Prince of Persia: Warrior Within Review

By Tom Bramwell Published 1 December, 2004

We need to turn back time, but we've run out of sand.

Version tested: Xbox

Order yours now from Simply Games.

"You bitch!"

Okay, so that's a bit out of line. But in trying to summarise the Prince of Persia's dramatic shift from wash-clean poster boy for grown-up platforming into the dark shroud of whatever gothic monstrosity inspired his new look, this quote - borrowed from an early clash with a largely-naked female adversary - seems like the most obvious one to crib.

Reddy?

'Prince of Persia: Warrior Within' Screenshot 1

The Prince is a lot darker now, see. For meddling with the timeline in last year's Sands of Time, he's condemned to be stalked through life by the Dahaka, an unstoppable monster with a single objective: the Prince's death. The only way he can change his fate, the Prince reasons, is to go to the Castle of Time where the Sands were originally forged, and use some of its many portals to journey back through history and stop them ever being made in the first place, thus negating the threat of the Dahaka and virtually everything else in the process - including the first game. He will do this by running along walls, leaping balletically between ledges and horizontal bars, solving a huge number of puzzles and killing anything in his path.

Which is fair enough. Except this newfound desire to cancel out The Sands of Time seems to have spread a bit beyond the bounds of the story. You could even argue that Warrior Within does so with reckless abandon. Gone is the clever save game system, which grabbed the Prince like a squeeze-toy and gave us a quick glimpse of some of the exciting things we were about to do, meaning that we simply couldn't bring ourselves to turn off the console, and guaranteeing that the phrase "just one more go" would appear in every review. In its place you can now save whenever you find a particular water fountain. Combat is no longer held at arm's length and wheeled out between the vast puzzles, but instead crops up regularly as we try and make our way around the labyrinthine castle's many brainteasers. Twinkling corridors no longer beckon us into misty, dream-like fountain shrines that upgrade the Prince's health. And the whole game is bathed in the red glow of blood. Everything's grimmer and grimier; even the Prince himself, who seems to have arrived at the castle via a Linkin Park video - complete with a horrendous metal soundtrack that only ever feels like it belongs when the Prince climbs into a gothic elevator.

Bloody hell

'Prince of Persia: Warrior Within' Screenshot 2

It's all part of a broad effort to improve the series' appeal. Other changes include the expanded combat system that's been trailed so heavily since May. Combos are more fluid and exacting (and you can now make progress without having to rely on the back-into-the-wall-and-spring-forward-to-knock-them-over manoeuvre every single time), you can pick up a second blade which wears out over time and either use it to perform spinny and slashy combos or throw it, you can spin around pillars to slash at necks, and you no longer have to stab enemies on the floor to finish them off - although we reckon this is more in order to facilitate the gruesome decapitation/neck-slice/cut-in-half death animations than anything else.

The game is also longer, and this time it even has bosses. Proper ones. Although some of them cheekily reuse the same sort of attack combos as each other (leading to a predictable tactic of holding block, waiting for him or her to stop slashing, then jumping in for the two or three permitted strikes and retreating into a block stance again), some of them are big, challenging and inventive.

But in attempting to expand its appeal, Ubisoft has arguably robbed Prince of Persia of much of the charm that sold us The Sands of Time, and a number of basic design issues compound this problem. Combat may be better and more approachable, but it's still less than brilliant, with enemies who explode when they die (Ubisoft: go and stand in the corner) and enemies who appear out of nowhere, and while we've always held the game's controls and camera in relatively high regard compared to the rest of the genre output, we still wound up mashing buttons in frustration at the fifth pointless battle in a row and then hurling ourselves into an abyss by accidentally springing off the wall or leaping over someone's head. And even if you like the combat, we can't imagine you liking it that much after more than a handful of hours in front of the TV.

Running away made fun

'Prince of Persia: Warrior Within' Screenshot 3

And while running along walls and leaping fluidly exactly where you want to go (with the option to undo things by rewinding the game when you fail; one of the best features of the first game and a worthy survivor) is still wonderful when it's at its best, and the occasional frantic races to escape the Dahaka by racing along walls and flipping between bars at speed provide some of the game's sharpest adrenaline surges, the actual platforming process hasn't evolved much. You can slide down banners by sticking your sword in them now, and there are a couple of new breeds of spike trap, but the lack of serious changes here mean that much of the platforming - while immensely pleasurable - can be completed more or less on autopilot. Which is just as well, because there are some irritating occasions now when painful combat (usually involving prancing lady vampires or something) is tacked onto the end of a relatively straightforward but time-consuming platform section, meaning that if you end up dying repeatedly you also end up re-jumping the same gaps over and over needlessly.

The split between fighting and platforming is not as heavily slanted towards the slashing as we'd feared. All the same though, the magic balance of the first game has suffered. Few of the puzzles in Warrior Within require as much mental application as those in The Sands of Time. We used to love walking into a room and having to really think before we could get out the other side, and the satisfaction that gave us (remember the library, for example?). Here, we walk into a room and our main concerns are a) killing things, b) how long it's been since we saved, and c) whether we're in the right room at all.

The latter point is a by-product of the game's non-linearity. You spend most of your quest trying to unlock a door by taking down a pair of mechanical towers, which you can tackle in any order, and you also find yourself regularly hopping back and forward in time using portals, which shift the castle between the rundown, decrepit ruin of the present and the majestic sharpness of its heyday. But while it is visually inspiring to run through a section of crumbling castle and then come back and see it reborn, you are still fundamentally running backward and forward through the same section of crumbling castle, and the absence of the first game's comforting linearity coupled with the somewhat nondescript map ultimately renders it more dizzying than dazzling after a while, and there were definitely times when we didn't know where we were going. Or, worse, faced with a pair of routes we wound up accidentally heading off down a well-guarded and booby-trapped corridor leading to a pointless room that contained Concept Art in a treasure chest. Yeah.

Time to look good

'Prince of Persia: Warrior Within' Screenshot 4

The little irritations constantly strike hard. Like being pegged back to odd junctures when you die (having us respawn just before a tough battle with a huge enemy with only a slither of health, when we actually died climbing a section that took a further five minutes of platforming to get to, is a sure-fire way of getting us to switch off the console in disgust), or being thrown off-guard by the camera doubling back on itself, getting caught under ledges, or getting stuck in a wall.

As you get further and further into the game, you discover that you like it less and less. The platforming is still great. We feel the need to try and reinforce this at regular intervals. But so much is lost or changed to its detriment. And, frankly, the new darker approach is the key to most of the game's shortfalls. The Prince may be grittier and may snarl in battle (the majority of his enemies, for the record, screech like cats being cut in half), but this hasn't made him more accessible, it's made him less likeable. The voice acting, even in the cut-scenes (which vary from beautifully rendered to rather tedious) is hit and miss, and the script is full of lines that are so un-Prince-like that you screw up your face in embarrassment. Certainly the story can't match the plight of the Prince and Farah for emotional investment. He's just out to save his own skin. There are some busty female characters, but they merely serve to underline the game's forced maturity. The irony, of course, being that The Sands of Time was already mature - boldly different in style with an eloquent lead and a grown-up bond between two unlikely allies at the centre of it all - whereas Warrior Within feels like it's regressed into generic teenage angst with swords and impossibly-breasted harlots.

Fortunately the darkness doesn't render the graphics any less gorgeous. The sepia tint and vibrant Arabian theme may be gone, but the animation and other visual effects (particularly the use of sand and water) are still jumping much higher than most, and the environments, at their best, are extraordinarily detailed and beautiful; so much so that we can forgive the occasional dip in frame rate.

"I am the Prince of Persia." Lies. We've met him. Younger chap. Likeable.

But as you can tell we're left struggling to like it. It feels harsh to be coming down so hard on it - its platforming mechanics are still some of the best we've ever seen in a 3D game, it looks brilliant far more often than it looks poor, and it retains many of the design ideas that made the first one such a dream, even if they're not utilised quite so effectively - but The Sands of Time set such a high standard in virtually every area that anything less was always going to be disappointing, and discovering that many of the bits that were nigh on flawless are less taxing, less focused, or are just the same with a scar across the face, is deeply upsetting. As the curtain falls on Warrior Within, you can't help thinking that in trying to make the game more approachable for the masses Ubisoft has instead alienated a large number of the people who've been busy singing its praises for close to a year.

Surely the only thing more upsetting than that is the prospect of this outselling The Sands of Time, and in the process cementing a stylistic change that we, as the gamers whose enthusiasm helped justify this sequel at all, would have been far happier without. Fair's fair, Warrior Within is still better than most platformers, but we prefer things the way they used to be. Bitch.

Order yours now from Simply Games.

7 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (131) Latest comment 7 years ago

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

  • IronGiant #1 7 years ago

    Played this for a while.. was not impressed at all. Went back to play PoP instead! :)

  • Foregone Reality #2 7 years ago

    "Be the first to write a comment for this article... Or not. It doesn't really affect me."

    Admit it Mugwum..! You know that these comments mean a lot to you..! ;)

    That said. It's a shame that mainstream gamers miss the intricate details of what made the original so great; and then opt for blood and gore instead with some swears for extra "Kewlness".

    Well..That's business I suppose.
    Edited by 2 at 01/12/04 @ 15:50

  • Ted Cuntablast #3 7 years ago

    Oh dear. And no widescreen either?

  • IronGiant #4 7 years ago

    They've successfully chav'd up Prince of Persia, congrats now let's see if they can ruin the next Beyond Good and Evil..

    /crosses fingers that they don't

  • Thamuhacha #5 7 years ago

    >"I am the Prince of Persia." Lies. We've met him. Younger chap. Likeable.

    Like this.

  • Freek #6 7 years ago

    You have to make the game crap in order to sell more of them?
    It boggels the mind. It was to be expected, read somewhere the guy behind Sands of Time was doing something else, confident that the team would do well on their own. A mistake that killed Devil May Cry 2 and will probably kill off Metal Gear Solid as soon as Kojima leaves aswell (or in that case maybe the series will get better, without the endless dialoge and cuttscenes).

    Still the way the story plays out:
    The only way he can change his fate, the Prince reasons, is to go to the Castle of Time where the Sands were originally forged, and use some of its many portals to journey back through history and stop them ever being made in the first place,
    Would mean the next game (if they ever make it) will be back to normal.
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/04 @ 15:59

  • tengu #7 7 years ago

    Hmm... I dunno... Loved the last game, but I can't decide on this one...

    I'll rent it first and see what happens there.

    And does he seriously say "I am the Prince of Persia, and the King of Blades!" in the game?

    I guess he doesn't include RAZOR blades in that statement, does he? The scruffy, hobo lookin' prat!

    (I know I've already made that joke, but I feel it was worth repeating...)

  • WoodenSpoon #8 7 years ago

    :(

  • Blerk #9 7 years ago

    I. Am. So. Confused. :-(

    /bang!

  • Dr.Haggard #10 7 years ago

    :'(

  • Schwabing #11 7 years ago

    does he still say 'no, no, that's not what happened' when you die? I liked that.

    so this is a sequel for those that didn't like the first one and didn't buy it rather than those who did like it and did buy it? muppets.

  • Dougs #12 7 years ago

    Dammit Ubi. Why did you have to ruin everything. SOT was my favourite game of last year, and now I'm left feeling very underwhelmed at the prospect of this. I'll probably pick it up after Xmas, out of some misguided sense of loyalty I guess, but only if its cheap.

    May have to have one last go on SOT for old time's sake.

  • Thamuhacha #13 7 years ago

    >does he still say 'no, no, that's not what happened' when you die?

    A Mr T style "that ain't what happened fool!" would be better

    Edit - to the Ubisoft employess named svabbi - 7 out of 10 is pretty good. And the review is very positive about the game mechanics. Calm down.
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/04 @ 16:09

  • Freek #14 7 years ago

    RE: Svabbi

    No, the reviewer diden't want what you describe as Halo 2, he(and many with him) wanted something like Half Life 2: a sequal that takes the series to a new level while keeping all it's strenghts and style.
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/04 @ 16:09

  • [maven] #15 7 years ago

    Svabbi, you like Bloodrayne (2)? ;)

  • UncleLou #16 7 years ago

    Confusing non-linearity? Oh dear. That's not my idea of fun. Just because every idiot cries "it's too linear" automatically at every game, that doesn't mean non-linearity makes sense for every genre. :-/

    Still sitting on the fence. Didn't find the demo as bad as some people, but I wasn't convinced I need this, either.
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/04 @ 16:10

  • gamingdave #17 7 years ago

    Really enjoyed what I played of the first one, must go back and finish it. Sounds like theyve cocked it up though. The things I loved about the SOT were in the detials, the voices and the pacing. Fighting was fine as it was (from what I played) but it was all about swinging, leaping and wall running that made it a joy. Oh well, lets just hope Wanda hasnt been chaved.

  • mal #18 7 years ago

    Was a bit concerned by the Games TM score that I might have to go and get this after all. But it looks like instead I can safely spend my money and time on more worthy games. Hurrah!

  • groovychainsaw #19 7 years ago

    damn - loved the first one, but couldn't help but feel that this one would be a disappointment - what I (personal opinion warning...) think they should have done was ramp up the complexity of the platform/puzzling and have NO combat - a bold move, but I loved walking into the rooms and working out how to get to the top (the aviary form the original pops into my head here) far more than the combat, which was... meh

  • Blerk #20 7 years ago

    Is there a PS2 demo yet?

    /considers waiting for January sales

  • asphaltcowboy #21 7 years ago

    well, I'm disappointed... yet strangely still excited... One for the Christmas list methinks :D

  • mingster #22 7 years ago

    svabbi - remember everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
    I respect yours and it's noted you liked the game .. that's great.
    Saying the review is bullshit etc.. makes people think you are a tard and your opinion then becomes void. Constructive reasons as to why the review is flawed is more sensible, swearing and saying 'u don't know jack, this game is da nutz' makes you look a twat or even worse a PR/Marketing person. (heeh sorry Marketing people...)
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/04 @ 16:18

  • Razzajazz #23 7 years ago

    Thank you for your stunning insight, Svabbi, but I feel I will trust the opinion of EG over the opioion of an UbiSoft PR rep!

    As Thamuhacha says, they're not saying the game is crap, they're saying it doesn't live up to the incredibly high standards of the first one. It will never cease to amaze me how the games industry tries to pitch gaming as the future of entertainment, something that will be diverse and inclusive, and then target a specific (Usually American) demographic of 14 year old, hormonally incapcitated 133t speakers!

    I really enjoyed POP:SOT, especially since Play was selling it for £9.99! Perhaps I will wait and do the same with this one!

  • Freek #24 7 years ago

    There's a demo, nobody liked that either.

    See that's kinda of why people read reviews, to see if the game is worth your hard earned cash.

  • Thamuhacha #25 7 years ago

    >There's a demo, nobody liked that either.

    True. I am intrigued by the concept of releasing demos and review code (aim: to give people an idea of what the game is like and so on) if we should apparently play it for ourselves.

    Doesn't really work.

    Not impressed with demo + not overly impressed with game from review (by reviewer I trust) = buying something else!
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/04 @ 16:20

  • Whizzo #26 7 years ago

    this is just one mans opinion.

    As is yours.

    Repeating the same stuff over and over maybe some humourous in-joke concerning the Sands of Time but I'm not convinced.

  • IronGiant #27 7 years ago

    who the hell is this Svabbi tard anyway?

    ahhhh, remembers i'm ignoring all unregistered posters!! it's much better this way, i recommend you all do it..

  • tengu #28 7 years ago

    But they're so cute!

  • Dr.Haggard #29 7 years ago

    My review of WW:

    Utter Bastards.

    True, it lacks the charm, eloquence and engaging personality of Tom's review, that 'just one more sentence' feeling, and is perhaps a little immature - you might say it's darker and more edgy too - but I feel it was more important to write it quickly and get straight to the point.

    I don't mind if those of you who enjoyed the original review are a little disappointed with my effort, but at least you all read it, and that's all that matters to me.

  • mingster #30 7 years ago

    But irongiant, ignoring the great unwashed means your missing half of the fun.

  • Dizzy #31 7 years ago

    Gothic == fashionable

    It is 1985 all over again! ;)

  • Whizzo #32 7 years ago

    Played the demo : it was shit.

    Mind made up by : myself.

    If demo is unrepresentative of final product it shouldn't have been released.

  • magicpanda #33 7 years ago

    scores dont maketh the game Svabbi.. Its what's in the review.. have you read the review Svabbi. Can you read big pages Svabbi?

    Now be a good boy and go back to shooting racoons from the top of your moms trailer.

  • absolutezero #34 7 years ago

    That song that plays over the intro is truely painfull. Its really really really bad and just doesnt fit the game.

    Is it me or did they not have d tuned guitars in ancient Arabia?

  • Thamuhacha #35 7 years ago

    >Read more reviews:

    Svabbi - that 88% score is based on six reviews, only one of which IGN recognise enough to award a quality rating to.

    If I had my cynical hat on they are the six who got the code early and might have felt the pressure to be nice in exchange for the exclusive.

    Or maybe not. Let's wait until there are 92 reviews like the sands of time page has. Then we can chat about it.

  • Schwabing #36 7 years ago

    "How about actually playing the game yourself instead of following the dumbass who wrote this crappy review like some mindless muppets?"

    Ignore someone who's opinion we have come to trust over a long period and buy the game anyway, you mean? perhaps.

  • posh_geordie #37 7 years ago

    Post deleted at 18:45:04 02-01-2012

  • Blerk #38 7 years ago

    I see Edge gave it a '7' too.

    /starts conspiracy theory

  • mal #39 7 years ago

    Svabbi, that's six other reviews...all from sites I don't trust. Personally I'll pay more heed to this review than those - which still gives it a passable 70%, but indicates, on reading it, that it's probably not going to be a game I enjoy. Thanks for telling us that you enjoyed us, because that's worth knowing. No thanks for calling us wankers though, you know?

  • absolutezero #40 7 years ago

    Svabbi did you not read everyone who said they played the demo and it was shit then?

    I was going to get this, Im not anymore.

    Plus I think Edge gave it a 7 which I trust more than the EG score anyway.

  • Blerk #41 7 years ago

    Nice quote from the Edge review, courtesy of Metacritic:
    "Ubisoft has taken a flawed game of boundless promise, destroyed some (but not all) of its appeal, fixed some (but not enough) of its problems, and jeopardised the whole endeavour by making the same mistake twice and rushing it to market before it was steady on its feet. Prince of Persia is strong and supple enough to survive this with many of its immense virtues intact. But it deserved so much better."

    Seems to back up what Tom says, I reckon.

  • mash the x button #42 7 years ago

    "It's all part of a broad effort to improve the series' appeal."

    Not for me I'm afraid.

  • drumbaby #43 7 years ago

    The PC demo had 'suck' written all over it.

  • speedjack #44 7 years ago

    Svabbi, nice try. Heres another link :-

    http://www.gametab.com/xbox/prince.of.persia.wa rrior.within/2667/

    As you'll see from the link both the quoted reviews say exactly the same as above. I.E. By no means crap, but sadly, not as good as the first one and has had most of the charm of the original removed.

    Now can you please register before you make another comment, so I can click on 'ignore ?'
    Edited by 1 at 01/12/04 @ 16:39

  • onyxbox #45 7 years ago

    Svabbi,

    Chill out man, it's just a game. It's just an opinion... why get so excited.

  • Thamuhacha #46 7 years ago

    I make this about 15 to 20 people who would have bought this. But now won't. At least until it goes to £20 / €30 or something.

    THE POWER OF THE PRESS!

  • onyxbox #47 7 years ago

    The first game had a little bit of ICO magic about it and I suspect that's gone now.

    :-/

  • Mr_Sleep #48 7 years ago

    Blerk said: "Is there a PS2 demo yet?"

    Aye, I've got one but I don't have a Ps2, I'll send you it if you want. mr_sleep at btinternet dot com

  • Blerk #49 7 years ago

    Cheers, Mr Sleep! That's very kind!

    /goes off to email

  • Mr_Sleep #50 7 years ago

    Assuming my email is still working from there...

    /goes to check

  • Blerk #51 7 years ago

    No bounce, so I'm hopeful. :-)

  • Mr_Sleep #52 7 years ago

    It would seem I have not dashed your hopes and the address is still working.

    /reply

  • Ghetto-lapin #53 7 years ago

    Ok, played it a bit, and even if I don't like some of the new art direction, it's still way better than any recent platformer/3rd person action game I know of. There's something so cool about running on walls that bad music can't erase.
    And reality check everyone, not buying it will NOT make Ubi go back to the first one's style, it will make them stop the series, or give it a ridiculous budget next time. Just as there will NOT be a BGE 2, because first one sold very poorly.

  • gizmo #54 7 years ago

    If Scabbi wasn't so obviously a f*ckwit, I'd be convinced he was the lead programmer on this game.

  • warlockuk #55 7 years ago

    Svabbi - are you talking bollocks or what?
    I played the PC demo, it was shit.
    Everyone I know who played the xbox version said it was shit and threw their controllers down in disgust.

    It's fucking ropey as fuck with the controls, too. It should have only got 6/10 as far as I'm concerned. You can't polish a turd.

  • Ted Cuntablast #56 7 years ago

    So much anger in this thread. Excellent!

  • Sko #57 7 years ago

    I guess the real question is, will all the people who liked SOT and dislike WW buy the (inevitable) third outing?

    Will they be hoping against hope that the publishers realise they've alienated their core audience and rectify the problems. Or will they steer clear, not wishing to be burnt twice?

    You know, this is beginning to feel an awful lot like the way the Tomb Raider series went. We'll have company spin doctors showing up any day now telling us how the game will be 'returning to it's roots' for the next installment...

  • Thamuhacha #58 7 years ago

    >I guess the real question is, will all the people who liked SOT and dislike WW buy the (inevitable) third outing?

    I'll wait for the review. And check out the demo.

  • Eighthours #59 7 years ago

    The irony, of course, being that The Sands of Time was already mature - boldly different in style with an eloquent lead and a grown-up bond between two unlikely allies at the centre of it all - whereas Warrior Within feels like it's regressed into generic teenage angst with swords and impossibly-breasted harlots.

    ^^^
    The best paragraph of the review. Neatly sums the game up.

    Why is it that publishers feel that in order to increase sales, the sequel must be dumbed-down from the original? Can't they credit people with some intelligence? The problem with the original POP was the piss-poor marketing and the fact that it was given PS2-exclusivity for 3 months, not the game itself.

  • steven #60 7 years ago

    I can't say i'm not disappointed but what I personally liked about POP:SOT was the platforming and the level design and with improved combat and as good platforming and level design, i may be satisfied... the dark look probably won't even affect me. Oh well its not as good as SOT.

  • Ghetto-lapin #61 7 years ago

    Setzer : of course no, don't buy if you don't like it, just saying that even if it's not as good as the first one I seriously consider buying it anyway, because it still looks as it's very good.
    Even when I look at the trailers and ads for it, even with the awful soundtrack it still has much more soul in it than all the EA line-up of this season combined.

  • tengu #62 7 years ago

    Depends on what your mother's photos are of really. Say your mother was a set designer on Eastenders, and all the photos were of that Zoe bird.

    I'd sure as fuck masturbate to THOSE, I can tell you!

  • Ghetto-lapin #63 7 years ago

    Plus, IF you manage to forget the Prince from SOT, the new one is kinda cool, yes. Not nearly as likeable as the previous one (who had the best French dubbing I ever heard in any videogame, not that any of you care I guess), but still pretty cool. The goth chick is ridiculously over-the-top though.
    Maybe the guys at Montreal were pushed in the wrong direction by evil focus groups from hell, but they're still very good.

  • Bezzy #64 7 years ago

    Plus I think Edge gave it a 7 which I trust more than the EG score anyway.

    It's the... I.... it's the same. It's the same! The same score. They gave it the same score. I mean, what? Do you trust edge's font more or something? I don't goddamn understand anything anymore. It's the saaame.

  • Artemus #65 7 years ago

    Seven is still a decent score and I will still be getting it. GamesTM gave it a 9 and EG a 7, so i'll take it as an 8 average.

  • trump #66 7 years ago

    " now let's see if they can ruin the next Beyond Good and Evil.. "

    who said theres going to be one?

    disappointed as PoP was one of the best games of last/this year
    good chance i'll play it anyway, but thats just cause everything else is a pile of shit

  • Scimarad #67 7 years ago

    How could they? SoT had a fantastic feel and style to it and they turn into this generic shite?? Idiots...

  • prettyboytim #68 7 years ago

    svabbi: if it's so great, why don't you write a reader review? Who are we more likely to believe: a 1,800 word review by the EG staff who we have grown to trust over time by testing their reviews with our experience, or some unknown muppet who can't even be bothered to register who just says "It's great!"?. If it's so great, CONVINCE US!

  • Derek Smart [3000AD] #69 7 years ago

    You losers just don't GET what the creators are trying to do with this game is all!

  • space_ace #70 7 years ago

    but it has kn1v35!

  • ekko #71 7 years ago

    The review read like a 6 out of 10 (maybe even 5)... looks like you chickened out with the 7.

    Don't think I'll be picking in this up and I adored Sands of Time.; I cannot condone this sort of action by marketing executives.

  • freedumb #72 7 years ago

    fundamentally i just cant get over the 'dark' thing. one of the best things about the original was the charm, the prince's personality and voice, relationship. with farah, emotion etc. I'll probably buy jak 3 instead, something thats funnier, warmer, refreshing and more imaginative, not some patronising goth dream or something.

  • Bezzy #73 7 years ago

    I always thought that more than the long assed combat and the far too linear puzzling, the prince was a bit of a dick head, and he didn't deserve the princess.

    HOW COME ALL THE NICE GIRLS ALWAYS GO FOR THE MEN WHO ARE OFFHANDEDLY NASTY TO THEM? I AM A SUBSERVIANT MALE. WHY DON'T NAKED LADIES TREAD ALL OVER MY CHEST??

  • Aretak #74 7 years ago

    :(

    I really, really wanted them to have made this brilliant... I'll still get it though.

  • urban #75 7 years ago

    7-10 aint bad, will give it a look in at a rent, not buying tho unless i like it.

  • Mmmkay #76 7 years ago

    HOW COME ALL THE NICE GIRLS ALWAYS GO FOR THE MEN WHO ARE OFFHANDEDLY NASTY TO THEM? I AM A SUBSERVIANT MALE. WHY DON'T NAKED LADIES TREAD ALL OVER MY CHEST??

    Oh Bezzy.

  • bfar #77 7 years ago

    It's been americanized. Yuck!

  • O-Fox #78 7 years ago

    Played the demo
    was shocked about how they managed to horribly disfigure a well loved title with 100% attitude or whatever they call it. It's like they took the first game and just injected a vial of Vin Diesel into it.

  • perilikid #79 7 years ago

    /shakes fist

    Curse Ubisoft! Just as I was beginning to love them. After SoT - certainly one of the most affecting games I've played in recent years - I would've considered a sequel a must buy game, but what with Edge giving it 7 and now this, it looks like it's going to have to wait.

  • Retroid #80 7 years ago

    "I wanted to love the first PoP, but the game I played was so buggy that it was rendered unplayable (when I finally gave up, halfway though the game, each of my saved games was barred from further progression by one bug or another)."

    I didn't see a single bug when I played it through. Twice.

    Which version did you have? I have the GC version.

  • Whizzo #81 7 years ago

    PS2 version was fine too.

  • Talha #82 7 years ago

    I think if this was the original 'comeback' game of the POP series, it would have gotten a 9. Trouble is , SOT was MAGIC. This, on the other hand, looks and feels forced, obsessive, single-minded and with a truly horrific soundtrack. Credit the fundamental virtue of animation, the whole idea, and awesome graphics for the 7.

  • 3william56 #83 7 years ago

    [Has massive plastic surgery]

    [Puts on ridiculously revealing outfit]

    [Straddles the main gun of a battleship in a totally obscene fashion]

    "Iiiiiiff I could tuuuuuurn back tiiiiime...."

  • Retroid #84 7 years ago

    Strange how most of the people who're disagreeing with this review (and others) are using daft americanisms.

    Sad truth is they probably live in Birmingham and like to pretend they're 'teh g4ng5taz, innit!'

  • pjmaybe #85 7 years ago

    Damned shame.

    Well done though Tom, good review and pretty much puts a cap on me renting rather than buying it. As you said, it'll be unfortunate if this sells such a huge amount that it pretty much means that the next POP game will be similar. They really don't learn these games companies, do they?

    Peej

  • Dagon #86 7 years ago

    "Sad truth is they probably live in Birmingham and like to pretend they're 'teh g4ng5taz, innit!'"

    Or maybe they are from some place in the rest of Europe.

  • Blerk #87 7 years ago

    PS2 version was fine too.

    I came across a bug in the PS2 version of the original that meant I had to reset and reload at one point. At one point when the Prince and Farah split up, Farah had to pull a lever for the Prince to progress. She ran over to the lever and.... stopped. And did nothing. So I couldn't go anywhere.

    Only happened once, but it was a bit annoying. Luckily I'd saved quite recently.

  • fxgogo #88 7 years ago

    If the suits at Ubisoft had looked at the problem with SOT not doing well initially it was their own lemming approach to releasing such a AAA title in the mad xmas push. Do they, or the other publishers for that matter, not realise that trying to sell so many games in such a crowded period is going to have the predictable result of many good games becoming casualty to a few top sellers. POP was one of those casualties.

    Well I will give it a go, as it deserves that much, but I think the reviewer has put it really succinctly, that this game has been changed to fit a demographic to try and sell more. This is really sad, as I have not played such an enjoyable game as SOT.

  • Thamuhacha #89 7 years ago

    >I went through the trouble of actually reading all of the comments, and I thought it was simply going to be a flood of 'OMG noz! this is teh hawt!' Thankyou gaming community, you have made me proud.

    They're classy in here. Just don't tell anyone.

  • Blerk #90 7 years ago

    /burps loudly

  • mustardkid #91 7 years ago

    "it'll be unfortunate if this sells such a huge amount that it pretty much means that the next POP game will be similar. They really don't learn these games companies, do they? "

    unfortunately they do learn ..... they learn that by making games appeal to the lowest common denominator that they sell a shitload more and can strut about wearing currency caps.
    Edited by 1 at 02/12/04 @ 09:30

  • Thamuhacha #92 7 years ago

    >They're classy in here. Just don't tell anyone.

    Except Blerk. He's rotten.

  • praetorian #93 7 years ago

    Bah. Bah bah bah and more bah. I loved the first one, too. Rental for me, then.

  • the-fell #94 7 years ago

    shame about this, but it sounds like the game i so dearly hoped it would not become :'(

    SOT affected me like few have before or since, a masterpiece fusion of story telling and gameplay it deserved a sequel worthy. but no; they've gone the way of raaawwk, gore and pr0n looking female adversaries :(

  • groovychainsaw #95 7 years ago

    Any idea about the xbox live funtionality? The time attack rapid platforming mode sounded quite good to me - could this improve the game guys?

  • tiddles #96 7 years ago

    It took me ages to work out what the image was of in this screen:

    <a href="http://www.eurogamer.net/view_sc reenshot.php?image=/assets/articles/a57314/4.jpg"&g t;Screenshot</A>

    At first I thought it was someone strung up by their arms (with the two flesh-coloured areas converging at the top), but I couldn't see where their head would be. Then I thought, what's that... it's... ahh.

    It'll be interesting to see how this game does - I think it's fair to say that the critical reaction to the new style (as opposed to the game as a whole) has been negative, and publishers DO take notice of these things, but the ultimate decider for the future of the series will be sales.... If the new direction leads to huge business, you can be sure they'll want to keep it that way.

  • Thamuhacha #97 7 years ago

    The closing para of the IGN "another take" sums it all up:

    >I can appreciate the "we want to do more action" idea. But in the future, try to make that action worth playing. Like Sands, the highlight of Warrior Within is still the platforming. And, like Sands, the downside is still the combat. Unfortunately, the platforming is so adversely affected by the other "more is better" aspects of the game. The result is simply not spectacular, innovative, or polished. It's just there.

    And I like the description of the bosses as "leather tramp" and "vinyl boat slut"
    Edited by 1 at 02/12/04 @ 12:13

  • Clive_Dunn #98 7 years ago

    "Do they, or the other publishers for that matter, not realise that trying to sell so many games in such a crowded period is going to have the predictable result of many good games becoming casualty to a few top sellers."

    Yes we do, thanks for your contribution !

  • fxgogo #99 7 years ago

    clive dunn wrote, "Yes we do, thanks for your contribution !"

    So why do we see the same silly behaviour year on year? Is someone going to be brave enough to be counter-cuture? I think it would seriously improve the industrys fortunes.

  • Clive_Dunn #100 7 years ago

    Because getting it right at Christmas means double the sales of getting it right at any other time of the year.

    Clearly Ubisoft thought this PoP was a stronger title than it appears to be and that therefore it could compete in the Christmas market. Looks like they've got it wrong this time.

  • Cubfan #101 7 years ago

    All 7 and we'll watch them fall
    They stand in the way of love
    And we will smoke them all
    With an intellect and a savoir-faire
    No one in the whole universe
    Will ever compare
    I am yours now and u are mine
    And together we'll love through
    All space and time, so don't cry
    One day all 7 will die

  • Liggur #102 7 years ago

    This is an amusing thread when you block the un-registered rabble :)

    I didnt like the rock music, Rock music arrived in the 1950's not 1050's (or whenever this is set)
    Otherwise, the reviewer has got it spot on.
    Removed the charm and style from the first.

    Was expecting an "EA Trax" logo to appear at the bottom corner during combat.

  • bloodflowers #103 7 years ago

    I never played the first one - only the PS2 demo - I was so put off by the framerate that I didn't bother. I was planning to get this on the X-Box - but after what people have said, what was the framerate of the original like on the X-Box? Maybe that's a better purchase.

  • mustardkid #104 7 years ago

    "framerate"



    shakes head sorrowfully

  • drumbaby #105 7 years ago

    "This one seems closer to....Devil May Cry... "

    Without capturing an ounce of DMC's magic, unfortunately.

  • Artemus #106 7 years ago

    I've been playing it for a couple of hours and this is is no way a 'shit' game, but then the seven score doesn't imply that (which some of you seem to have missed). I was a huge fan of the original by the way. There's a couple things that don't really fit in this; the princes voice and his general character, and the rock music. Apart from that, so far, I've done more platforming than fighting. The fighting, however accomplished, I would happily lose, just like the first game. But the platforming is excellent as ever with a couple of new additions like the curtain tear.

  • mal #107 7 years ago

    Most of us loved the first game not because of the fighting, or particularly because of the puzzling, but mainly because of the atmosphere and story - which, according to the review, they've ballsed up. Remember that a 7 means that this is a much better than average game, just not a magical game like the first.

  • Talha #108 7 years ago

    Guys (and gals)This game earned a SEVEN. That is right, five plus two, seven. That means it is very good. The only problem is that there is a shitload of NEGATIVES that burden down the positives, so its would be rather like: Atmosphere + Graphics = 10, grisly combat + vulgar boss sluts + atrocious score = -3. Geddit?

  • pjmaybe #109 7 years ago

    I think it earned its 7. The problem is, it's going to be nigh-on impossible for anyone who played the first game NOT to make comparisons. If you can play it and take it as a new game in an entirely different franchise to POP, you might enjoy it. If you constantly compare it to POPSOT, you are going to hate its tits off..

    C'mon, it does feature one of the most impressive female video game arses of all time!

    Peej

  • Liggur #110 7 years ago

    Gamespot's review (8.8) mentions the XBOX Version has sound issues, and the PS2 version has graphics issues.
    From the Review:
    Some technical flaws in the Xbox and PlayStation 2 versions of the game also mar the experience somewhat. The Xbox version is prone to audio glitches. Certain sound effects get stuck, and, at other times, scenes that should have voice in them are cut off completely. This is a shame, because the sound effects in the game, aside from some ham-handed voice acting from the prince, are excellent and impactful. Meanwhile, the PlayStation 2 version's flaws are graphical. As a result, the game has a slightly choppier frame rate than the other versions. While it's not enough to hinder gameplay or combat, it does detract a bit from an otherwise beautiful-looking game. We didn't notice any sound or frame rate issues with the GameCube version of Warrior Within, however.
    Edited by 2 at 03/12/04 @ 10:17

  • bloodflowers #111 7 years ago

    " "framerate"
    shakes head sorrowfully"

    Bloody pedant. Ok, frame rate. I don't mind simple graphics, but I hate juddery movement. 30/25fps is acceptable, less isn't. I let GTA get away with it though because the game itself is one of the few good enough to rise above such flaws.

    At anyrate (... ;) I picked up the original for the Xbox last night - it's much smoother than the PS2 demo was, very pleased and don't think I'll bother with the new game, at least until it's lurking in the second hand bins.

  • space_ace #112 7 years ago

    it's got negatives, but tbh, i'm playing it. which can't be said about ea lames.

  • the-fell #113 7 years ago

    i just picked my copy up despite the reviews, i'm still hoping some of the magic is there :S

  • spindizzy #114 7 years ago

    Penny Arcades review:
    http://www.penny-arcade.com/news.php3?date=2004-12-03
    Much the same as EG, but I especially like this:
    There's a new combat system now, but there's also way more combat, and it takes place all over, so whether or not it actually ceased being repetitive I couldn't tell you. Just as in the first one, I traverse the combat oriented areas so I can arrive at the next perfected, genre defining platform section. It is like getting a ordering a pizza and getting a free walrus. Even if the walrus were excellent, I mean truly exemplary, I'm really not in the market for it and it's not why I ordered the pizza.

  • hamsterdance #115 7 years ago

    Don't know if this has been posted yet but thought I'd give the link because I found it so funny.

    http://www.penn y-arcade.com/view.php3

    Gotta love that line the Prince gives. :D

  • Lothar Hex #116 7 years ago

    I was looking forward to this, but it seems from various reviews that a lot of the charm from the first game has been surgically removed and a lot of "angst" has been improperly stitched in it's place.

    I think I'll have to rent it first.
    Edited by 1 at 03/12/04 @ 23:11

  • Dr.Haggard #117 7 years ago

    femmy, pudgy, alcoholic losers with bad teeth weren't very marketable.

    OK, I'm going to ignore the rest of your bizarre xenophobic discharge and assume you were being facetious, but I've heard this particular thing said before and I'm hoping someone can tell me where on earth it comes from. Bad teeth? Huh?

  • kdsh7 #118 7 years ago

    >(Have any of you half-wits actually played the game? Or have you based your opinions on a short demo and crap review? I've read all the comments posted here, and am disappointed that you people can even call yourself gamers. I've got the full game, and have to give it 8/10. The style of the game has changed, but it's changed for a reason. The reason is called the games PLOT. All you people seem to want to do is pick holes in something most have you haven't even played yet! Here's an idea...rent the game if you're unsure about buying it, play it through, then make some intelligent comments on the game itself, not about your hatred of "casual" gamers.)

    Do you really think the plot changes dictated the look of the game or the other way round? Be realistic. SOT had charm, and style. It was enchanting to all those who played it and watched others play it. This game has scantily clad women saying things like 'ooh..it feels so goo..ood' during combat, and a woman in a Jessica Rabbit outfit.

    The gameplay is as good as it ever was but everything else is just so... inferior? inappropriate? charmless?

    Little things that made the original so endearing, like the game over: "no no no, that's not how it happened" has been replaced with unskippable splashing blood which makes you wait several seconds before you can try again.

    I will say that the story progressing cut-scenes do tie the dark look in very well, but they've gone so far over the top with the actual game that it lacks credibility.

  • pjmaybe #119 7 years ago

    I'm getting into it a bit more now. 35% in and it's beginning to feel a bit more like the game I wanted it to be. It's still no "Sands of Time" but it's got some damned amazing jaw dropping moments that have made me actually change my mind slightly about how "mainstream" it has become (actually I seriously doubt this will appeal to mainstream gamers as some of the puzzles actually require a bit of a brain!)

    Now I've stopped purely fighting and am getting more into the puzzley side of it, there's a chance to stop and admire the graphics, the scenery and some of the more subtler animations in the game. Sure, the fighting is still more or less a case of "block, stab buttons, block" but I'm liking it!

    Peej

  • SnoppleMonster #120 7 years ago


    I was very weary about buying this game after I read a few 'so-so' reviews.

    Then I read the Games TM review and got confused. On Saturday I bought it (XBOX version, after owning the NTSC Cube SoT ) and played it.

    I didn't quite like the first bit on the ship, but then when the prince gets to the island with the castle things started to pick up at bit.

    Based on reviews I was expecting..... not enough platforming/puzzling, too much combat, a complete (worse) change in style etc...

    What I got was something very similar to the first ( much more than I had feared ). It's not a million miles away from SoT in style, it still has a dream like quality to it, and although there are some very 'rock' bits ( almost like devil may cry ), there are also moments of moody, incidental music that pleased.

    Also the platforming is every bit as inventive as it was in was in SoT. I'm not sure why there's so much anger about this game, but I quite like it, and felt no need to throw my joypad down.

  • #121 7 years ago

    Same score as Pirates.... w t f.

  • the-fell #122 7 years ago

    i think roy walker of catchphrase fame could have summed this one up:

    'it's good, but it's not right'

  • pjmaybe #123 7 years ago

    The Fell = Best post of the thread.

    Though I'm liking it, it has something missing (or something extra it shouldn't have!)

    S'like diving into a piece of shortbread only to find it's soda bread instead...

    Peej

  • Lothar Hex #124 7 years ago

    Finally got round to renting this and initial impressions are basically as follows:

    Theres a good game here, it's just covered in a lot of crap. Dark and dreary level design, unlikeable Prince, horrible heavy metal soundtrack (and this is from a bloke who likes heavy metal.) The combat, while improved, is still boring.

    Platforming bits are still mucho fun.

  • jonnyreb #125 7 years ago

    After HATING the demo, reading poo reviews and loads of negative comments I was basically going to leave this one.....however I got 'Call of Duty - Finest Hour' as a *gift* (obviously someone didn't like me all that much) so I took it back to GAME and spent an hour trying to decide what game to swap it for.............POP WW was the only thing that looked even remotely interesting.

    After playing for about 6 hours I can say that it's not THAT bad.....I loved POP SOT and this is a different game...darker and far more action based.

    Music is horrible, combat gets to be a bit of a pain and the 'open ended' level design makes for some rather irritating moments of being unsure what to do.

    But, saying that, it's better than 99% of the crap that's out there at the moment (hardly a reason to buy, I know) and once you get past the first 3 or 4 hours it actually gets pretty good.

    I think 7/10 is a fair score........

    Funny thing is, if you hated the first one you won't find anything here to change your mind, but if you loved the first one then this will also turn you off as the game is so different..............

    Just get past the first impressions and there is something worth playing here.........even if it won't be at the top of your game pile in a month (MP2 Echoes will be there for me at least :) )

  • delpa #126 7 years ago

    it looks nasty!

    Aargh

  • Eternity #127 7 years ago

    After playing this more, I'm liking it more. All the complaints about how "platforming is no longer the focus" seem to be crap. There appears to be just as much platforming as in the last game, and it's a bit tougher - the fact that the fighting system is deeper seem to make people think that it's the "new" focus, when really it's just moved a bit more into the spotlight without taking up any of platforming's space. Really though, all the fighting combos and moves and tricks seem totally unneccessary - SoT had plenty and I loved the simplicity and awesome fluid controls in pulling off these sweet moves. WW is considerably less intuitive, though it gets a bit easier as you get more comfortable. Honestly though, I would've been fine with them keeping the original fighting system and just adding more complex bad guys rather than tacking on all these crazy double wielding moves and combos and mid air steals and what not. I don't want to have to think about what button does what, just give me a sword button and a dodge button, make them context sensitive, and throw in some complex fighting patterns in the bad guys.

    Again though, the game did become much more fun as I became more comfortable with the controls... it all feels just a bit too complex for a Prince of Persia game.

    Also, complaints about the music appear to be overdone. There's still plenty of good ambient music. The heavy guitar rock does actually have some little ethnic overtones to it, which sounds kind of interesting. The problem is that these songs in particular are the ones that stand out the most and they repeat way too often. Also, they'll occasionally pop in and fade out at the worst times. I can understand metal playing when I'm fighting a hoard of tough bad guys, but not when I'm pushing a crate.

    review from rottentomatoes.com

  • Eternity #128 7 years ago

    Oh and I joined the site so if you want to ignore me now you can. Happy?

  • Eternity #129 7 years ago

    Oh one last thing(I think...) I acctually don't normally like rock I just found that the soundtrack to it was ver endearing to the game and it fit it well. I acctually like new age music allot better, but what can I say im a sucker for a good game soundtrack. Although I will admit that SoT did have a very good soundtrack as well so I like them both.
    Edited by 1 at 07/01/05 @ 06:10

  • Eternity #130 7 years ago

    Oh I thought of something else! Have any of you ever seen the garden tower and it's beautifull look, and the music to that place is great to boot. I bet you guys have only seen the ship! once you get to the Castle of time the game really takes on it's true form. THIS IS ALL SLANDER YOU'VE ONLY SEEN THE GAME WITH YOUR EYES AND NOT YOUR HEART ^_^ beauty is more than skin deep!

  • Eternity #131 7 years ago

    Another thing (I got sick of saying one more thing^_^) I just wanted you to know I have read all of the review and all of the comments so you cant say I havent

  • Achilless #132 7 years ago

    I have finished this game for 4 times. It's interesting because the first time I wanted to finish him. The 2 time I wanted to see all the image. The 3 thime I want to be the most dangerous to make all the combos. And the last I wanted to be perfect, and perfect it was. This game is interactive butI think that the Ubisoft can make the POP 3 KB multiplayer, because it's so funny. And multiplayer can be moost funny, I think. And I will open a web site with all screenshots that I have with Prince of Persia Warrior Within, they are ±200. That will hapen in 1-2 mounth, I hope in july it will be finished.That's all, play Prince of Persia to see a great warrior!