Prince of Persia: Warrior Within Comments by Tom Bramwell
We need to turn back time, but we've run out of sand.
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Poster
|
Ghetto-lapin
01/12/04 @ 16:56
0
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. |
|
0
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. |
|
0
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
01/12/04 @ 17:14
0
>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
01/12/04 @ 17:17
0
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. |
|
Ghetto-lapin
01/12/04 @ 17:43
0
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. |
|
Ghetto-lapin
01/12/04 @ 18:14
0
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. |
|
prettyboytim
01/12/04 @ 19:34
0
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]
01/12/04 @ 19:38
0
You losers just don't GET what the creators are trying to do with this game is all!
|
|
0
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.
|
|
0
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?? |
|
0
"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. |
|
0
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
02/12/04 @ 06:05
0
[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...." |
|
0
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 |
|
0
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. |
|
0
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
02/12/04 @ 09:16
0
>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. |
|
mustardkid
02/12/04 @ 09:29
0
"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 1 times,
most recently on 02/12/04 @ 09:30
|
|
Thamuhacha
02/12/04 @ 09:51
0
>They're classy in here. Just don't tell anyone.
Except Blerk. He's rotten. |
|
praetorian
02/12/04 @ 11:13
0
Bah. Bah bah bah and more bah. I loved the first one, too. Rental for me, then.
|
|
0
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
02/12/04 @ 11:24
0
Any idea about the xbox live funtionality? The time attack rapid platforming mode sounded quite good to me - could this improve the game guys?
|
|
0
It took me ages to work out what the image was of in this screen:
Screenshot 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
02/12/04 @ 12:12
0
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 1 times,
most recently on 02/12/04 @ 12:13
|
|
Clive Dunn
02/12/04 @ 12:25
0
"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 ! |
|
Clive Dunn
02/12/04 @ 14:07
0
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. |
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Advertisement
