Jump to navigation
Advertisement

King Kong Review

Xbox 360 Review by Tom Bramwell

5 December, 2005

Welcome to Skull Island. Well, one of you was already here.

King Kong is a game that by design ought to suffer from a lack of identity. Most of the time you're playing through the eyes of Jack Driscoll, a gallant sort of chap desperate to extricate a damsel from enormously hairy distress, while some of the time you're working from over the shoulder of the very architect of her plight, the aforementioned enormously hairy Kong.

Yet in spite of this you'll find that you actually empathise with several characters. Most notably Driscoll, largely undefined beyond the rolled-up sleeves groping for spears in front of you and his plaintive cries, whose mantle's easily assumed as your own; but thanks to largely excellent third-person camerawork you'll also come to understand both Ann and Kong.

The key is the game's biggest personality - that of Skull Island, an enormous prehistoric jungle setting home to enormous reptiles, savages natives and countless rickety perils. It even has its own food chain, which you'll use to your advantage, using grubs to bait bigger enemies out of the way, or distracting carnivores by shooting giant bats out of the sky. At times the island twists its body to reveal herds of stampeding Brontosaurs or a burning sky creeping over a mountain range; at others it throws shadows across rocks to hint at what lies beyond; and when it's most revelling in its pageantry it opens the cage and throws its worst horrors at you, never quite taking the fatal bite but always nipping at your heels with teeth each the size of your arm.

'King Kong' Screenshot reign

It never reigns.

It's the character you'll be most interested in, most obviously because its principle illusion - that you're just a tiny frail creature caught in a world of monsters, rarely in possession of anything that can actually overcome them for longer than a few seconds - is so well kept up. So much so that when one of Driscoll's companions, Hayes, instructed me to get Ann back from Kong and regroup with him later, I really wondered how I was going to do it, even though everything I'd done to that point argued that it would be simple, eloquent and largely transparent.

Driscoll's first-person combat is split between throwing spears and bones, and fighting with poorly stocked supplies of weapons dropped in crates by Englehorn, the captain of the ship that brought you to Skull Island, who circles in his seaplane. The guns rarely last long enough to nullify every threat in a given situation, and the remainder of your success is a product of frantically groping for the spears and bones with the right trigger, then aiming with the left and loosing with the right again. By clicking the right thumb-stick you can hold your finger up as a kind of crosshair, but often you won't have time. Occasionally you'll be so helpless that you'll need to rely on your surprisingly able companions - often in danger, but never stupid about it or impossible to protect - to rescue you from the jaws of whatever hunts you.

So then, you might imagine that the sensation of being hunted is juxtaposed by Kong the hunter, but actually Kong's more of a pursuer. While his enormity and brutish strength swat away the creatures that flood Driscoll's view with red and set his heart pounding, and put the player on an even, suitably vicious footing with the giant predators Driscoll can only hope to distract and evade, the real game of Kong is chasing things down; leaping from branch to pillar to wall, breaking through giant wooden gates and preventing the horrors of Skull Island keeping Ann from his padded grasp.

'King Kong' Screenshot close

But he comes pretty close.

And yet for all the surprise, the wonder, and the simple majesty with which the game's all sewn together, as I drew closer to what I knew must be the end of the journey I found myself quitting out after saving to count how many chapters were left - instead of yearning for it to continue, I was checking my watch.

It's important to note that King Kong is bristling with moments that will capture your attention and live for a while in the memory. There's your struggle to transfer fire from one end of a valley to the other - by scurrying between the legs of onrushing Brontosaurs, and having at intervals to stow the flame in stony basins just in time to loose your precious flaming spear into an attacking scavenger, before lighting another stick and continuing the journey. There are the Rex pursuits - continuous evasion among pillars and other hiding spots, the object being to keep their attention on you without getting too close, all the while your companions work to open the gates ahead, and the number of safe spots diminishes as your typically giant adversary breaks everything down in search of you. And there are moments when Skull Island meets the nascence of the kind of puzzle design that made Michel Ancel's last work, Beyond Good & Evil, feel so neat - like the fitful battle against giant millipedes and crabs in caves that frame the puzzle of how to carry fire past waterfalls.

But curiously, while errant film-maker Carl Denham contrives to paint a story within a forgotten world, ultimately fails when it overwhelms him, and has to make do with capturing a piece of it to play show-and-tell with back in the real world, the developers start off playing show-and-tell, then leave you underwhelmed through repetition and send you on your way forgettably. It does the scale very well, and you certainly feel imperilled, but all too soon you start to spot the patterns - spearing small enemies and evading larger ones, finding fire to burn your way to the next door, and finding levers to open them.

'King Kong' Screenshot catch

It's like playing catch, except you're the ball.

In Kong's case it's even more basic - just blatting things, holding the stick forward and pressing X when it's appropriate to jump. While visually impressive, these sections lack structured challenge. Swinging from branch to creeper-clad wall to pillar to wall to branch again may be satisfying in its fluency, but the fluency is the only thing you can fail to achieve - by not hitting X as you swing forward from a branch, you'll turn and swing the other way, then turn again for another chance to hit X. You can occasionally tumble to the depths below, but you'll seldom fail like this, and respawn points - as in the rest of the game - are very generous. What's more, Kong's fighting, while visceral in every sense, merely rewards mashing rather than clever positioning or technique.

As a whole, the game's entertaining but seldom overwhelmingly so. Sometimes it manages to perform its best tricks in concert, but there are virtually no Half-Life 2-style moments of sheer awe - either through inspiring sight or intricacy of design.

That said, Ubisoft's work on the Xbox 360 elevates the game slightly. The jungle is more battered and gloomy than lush and verdant, but while it can't quite do humidity and doesn't feel particularly organic or broad, it's still mightily atmospheric, and it can certainly do 'wet'. The rocky terrain often glistens convincingly with moisture - without beaming like polished marble the way so much wet architecture does elsewhere. It's probably the most 'next-generation' thing I've seen on this kit yet. Kong himself is equally well realised and in particular animated, swinging magnificently between branches. But special mention must go to the character modelling of Ann, who is far more believable and affectionate a character than any of the others (on the system, even), with gentle features and an appreciable softness of expression that colours the tacit bond between herself and Kong far more steadily than dialogue could ever have done.

'King Kong' Screenshot eaten

Sometimes it's fun to let him win. Just to see someone get eaten.

Indeed, the manner in which Ubisoft 'apes' the film - or at least what we anticipate the film being - is probably what kept me going most. Kong may be huge, but he's over 70 years old now and hardly an unexpected sight. Realistically it's Peter Jackson's Skull Island that we're more interested in exploring, and the game gets this right. But for a couple of weak or overly pointless sections, we're well serviced more or less throughout - the levity and obsessiveness of Denham's imprudently manic commentary was certainly reflected in my own eagerness to see past every ridge and uncover the next area. It doesn't feel like a whole world, but it feels like another world, certainly, and continually pokes at your curiosity and imagination, so much so that you may even find Driscoll's view slightly restrictive - you'll want to see it through as wide an angle as possible. By means of an example, I'm absolutely bursting to mention a particular skull in Kong's lair and all the things it might represent.

Overall there's a great deal to admire, including the use of screen-colouring, pad rumbling and the deadening of sound to indicate pain instead of clumsy on-screen instrumentation; and the screeching of strings to motivate you to hurry when one of your colleagues is in increasingly drastic danger. It feels very clean.

But then it is tied to an inescapable path, which we all know ends on top of the Empire State Building - in circumstances whose inevitability is saddening once you see how the game works, and whose ultimate realisation is, in a sense, fittingly empty. The reluctant adventurers' passage across Skull Island and back will initially capture your imagination and the only thing likely to shake you from Kong's pursuit is grasping its transparency before time. In fact, I should go even further to emphasise that: this is a game you almost certainly enjoy playing to the end.

But while laudable in many senses, ultimately King Kong is as Carl Denham - fascinatingly single-minded and full of wonder, but ultimately shallow, and too caught up in its initial achievement to really think the rest of it through.

8/10

Read our Scoring Policy

Advertisement

Are you excited about Peter Jackson's King Kong on Xbox 360?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games

Thanks!

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Comments: 1-50 of 124 in total | next 50 »

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
Kingsadist
05/12/05 @ 13:44
#1
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Moving stuff...
kebab
05/12/05 @ 13:51
#2
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Yes! I might not sell my Xbox 360 now
gamesb*tch
05/12/05 @ 13:51
#3
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
not my cup of tea I am afraid, then again, the film looks 'a little iffy' too
Ceatlan
05/12/05 @ 13:52
#4
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
So would Kristan, who reviewed the game on the other platforms, give this version an 8 also or a 9 like the other versions ?

And what score would you have given the game on the other platforms Tom ?

Not essential, but it would help it the comparison.
Stickman
05/12/05 @ 13:52
#5
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Can't wait to see how someone shoehorns Sony bias into this one....
morriss
05/12/05 @ 13:52
#6
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
8/10 is BACK!!
krudster [mod]
05/12/05 @ 13:59
#7
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Not sure if I'd give it a 9 on 360 - not seen it yet.
kalel [mod]
05/12/05 @ 13:59
#8
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I agree. I got this, PGR and PD0 on launch day, and this is the best of the three imho. Definately an 8.
freedumb
05/12/05 @ 14:00
#9
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
different reviewers though, LeDilettante. And apart from the graphics, its more or less the same game isn't it?
rauper [staff]
05/12/05 @ 14:02
#10
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
And it's £10 more on X360...
kebab
05/12/05 @ 14:02
#11
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
oh not LeDilettante again.... snore
kebab
05/12/05 @ 14:05
#12
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"And it's £10 more on X360... "

Exactly, value for money has to come into the equation
gamesb*tch
05/12/05 @ 14:05
#13
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Rauper: £10 more

Or you could get it bundled at TRUS for only £623, with Swordfish, bet the reviewer would be giving a 1 or less then ;P
Celeborn
05/12/05 @ 14:07
#14
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
LeDilettante; you're really failing to grasp the concept that different people have different opinions. It really isn't that hard to comprehend.
Furbs
05/12/05 @ 14:09
#15
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
If its nex-gen, but the same game other than graphics, then damn right it should be marked down a notch. I've got the 360 version, and simply because I was more impressed with what the Xbox1 achieved with it, I'd give it the extra mark.
gamesb*tch
05/12/05 @ 14:09
#16
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"they just don't add up."

Kieran = 9/10 or whatever
Tom = 8/10 or whatever
Gamesb*tch = 3/10

It's a 'review' not an empirical calculation of the goodness of a game... [waits for Blerk to post an equation :P]
Stickman
05/12/05 @ 14:09
#17
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Please explain how this an 8/10 on Xbox 360, while being the EXACT same game than its 9/10 Xbox counterpart but with better visuals. OMG EG is so biased towards Sony!"

\o/

/applauds.

Knew I could rely on you!
Edited 1 times, most recently on 05/12/05 @ 14:10
Shinji [mod]
05/12/05 @ 14:11
#18
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Different reviewer, different generation of hardware, different price point, different review score. How is that difficult to understand?
Artemus
05/12/05 @ 14:12
#19
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It's a PS2 game with prettier graphics.
Teeth
05/12/05 @ 14:13
#20
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Why make them coherent? It's so passé.
Stickman
05/12/05 @ 14:14
#21
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"In this particular case, I don't see how 'same game, better graphics' can result in a lower score. "

The 360, being a 'next-gen' piece of kit should make up for it's more expensive game by giving you more than simply prettier graphics. This doesn't, hence is not as good a package as the XBox version.
Furbs
05/12/05 @ 14:17
#22
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
LeDilettante, go away, make your own website. Make up your own scores and never come back.

If they are "pro-sony" WTF is the 9/10 for the Xbox1 version doing there??
krudster [mod]
05/12/05 @ 14:18
#23
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Chief Editor to Chief Troll: Different reviewer = different opinions.

There isn't an EG mind hive.
disc
05/12/05 @ 14:19
#24
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I'd take the score down a notch for reason of being balanced more towards fighting instead of puzzling.

LeDilettante please stop.
kebab
05/12/05 @ 14:20
#25
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Which makes the scores almost useless in any comparison attempt"

bingo!
Freek
05/12/05 @ 14:20
#26
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Because that's not how review scores are "generated", they are infact not generated at all.
As can be seen with the Fahrenheit review, different people give different scores to the same game. Because they have different opinions about it. The score doesn't matter as much, it's what they write in the review that's important.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 05/12/05 @ 14:21
Furbs
05/12/05 @ 14:21
#27
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
/drops penny
gamesb*tch
05/12/05 @ 14:21
#28
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
This thread is descending into a 'tallest dwarf' or 'one legged men in arse kicking competition'

Peace.

Out.
Shinji [mod]
05/12/05 @ 14:21
#29
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Same game, same content, better graphics = more immersive. Add 1 for graphics, take 1 out for higher price point = same score. How is that difficult to understand?

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realise I was dealing with a professor of mathematics.

The reviewer clearly felt that the improvement in graphics did not live up to the higher price point and the ambition which would be expected from a next-generation title - which is fair enough. Next-gen consoles costing 300 quid, with titles at a 10 pound premium, should offer something more than "the same but more high resolution", and it's entirely fair to knock off a mark if a game doesn't live up to that promise.

Besides which, it's a different reviewer. Different reviewers score games differently, with the site's editorial oversight only serving to make sure that there's nothing completely insane going on with the scoring system. That's how any honest reviewing process works.

/Not entirely sure why he's arguing with this guy again, but..../
Edited 1 times, most recently on 05/12/05 @ 14:22
Aretak
05/12/05 @ 14:22
#30
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
If people stopped paying attention to LeDilettante, he'd soon get bored and go away. Stick him on ignore and don't give him the attention he craves.
Furbs
05/12/05 @ 14:23
#31
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
LeDilettante, I'd love to know how many comments threads you've moved away from talking abou the game to worrying about some silly number when theres 2000+ words above it you could discuss. Its pointless, its been done to death and its annoying.

Oh, just remembered I'm on ignore...someone quote my last couple of posts? :P
tengu
05/12/05 @ 14:25
#32
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It's still only worth a 7, pretty visuals or no.
kebab
05/12/05 @ 14:28
#33
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"It's still only worth a 7, pretty visuals or no. "

OMG sony bias LOL
Furbs
05/12/05 @ 14:30
#34
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Not when comparing a launch title when its available on the previous gen. IMO.
drumbaby
05/12/05 @ 14:31
#35
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"If people stopped paying attention to LeDilettante, he'd soon get bored and go away. Stick him on ignore and don't give him the attention he craves. "

Indeed. I'm very surprised he isn't on EVERYONE'S ignore list, tbh.
Stickman
05/12/05 @ 14:32
#36
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Furbs said:

LeDilettante, you're a cockend with shit for brains. You don't even make sense, probably smell musty, and sleep in your mother's underwear, now just piss off would you?


I may have paraphrased a leeetle.
yorkiebar
05/12/05 @ 14:32
#37
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I think we could start a "eurogamer is anti-Rare and pro-Ubisoft" thread off this one. Tom complains about Kameo, and gives it a six. He complains about Kong, and gives it an eight.

Always surprising....
Furbs
05/12/05 @ 14:32
#38
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
LOL. Talk about read between the lines! ;)
gaijin
05/12/05 @ 14:33
#39
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"/adds 'Avoid EG reviews, stick to Comments and Forum sections' on 'To Do List' "

Funtastic. Now 'Dil will be able to make comments not only without having played the game, but without even having read the review! Thereby finally escaping the lingering spectre of any point or relevance.

/puts self on ignore list to save everybody else the effort.
Furbs
05/12/05 @ 14:41
#40
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
They're the same shots as few other sites are using...
Furbs
05/12/05 @ 14:53
#41
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Always a fan of the site but only signed up today huh? Oh well. Enjoy IGN. Theres a really neutral site.
rauper [staff]
05/12/05 @ 15:04
#42
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
OK, he's gone...
kebab
05/12/05 @ 15:04
#43
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
That was the highlight of my lunch break
jiveguy
05/12/05 @ 15:04
#44
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
What I've noticed about eg reviews lately is the worrying trend of several staff members and some of the free lance guys having to come onto the comments and defend each other. The wild accusations (justified or not) of bias are having a nasty effect on the site as a whole and how its seen in the wider gaming community. Eurogamer reviews are still respected because they are usually accurate but they are losing this when the writers themselves get caught up in petty comments arguments.
Artemus
05/12/05 @ 15:05
#45
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Thankyou!
Perry
05/12/05 @ 15:06
#46
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I actually had to un-ignore LeDill to see what he had said.

My god, LeDill you are a complete f**king muppet.

Edit: Clicked ignore once again
Edited 1 times, most recently on 05/12/05 @ 15:07
rauper [staff]
05/12/05 @ 15:09
#47
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
No, you are that bad.
Wobble
05/12/05 @ 15:12
#48
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
No body has said it yet because the thread got derailed over the score, so I will.
Nice review. Well written etc.

/ok you can go back to the meaningless back and forth over the number now.
Bertie [staff]
05/12/05 @ 15:12
#49
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
You don't strike me as the sharpest tool in the box, Le Dilettante
Putty Man
05/12/05 @ 15:14
#50
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
(Comment on PDZ review, which makes sense IMHO)
krudster
01-Dec-05 16:37:34 Mirkan, I'll say it again: this would score a 7 on Xbox. The platform is irrelevant here, it's not a classic game, end of chat.

(Comment on this thread...)
Shinji
05-Dec-05 14:11:43 Different reviewer, different generation of hardware, different price point, different review score. How is that difficult to understand?


Get the story straight lads, either the platform is irrelevant, or its effects the review/score. The inconsistency here is slightly confusing. This distinction is very important when deciding on which games/consoles to buy.

Comments: 1-50 of 124 in total | next 50 »

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

X View gallery