Long read: What might the ultimate character creator look like?

Baldur's Gate 3, Street Fighter and Lost Ark developers discuss.

If you click on a link and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. Read our editorial policy.

Retrospective: Armed & Dangerous

Laughs or howls?

I'm trying to think of more hoary old subjects to discuss than comedy in games. Let me see. How about DRM? I could be trying to talk to you about digital restrictions management. Or whether girls play games? Come on, that's more overdone, right? What about whether the PS3 is better than the 360? Okay, so in this context, everyone's now happy that we're talking about comedy in games, right?

Right. Armed & Dangerous was released in 2003 to rapturous celebrations of its amazing sense of humour. Even the most critical reviews raised just how funny it was. In stitches they were.

Sit down, hold onto something solid, and cross your legs. Armed & Dangerous isn't all that funny.

The reception is all down to context. You know when a golfer makes a funny mime to the crowd when someone's phone rings, and everyone falls about laughing? Context. It's not funny. It's just unexpected. Put that golfer on stage at an open mic comedy night and his hilarity would be put into cruel perspective.

It's just not okay, not after 3000 years of games being around, for something just not being completely humourless to be good enough. And it's not that A&D is unfunny - not at all. It's occasionally wry, often silly. But just not "hilarious".

Planet Moon's second game, following Giants: Citizen Kabuto, had you play Roman, the leader of a group called the Lionhearts. For reasons obscure, your goal is to steal the Book Of Rule with the help of a tall robot, Q, and a mole called Jonesy.

Don't forget to blow up the trees and buildings too.

Along with them comes Rexus, an old, tiny blind "man" thing, who was once the keeper of the book. Sometimes with their help, sometimes without, Roman has to third-person shoot his way through levels packed with enemies, exploding buildings, and ideally, jetpacks.

It's the four main characters who are supposed to be the source of this non-stop rollercoaster ride of hilarity. Because they're a bit stupid! And they probably might set their bottoms on fire. And reference Star Wars, 25 years after it came out. There are also some cut-scenes of the enemy and his deeply stupid son, where characters might fall over or get confused.

Surely this isn't good enough to receive the accolades? It's not awful, and it's snicker-worthy as often as it awkwardly misses the mark. But it's not good enough!

The comedy sources from so many places, seemingly without the shame to attempt to disguise the inspirations. So grab a handful of Pratchett, a fist of Python, and then scrape in some Mel Brooks. Reference ancient films, make a farting noise, and then fall out of a window. And apparently that guarantees your reviewers in conniptions.

However, the game surrounding all this is so much more deserving of attention than the tepid humour.

Played in third-person, levels are large, sprawling areas, absolutely stuffed with enemies. And dashing about shooting at them will get you quickly killed. Tactics are quickly forced upon you. You have to apply your range of weapons smartly, judiciously, and perhaps explore something other than the most obvious route.

And of course those weapons are deserving of mention. I reckon at least one in five people reading this have screamed at the screen before now, "WHAT ABOUT THE LAND SHARK GUN?!?" Possibly followed by, "YOU GREAT BLITHERING IDIOT!"

The Land Shark Gun is utterly brilliant, and hilariously funny. Anyone suggesting otherwise is clearly not meant to have oxygen. This is a gun that fires a shark - a shark that swims under the surface of the land, its dorsal fin sticking out, until it's underneath an unwitting enemy. It then erupts from the ground, swallowing the baddie whole, before disappearing and searching for another victim.