would give more time to the Dahaka chases from WW which were easily the highlight of the series.

  • spiritsnake #84 2 years ago

    ahhhh cmon cudnt Dan have stopped himself from mentioning that u get a magical sword at the end?? thats a bad spoiler ryt there,no more will i get the excitement as wen the sword was a surprise to me!

  • jaguarwong #85 2 years ago

    Any chance we can have a review of the Wii version?

    Since they took the effort to built a ground up Wii version it would be a shame to ignore it.

  • jaguarwong #86 2 years ago

    ...oh, and:

    "ahhh cmon cudnt Dan hav stopped himself from mentioning that u get a magical sword at the end?? thats a bad spoiler ryt there,no more will i get the excitement as wen the sword was a surprise to me!

    The only surprise you deserve is a surprise smack in the face with a hard cover, leather bound copy of the Oxford English Dictionary.

  • Vasenor #87 2 years ago

    For me what made the Sands of Time one of the best games I've ever played rather than merely very good was the atmosphere it had and the tight level design. It had some wonderfully fluid acrobatic set pieces.

    I did enjoy playing the 2008 game but it just didn't capture my heart in the same way. The atmosphere wasn't quite there. They got closer to that sense of wonder than any of their other attempts since the Sands of Time.

    From the sounds of it this outing doesn't create a solid sense of place and atmosphere, shoehorns in the plot even more roughly than previous outings and doesn't provide new tight acrobatic set pieces to match its predecessors.

    Basically it is like a decent Quake map pack. The same meat and bones but not the same soul.

  • UncleLou #88 2 years ago

    Any chance we can have a review of the Wii version?

    Since they took the effort to built a ground up Wii version it would be a shame to ignore it.

    According to a review I've just read on a German site, the Wii version is a much better game.

  • muscleblade #89 2 years ago

    For once the Wii version is the best version.

  • khaz #90 2 years ago

    At least its not a bullshit qte automatic platforming game where you didn't even have to press forward on the stick like in the last PoP. *rage* *rage* *rage* *rage*



  • Playclever #91 2 years ago

    Might give it a go, but I so loved the 2008 game for it's relaxing, flowing feel and beautiful graphics that going back to the old formula is a big turn-off for me.

  • Seabeast #92 2 years ago

    I got this game for free when signing up for a years subscription to FHM magazine (only 25 quid so total bargain) and it's really good IMO.

    The combat is quite shallow, but everything else is classic PoP and well worth purchasing.

    I only come to Eurogamer to read the comments, because most of the reviews are freakin' terrible.

  • WTFEURO #93 2 years ago

    WHAT THE F**K EURO????? 6/10? It's worth a 9 and you frickin know it. You blatantly did not play it. >:(

  • WoodenSpoon #94 2 years ago

    Saw this being played last night and I have to say the score here seems really harsh.

    After the Sands of Time sequels everyone complained that they wanted the first game back; now its here and it gets panned for being too much like Sands of Time.

  • kmheurogamer #95 1 year ago

    This game was a lot of fun and felt like a return to the old POP series. What a shame this review only picks out negative aspects of a title I had a great time playing. The world art is stunning and the puzzles enjoyable. It is certainly no movie tie in.

    Great game. Dissapointing review.