Change Your Image
brad-95627
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Assassin's Creed III (2012)
Great story mode, forgettable side content
After finishing the Ezio Collection for the first time, I was excited to see what else the AC Series had to offer - and I was ready for a change of scenery from Constantinople, and the whole look of the Animus from AC: Revelations. The 3rd main title in the series delivers on this, and while it's not perfect, I feel it doesn't get the reputation it deserves, in favor of the next game in the series (Black Flag, which is widely renowned as one of the best).
STORY: After seeing the end of both Ezio and Altair's stories in Revelations, it was time for a new ancestor and historical period to take center stage. I knew very little about this game going in, so was excited to find that it was set leading up to, and during, the American Revolution.
The in-Animus story took all sorts of twists I didn't expect, and kept me guessing and engaged almost the whole way. My only big issue is with the pacing, as the introduction feels very drawn-out, for what it contributes to the story. Most of the necessary story beats could probably have been achieved in 1-2 hours of gameplay, and felt a lot more punchy, but I suppose the devs wanted to let the player feel more settled before the rug-pull towards the end of the prologue.
The story jumps forward in multiple-year intervals after the prologue, telling the life story of its central character, Ratonhnhaké:ton. I was very impressed by the story's dedication to authenticity in an area of American history so often glossed over for the ugly light it casts on the Founding Fathers, and having the player experience the story through the eyes of a Native American was a truly bold choice. The story also does the work of the previous AC games, putting the player right in the center of famous historical events and figures. The story is full of touching moments, catharsis, heartbreak, and action, even some comedic touches in the right places. It feels quite epic, and is only hindered by its pacing issues.
Outside the Animus, we also have the final chapter of Desmond Miles's story. While Desmond's portions have never been a real showstopper in the series, I have grown to appreciate the change of pace, and moments taken to ground the historical story in present-day circumstances, while also providing a throughline between the previous games and this one. Plus, after Desmond spent pretty much all of Revelations on the bench, it was nice to step back into his shoes for a little bit. The modern day missions are a little more fleshed out and globetrotting here, and I appreciate that. Though the story gets more than a little confusing for a first-time player towards the end, I found it a decent conclusion to a story that might not have been anyone's favorite, but was still given some impactful story moments throughout the saga.
GRAPHICS: I played the original 2012 release of this game, coming off the back of the remastered Ezio trilogy, so the overall graphical quality did feel like a little bit of a step back, but the visual appeal is still there. Revolution-Era America is captured very nicely in the environments of this game, which range from cities like Boston and New York, to the wild untamed Frontier, to the Davenport Homestead, which is like this game's answer to AC2's brilliant hub area of Monteriggioni. Each of them feel lovingly crafted and distinct, but my personal favorite, without question, is the Homestead. Unfortunately, the appearance of multiple distinct areas in the game means the return of inter-regional travel and lengthy waits on loading screens. However, the look of the Animus returns to a high-tech white color scheme after the unstable, corrupted look given by the darker color scheme in Revelations, which is a welcome change.
GAMEPLAY: The series's infamous parkour system continues steady improvement in this game, and contains perhaps my favorite change so far: the integration with nature. Connor can climb trees effortlessly, free-running through the treetops and creating a sense of unbridled freedom which can't be conveyed in the man-made environments of previous games, and adds a lot of fun to traversing the frontier.
Unfortunately, that was the only reason I really enjoyed the frontier in this game. While the traversal is a lot of fun, it eventually starts to feel slightly like an inconvenience, every time you want to go from one story mission to the next. The options are to either free-run through the frontier, waiting through a loading screen on each end, or fast-travel with just one loading screen. In addition, the side content of the game just didn't draw me in enough. The story was very enjoyable, but the side content didn't hold my attention, so I didn't have a lot of reason to go exploring during or after the story.
The combat in the game is also insanely fun, with the Mohawk being the default weapon and some amazing moves to go with it. In many hours of playing, the combat never once felt old or stale. Connor may feel very overpowered at some points, but in the best way. I loved every opportunity I got to run up behind a gunman on a roof and give him a flying knee that sent him flying 30+ feet.
OVERALL: AC3 is a great change of scenery for the series, and provides a brilliant (if questionably-paced) story mode which throws the player right into the center of the American Revolution. It also takes an uncommonly honest look at the Founding Fathers, both in their heroic actions and their damnable, villainous ones. The environments are pleasant enough to look at, even if they don't hold up to the environmental design of a more modern game like RDR2. The Davenport Homestead holds up as the best environment in the game by far. The combat and free-running are more polished than ever, and play great even over 10 years later. The only downfall of the gameplay is the side content not being nearly as appealing as the main story. I give the game a solid 8/10.
Assassin's Creed: Revelations (2011)
Slightly less charming, but a fitting conclusion
After finishing AC: Brotherhood, I was beyond excited to dig in to the follow-up, and conclusion to the famed Ezio Collection. I very much enjoyed Revelations, and it handles the ending of Ezio's story with the due respect to such a beloved protagonist. It also brings back Altair from the very first AC Game, and gives me a more favorable retrospect on the firsy game. However, Revelations is not flawless, and I found it loses some of the charm of AC2 and Brotherhood.
STORY: Within the Animus, the story begins to weave together Ezio and Altair's stories right from the jump. Ezio spends the story entirely away from his home and family in Italy, who only receive mentions in the story when he writes to his sister, Claudia. He is racing the Templars to track down the 5 keys to the fabled Library of Masyaf, and after a quick opening at Masyaf itself, the search leads Ezio to Constantinople. Here, he meets Sofia, a fellow Italian, and befriends the city's rebel leader Yusuf, and the crown prince Suleiman. They are a fine and reasonably charming cast of characters, but don't quite hold up to previous companions such as Mario Auditore, Leonardo da Vinci, and Caterina Sforza. Most of the story seems to hinge on Ezio's involvement in events in Constantinople, though, and the Masyaf keys feel as though they very much fall by the wayside of the story.
Altair's story is told mostly through flashbacks as Ezio finds each key, with every one allowing him to experience a significant moment in Altair's life after the story of AC1. They are minor glimpses, but allow the character to be revisited with a little more refinement than was possible in 2006 - and a region-accurate voiceover for Altair. For me, these flashbacks were highlights of the story - which says good things about the flashbacks (especially considering my overall opinion on the first game itself), but less-than-great things about the pacing and immersion of the main story.
Outside the Animus, we have the story of Desmond, which really feels as though it is being put on hold for this game. He spends the entire game in some kind of coma, stuck in the Animus with a ghost of his Abstergo predecessor, known chiefly as Subject 16. No major beats really happen for Desmond in this game, and I could probably count my number of visits to Animus Island on one hand.
GRAPHICS: In terms of size and scale, Revelations is a wonderful achievement. The huge towering buildings of Constantinople stand tall and imposing, and really mark just how far the series has come in just one console generation. However, in terms of the color scheme and other certain aspects of the production, this game is unfortunately lacking. The entire city of Constantinople somehow feels flat - not nearly as vibrant as it should be, and that takes a toll on the overall player immersion. In addition, I was not a fan of the all-dark overhaul of the menu and user interface - much as it serves the overall aesthetic message of the Animus and simulation beginning to fall apart. Through and through, the game sadly lacks the visual flair of Ezio's other outings - except, surprisingly, in Masyaf, which looks significantly better than most other environments, and better than the previous iteration in AC1.
GAMEPLAY: The foundation of gameplay laid by AC2 and Brotherhood continues to be built upon here, with the freerunning system now feeling smoother than ever. The combat system has also seen a leap forward, now featuring brutally satisfying animations, and a chain-kill feature which feels great to master. The hook-blade is a great addition to the gameplay, and the bomb-crafting system was also pretty well-executed - but I only found myself using the latter sparingly.
The 100% synch goals also make a return, making for some long sessions retrying the same mission over and over, trying to complete it without taking any damage. Ezio also rises to the top of the Ottoman chapter of the Brotherhood, once again recruiting assassins and sending them on international missions to battle Templar influence, which was one of my favorite additions in Brotherhood.
Perhaps the most unwelcome change was the addition of tower-defense style gameplay in certain regions of Constantinople when Assassin dens came under Templar attack. I appreciate the fluidity of regional power changing hands over time, but these segments did not work for me. But thankfully, they are very infrequent.
OVERALL: AC Revelations is definitely a tonal shift from the previous games, and this carries throughout the game - with Ezio becoming more weathered and jaded than we have seen him before, with the setting shift away from Italy, and also in the overall visual design of both the game and the menus. The story overall delivers a fitting conclusion and another exceptional performance of Ezio, but is definitely bogged down by some pacing issues here and there. Overall, it may not be as strong as the rest of the Ezio collection, but is definitely still worth a play.
Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood (2010)
Still more improvements, a brilliant continuation
I was very impressed with Assassin's Creed 2, which picked up on everything that worked about the original game and turned out an overall beautiful sequel that improves in every category. Brotherhood is not as much of a leap forward, but it didn't need to be. It makes welcome additions to the mechanics and overall game quality, though, and continues a story very much in the same spirit as it's predecessor, blending the beautifully-executed Renaissance-era Rome and Ezio's effortless charisma, with the modern-day intrigue and heady mystery of Desmond's modern-day fight against Abstergo.
STORY: In both timelines, this game picks up exactly where AC2 left off; with Desmond and co on the run after Abstergo raids their hideout, and with Ezio in the vault beneath the Vatican following his battle with Rodrigo Borgia. The opening sequences make for a great welcome back to prime the player for another adventure in both timelines. From there, the pacing is very well-done, drawing focus to the main story when necessary, but never unnecessarily closing off the open world to the player. Overall, I found this story a little easier than that of AC2 to follow the first time around, possibly because I was already familiar with the cast of characters. Ezio's story ends in a decently satisfying way, and never seems to get less compelling. Desmond's story remains fairly static until the very end, per the game's internal logic, until, just like in the previous game, it kicks off a crazy ending that leaves the player with many more questions than answers. I can't imagine what it must have been like to play this game back in 2010 and have to wait a year for the follow-up.
GRAPHICS: The trailer for this game, as with the rest of the series, boasts insanely realistic graphics, and the gameplay pales in comparison to it. That's why I'm grateful for more modern trailers that clarify that the footage was captured from a console. For 2010, the graphics are decent, but in 2023 they're nothing to write home about. They're not BAD graphics by any stretch, but they don't hold up to some other games of the time (God of War 3, for example).
GAMEPLAY: There are a few additions to gameplay mechanics here - nothing reinvents the wheel, but they don't need to, and the changes are mostly welcome. My favourite change is the ability to use the titular brotherhood, and send other Assassins on contracts and missions around the entire world, bringing in passive income and generally boosting the immersion of being a leader in the Assassin movement. There is also a general improvement to some of the navigation and UI like the weapon wheel that just makes the game a little easier to use. The one change I'm not really in love with is the addition of 100% sync goals, bonus objectives that aren't necessary but that I feel the need to accomplish, which makes a handful of missions frustratingly difficult. However, the feeling of accomplishment from getting that 100% sync is very gratifying.
OVERALL: AC: Brotherhood is a worthy successor to AC2, with another captivating story and cliffhanger ending, and small improvements here and there to keep the gameplay immersive and fresh. Playing in 2010 may not have felt like a mechanical leap forward players might have hoped for, but playing the games back to back on The Ezio Collection keeps them all feeling very consistent. 9/10, a great addition to the series.
Red Dead Redemption (2010)
A great western, overshadowed by a superior sequel
I played this game for the first time after having played the prequel, Red Dead Redemption II. I immensely enjoyed that game, and was aware that the original was drowning in critical acclaim when it first came out, so I was excited when the opportunity came up to play it, and the game delivers on all fronts. It's not perfect, but it's very well written and performed, and is definitely worth visiting and revisiting.
STORY: The ending of this game was unfortunately spoiled for me long before I ever picked up a copy - downside of being 13 years late on the uptake. I do think this took a large part of the gut punch away from the ending, but it doesn't diminish the rest of the story. With its vibrant cast of well-established characters, masterful writing, and a very authentic-feeling world, this game still whisks players back to the times of the taming of the West. John Marston is a man of a dying breed, desperately trying to extricate himself from his violent past as a gunslinger and prove that he can change, that he can become a family man. However, the bill comes due for his misdeeds in the form of the US Government, who emptily promise Marston that his slate will be wiped clean if he helps to clear up the mess of his old gang. Marston never loses sight of his resentment over this, and only does their bidding to serve his own goals. However, for one so seemingly unlikeable on paper - who kills for the government, betrays those he called family, and has no ultimate goal beyond his own self-interest - Marston is easily one of the most endearing video game protagonists in recent memory. All he wants is to get back to his quiet life, to feel as though he can do right by his family and leave his past behind. This game also makes a remarkably strong case for Old Western decency and against the enforcement of civilization on wild spaces, for media produced in a time when those conflicts are long since settled in the other direction. It shies away from no part of the history it portrays, and immerses the player completely. The story does tend to drag heavily at certain points, and having to travel between each story beat (while realistic) is not as appealing as it is in the sequel, in which the world is much more inviting to explore. However, there are certainly more virtues than faults here.
GRAPHICS: For the time the graphics of RDR hold up very well. The old west feel of the world is very authentic, and there is beautiful distinction between the big city of Blackwater, the small rural towns like Armadillo, the untamed wildernesses, the Mexican desert, and everything in between. Some of the environments can be a bit of a slog to travel through, especially over and over again for certain story beats, but I suppose that's a matter of opinion. The graphics aren't as sharp as a game like God of War 3, which came out around the same time, but it doesn't break the immersion.
GAMEPLAY: As someone who's okay, but not great, at 3rd person shooters, the auto-aim in this game was a life saver for me, because the aiming reticule is tiny, and all too often you're shooting at targets you can barely see, due to poor contrast or long distance. Without that assistance, this game would have been much less fun for me to play, as every gunfight would surely have taken me many attempts. The same can be said for the regenerative health bar. They manage to keep the game fun, though I'm not sure if either can be turned off if a player wants more challenge - but I am not that player, so I don't ask these questions. The horse mechanics are definitely improved in the sequels, and the overall balance of gameplay is as well. Here, at certain points, it feels a little repetitive and can really drag down the pacing. However, the good still generally outweighs the bad here.
SIDE CONTENT: There are some really interesting side missions to be seen here, and some less so. Most of the same mini-games as are available in RDR2 appear here too, though they never added much value in my experience. The big thing that I notice is missing from this game that pops up only in the prequel is the ability to lock onto and interact with strangers. Somehow such a small change really opened the door for me to interact with the world at every possible opportunity, and brought the game to life in a remarkable way, and it's missing from here. I simply don't feel as inclined to go out and see what the world might be hiding from me - though that might just be me being spoiled by the features of RDR2 before playing the first.
OVERALL: At its best, RDR is a shining example of what a video game should be - an immersive, fully-realized, escapist fantasy that tells a compelling story and invites the player to participate. At its worst points... it's still pretty good. As I mentioned, the pacing bogs down pretty badly here and there, and the gameplay tweaks are definitely noticed between this game and the prequel, but it is still 100% worth the play.
God of War III (2010)
Epic and Bloodthirsty, and Mostly Brilliant
As a trilogy-concluder and a follow-up to the epic cliffhanger ending of its predecessor, God of War 3 had a lot on its shoulders. The game does accomplish everything it was meant to do, and the good things are delivered in spades. This still stands as one of the most wow-factor games I've ever played, and just about every second of it (starting before even the main menu) just feels absolutely epic, for lack of a better word. However, while this game spends about 90% of its play time being an unapologetic slaughterfest, the story makes an attempt to bring Kratos to some kind of enlightenment, while simultaneously squashing all the sympathetic aspects of his character from the original game. Unfortunately, these parts always feel like a kind of hollow attempt at adding depth to the story. It's the only thing holding this game back.
STORY: As mentioned above, the story starts out knowing exactly what it's setting out to do; the previous game ends with Kratos leading the Titans to battle on Olympus, providing a very singular mandate, for this game to fulfil that conclusion, and from the epic score and opening recap, to Zeus's pre-battle monologue to the Olympians, to the battle that follows, the first 20 minutes of this game go down as one of, if not THE best opening in a video game. The sheer scale is mind-blowing, and the remastered graphics still hold up. For the most part, this trend continues, with each boss battle feeling distinct, each kill getting more brutal, Kratos sinking to new depths at every obstacle to his revenge. However, this rhythm is interrupted by the introduction of Pandora, who, much too quickly, becomes a surrogate daughter for Kratos, as he deals with the guilt of having killed his own daughter. Pandora's sole function in the story is to introduce the concept of Hope, which will become the game's shortcut to an ending, and to give the game an attempt at adding pathos or redemption to Kratos, which feels so out of place with the rest of the story.
In hindsight, the developers may have been trying to pit the player against Kratos, wishing for his redemption, by attempting to repulse the audience with the increasingly brutal and detailed violence. To be fair, the violence in this game is accomplished to brilliant effect, and is definitely not for those without a strong stomach. However, even when the violence in the game turned my stomach, as certain moments in the previous games did too, I didn't find myself yearning for a redemption arc - more just accepted that I was playing as a villainous character, which is the point made by the entire rest of the game. There's nothing inherently wrong with a more harrowing and sorrowful look at a revenge story, or attempting to play on a sense of player empathy - The Last of Us II does this to perfection - but here it feels like the game is trying to have its cake and eat it too.
In addition, the whole culmination of the Pandora's box mystery feels very messy and doesn't fit with the internal logic established by the previous games. It left me with more questions than answers, but that's the result of trying to pull off a plot twist spanning multiple titles when it's not set up properly from the beginning.
GRAPHICS: The visuals on this game are the pinnacle of the original trilogy, and among the best on the PS3 and PS4 alike. When I played God of War 2, I was impressed by the visual fidelity of the pre-rendered cutscenes, especially for having been on PS2. That level of graphic is more than outmatched by this sequel, and the fidelity is carried between the amazing pre-renders and the gameplay too. Every second of cinematic in this game seems to push the hardware to its limit, and the game is visually stunning for this from beginning to end. The details go all the way down to pores on Kratos's face and flecks in his irises, deservingly shown off from the main menu and opening cutscene. It's a triumph of graphic achievement, and the gory violence being dialled up to 11 just looks incredible, in all its cartoonish, over-the-top glory, and is stomach-churning at several points.
GAMEPLAY: God of War 3 continues to improve upon the already solid combat and traversal established by the previous 2 games. Many reviews say that the additional weapons feel mostly like re-skins of the Blades of Exile, but I disagree. They each have their own tweaked move set, they behave differently than the regular blades, and they all have their own magic that feels unique and tailored to the nature of the weapons. The Nemean Cestus also provides a more dramatic shake up, similar to the Barbarian Hammer in GOW2. This game also finally resolves the issues I had with the fixed-perspective camera from the old games. The camera no longer gets stuck so that I can't see the objective, and is used to phenomenal effect to frame and enrich the game's most showy, cinematic moments. This is especially important because the enemy variety in the game is awesome, and forces you to really strategize when played on harder settings. Every minor gameplay gripe I had with the first 2 games (bad camera usage, frustrating difficulty, counterintuitive traversal) have all found remedies in this game, making it my favourite from a gameplay perspective. It rarely gets old, most puzzle segments are still very well thought out, and it keeps me fully engaged every time I play.
SIDE CONTENT: The game offers a little more replay value (if the opening itself wasn't enough to make you want to relive it over and over) by interspersing collectibles that unlock bonus abilities on replays of the game. In addition, there are a couple of challenge maps, and an extensive behind-the-scenes documentary, which I really appreciate on all the God of War games.
OVERALL: For its graphics and gameplay, this is the best game of the original trilogy. Story-wise, the game is a mixed bag of timelessly epic, near-perfect action sequences, and hollow-feeling attempts to add a depth that feels like it doesn't belong. The ending is a little confusing and doesn't fully stick the landing, but does not sour the overall experience. It's not much to suffer through for the rest of the spectacle this fantastic game offers.
Assassin's Creed II (2009)
The sequel that the original desperately needed
After playing AC1 for the first time on the Xbox 360 a couple months ago, I noted that while there were makings of a truly great series in there, future entries needed big improvements to keep me invested in the series. And this sequel delivers that in spades. The video game industry seems to have an instinctive understanding of how to make a good sequel that the film industry finds notoriously rare. Assassin's Creed 2 is vastly superior to the original in every conceivable way - better graphics, improved (but not perfected) free running, a much more complex and layered main character and supporting cast, a hugely engaging open-world environment, a more interesting story in both the past and present, and a better soundtrack. Brilliance across the board.
STORY: The game's opening scene picks up moments after the end of AC1, following a brief narrated recap of those events. Desmond and Lucy break out of Abstergo and are on the run. Finding himself allied with the Assassins now, rather than a captive of the Templars, Desmond meets his 2 new teammates and puts himself into the Animus 2.0, to get himself synchronized with the genetic memories of a new ancestor - Ezio Auditore, perhaps the most famed protagonist of the AC series. Desmond is now in a race to find the fabled "Pieces of Eden" from the first game, to locate them and understand them before the Templars manage the same. I won't go into spoiler territory with the story, but the memories (the bulk of the game's story) are much more engaging this time around for so many reasons. Ezio himself is insanely charismatic and sympathetic as a protagonist. He's not perfect, but he learns and improves. He loses and he perseveres. He relies on a beautifully-realized and performed supporting cast, from his uncle Mario to Leonardo da Vinci. In addition, the setting of Renaissance Italy is much more appealing to me personally than the first game's setting of Crusades-Era Jerusalem. The story is very touching and entertaining, if at times a little cliche - which isn't really a problem. I was along for a wild ride every step of the way from beginning to end.
GRAPHICS: The execution of Renaissance-Era Italy is absolutely beautiful in this game. From the Villa Auditore to Venice and everywhere in between, this game feels like a wonderful piece of escapism. The character models are not the best for a 2009 game, but they're solid nonetheless, and they aren't really the focal point as much as the environments anyway. However, it definitely made me chuckle to notice that Ezio is literally the only person in all of Italy who aged at all over the 20+ years covered from start to finish in this game - and it's mainly reflected in a beard and a gruffer voice. Every other character model is exactly the same from start to finish. It doesn't ruin the illusion, but it is funny to notice. The only other gripe is that I found it a bit uncanny watching each city "load in" to the Animus at the start of each new memory sequence. It feels authentic to the internal logic, but just struck me as uncanny. Beyond that, the game is a definite spectacle, and a pleasure to explore.
GAMEPLAY: Perhaps my biggest complaint about the original Assassin's Creed game was in its gameplay, which felt like it had so much potential that wasn't being used. The sequel shows this potential much more fully realized. The combat is more in-depth, and uses the same basic concept with better execution. Gone are the days of eavesdropping on benches (which feels like authentic espionage but doesn't work for gameplay), and they're replaced with a much more varied gameplay loop, featuring escort missions (which never get too frustrating, as they often do), some stealth segments that feature more run-and-climb mechanics and often play like puzzles, and other things that kept me engaged from start to finish. There were a handful of stealth-mandatory missions that I found frustrating, but they were mostly the right balance of challenging and rewarding. Also, you can now impact your notoriety in an area, which means that it's possible to travel without fighting for your life on every city block - something that annoyed me about the predecessor. However, the crux of this series is the free running mechanic, which already came out of the gate feeling very fluid, but needed improvements. This game makes some of those improvements, but it's still not perfect, as I found myself too often steering Ezio away from his targets because of all the quick changing of direction. Because of this, in a good chunk of the parkour-based challenges, I found myself having to stop on each obstacle and realign the camera before making the next jump - which made time trials much more difficult and overall felt like a disruption of the flow of free-running. However, this is more of a minor complaint and didn't impact my overall enjoyment of the game.
SIDE CONTENT: A game has to really impress me to make me want to go back and spend hours picking up trivial collectibles for minor rewards, but AC2 has managed just that. Thanks to its beautiful environments, solid voice acting, and very entertaining gameplay loop, I have no problem running around each of the cities to grab every collectible to get that sweet 100% completion moment - even if I may have to pull out an IGN map here or there to help out. The collectibles are the only side content to speak of, but any excuse to continue exploring and escaping to Renaissance Italy is okay by me.
SUMMARY: Assassin's Creed 2 is leaps and bounds ahead of its predecessor. Everything that I had hoped would be in this game is here in full force, and while it's not completely flawless, it is wildly entertaining in every single aspect. From its awesome cast of famous Renaissance figures and Ezio's family, to its vastly improved gameplay, to the stunning environments available throughout the world, to the great soundtrack, to its cliche-but-thrilling story, this game is one I am thrilled to have found, and one I will undoubtedly revisit in the future.
OVERALL: 9/10.
Uncharted 2: Among Thieves (2009)
The Peak of the Original Trilogy, Without Question
Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, like God of War 2 before it, is a truly incredible sequel that expands on everything that worked about it's predecessor, fixed things that didn't work, and delivers a story so entertaining that it feels like an interactive movie. The writing is witty and engaging, the plot is fast-paced and bombastic, the graphics are beautiful as ever for the remaster, and the gameplay keeps a decent balance between gunplay, traversal, and puzzles to keep players engaged throughout.
STORY: The in medias res opening of this game sets the expectations for this sequel, right from the opening quote from Marco Polo. Left with a critically-injured Nate precariously hanging from a derailed train with no explanation, the player knows to expect bigger set-pieces, better graphics, more thrills, and a more brutal story for Nathan than was delivered in the first game. The point of an IMR opening is to leave the audience questioning "how did we get here?", and the game accomplishes that handily. From there, Nathan runs into some old contacts in the Bahamas, and they arrange a heist on a Turkish museum, despite Nate's misgivings. From there, a tale of betrayal, power, uncovering the past unfolds with almost impeccable pacing.
The characters in this game are again the engine behind the appeal of the game, and they are on full form throughout. Nate is lovable, witty, and charismatic, Elena still holds a firm sense of right and wrong (and brings out the best in Nate), Chloe is an unapologetic badass with a reluctant soft side, Harry is the kind of villain you could never get tired of punching, and Lazarevic makes for a truly menacing antagonist, sacrificing anything to achieve his ends. The chemistry between all of the characters is electric, and gives the game so many quotable moments. Even more minor characters like Tenzin and Schafer have memorable moments make the game a pleasure to revisit.
As with Uncharted 1 & 3, this game also introduces a race of semi-supernatural monster enemies towards the very end. It's always something I've been kind of indifferent about, but I will say that the Guardians of Shambhala are the coolest of the lot, and offer more of a challenge than the "slippery naked guys" from the last game, while not being AS much of an annoying set of bullet sponges as the Djinn in the 3rd game.
The set pieces in the game are also mind-blowing, spanning from collapsing buildings, to centuries-old booby traps, to taking out an armed convoy, to shooting down a helicopter from atop a moving train (a highlight level for the whole trilogy).
GRAPHICS: Developer "Naughty Dog" has always been at the cutting edge of graphics tech, and for a mid-generation PS3 game, it definitely shows. Overall, I certainly wouldn't mind an update for the entire trilogy to be done in the style and fidelity of Uncharted 4, but these graphics (especially in the Nathan Drake Collection) are definitely nothing to complain about.
This game is much more globe-trotting than the 1st, and every new environment is more beautiful than the last. From the Turkish Museum, to the dig site and mountain in Borneo, to the war-torn Nepalese city, to the mountain and Schafer's village, to the Monastery in the mountains, to Shambhala itself, every environment is visually distinct, beautifully realized, and thrilling to explore.
GAMEPLAY: With the clunkiness that plagued the first game's shooting being cleared up in the second entry, there's not much to complain about with the gameplay of Uncharted 2. The gunplay is fun but fair - ammo is always plentiful, with numerous weapons offering multiple approaches to any encounter, with none feeling impossible when played on Normal difficulty, which is the way it should be. Of course, harder difficulties should be much more challenging (I myself have played the game on Crushing before), but for those who play for a balance of story and gameplay, an encounter that causes 1000 deaths just grinds the gameplay to a halt. That sort of thing shouldn't happen on regular difficulties (looking at you, God of War '05), and Uncharted 2 nails the progressive difficulty.
Traversal is smooth and doesn't really get to the point of feeling boring or drawn-out, but allows the game to call players' attention to the beautiful environments, while some segments offer a little more of a challenge, with players needing to think about how to get from A to B, rather than just following the intuitive paths that are often presented. I appreciate the variety between the two. One thing that's worth mentioning here, though, is that there are 101 treasures to collect across the game's ~11-hour run time, so completionists should be prepared to explore every single nook and cranny, because some of them are a real pain to find. Thankfully, the game has a per-chapter treasure counter, so if you get to the end and you're only missing a handful, you don't have to play the whole thing again to find them.
SUMMARY: Uncharted 2 is an improvement over its predecessor in every conceivable way, moving effortlessly between multiple locales, balancing a larger cast of characters, offering challenging but rewarding gameplay and an immensely entertaining and satisfying story, worthy of a Hollywood blockbuster. The whole thing works like a well-oiled machine, and is rightly hailed as the best of the first 3 Uncharted games, and it often flip-flops with the 4th game for my personal favourite. If you own a PS3 or onwards, the Uncharted games are a must-play, this entry especially.
Overall rating: 9.5/10.
Batman: Arkham Asylum (2009)
An excellent game, unfortunately overshadowed by its sequels
If you ask any fan of the Batman: Arkham series to rank the games from best to worst, you would rarely see this game topping the list. But to just position Arkham Asylum relative to the other entries in the franchise is to do a disservice to how brilliant the game is. The beauty of the Arkham series is each entry has at least 1-2 unique things that help it stand out from the others, and that makes them all worth revisiting, rather than just picking one game as the best. That being said, it's easy to forget how much Asylum gets right, and the qualities that set it apart from the rest of the series:
1. The direct comic book/animated series influences
2. The weightiness of the movement and combat
3: The cerebral feeling and psychological-thriller undertones
STORY
The story of Arkham Asylum goes from "simple but effective" in the beginning, then takes a detour into "bizarrely supernatural". The shift doesn't derail the game's pacing, but I do find it a bit jarring. Rocksteady Studios knows that this is the Batman game that fans have been waiting for. The opening few shots of Batman and the Joker, as they drive to and enter the Asylum, immediately portrays a dynamic that's consistent with the 90s animated series, written for the now-mature audience who grew up watching it.
No review of this game would be complete without praising Kevin Conroy as Batman, and Mark Hammil as The Joker. Every line feels effortless, the chemistry between them is down to a science, and beyond the sense of nostalgia for Animated Series fans, the performances just bring the material to life in a way few others could.
The first playable segment is a "forced-walk" segment, which would become something of a tradition in the series. An unexpected choice for such a long-awaited and eagerly-anticipated action game, but it shows that Rocksteady made choices that serve the overall experience of the game, rather than immediately indulging in the action at the cost of getting a good feel for the environment, tone, art design, and voice acting which are all on full display in the opening. Then, the Joker makes his long-planned escape and takeover, and the simple mandate comes into play; fight your way through the other freed super-villains and Blackgate inmates to tame the chaos and bring the island back under control. This provides a simple goal for the game, as the Joker's well-co-ordinated attack leaves Batman with more immediate concerns than simply "punch the clown and put him in a cell".
Along the way, more of the underlying and antecedent events come to light, and it's discovered that Joker's endgame is not to simply capture Arkham Island for his own control, but to create a huge army of monsters, and rampage across Gotham. This is a more outlandish, comic-book-esque Joker plot, that, while slightly undercutting the serious tone of earlier chapters, still makes for a fun back half of the game once you roll with it.
The story is well-paced, alternating between combat, stealth, navigational challenges, very fitting "Detective Mode" segments, and story beats. None of these ever get a chance to feel boring, and the game stays just as entertaining from the opening all the way to the final boss fight. The feeling of natural exploration as the story guides you through the small island, on which the entire game takes place, really adds a sense of organic discovery, and has enough variety to keep players engaged throughout the story and end-game content. In terms of thematic strength or depth, the story is nothing unique, but it's a loving homage to the source material that inspires the game, and a fitting backdrop for the first truly great video game outing for the Dark Knight.
GRAPHICS
Having played the original PS3 version and the "Return to Arkham" remaster, I will say that each version of the game is beautiful, but there was something more befitting of the game's art direction in the original version: the textures look a little rougher, and the characters a little uglier, and the lighting a little harsher. The remaster is very polished and throws everything into smoother detail, while not a bad thing, I do remember my first impression of playing Return to Arkham, thinking that some of the gritty charm of the original version had been lost. Return to Arkham still looks utterly beautiful, and either version still holds up in 2023.
The graphics throughout the game are brilliant, and each of the game's varied environments are beautifully realized, from the cold, industrial feel of the Intensive Treatment Unit, to the decrepit and uncared-for Medical building, to the overgrown external environments. The lighting engine in the game compliments all of these environments perfectly, handling both warm and cold lighting, that help the whole game feel dynamic.
The comic book influences on the art direction are undeniably stronger in this game than in the rest of the series, as well as making for welcome changes when the series establishes more of its own identity. Every design choice from the menu and UI design, to the black "motion" streams that come out of Batman in combat, all scream comic book come to life, and gives the game an appeal that keeps me coming back to it.
GAMEPLAY
Gameplay is where Arkham Asylum experiences its highest highs. Arkham Asylum's "FreeFlow" combat system spawned a thousand imitators, few of which do it as well. The combat flows effortlessly, it incorporates quick-fire gadgets, and encourages rhythm over button-mashing. There is a weightiness to the combat in this game that gives it a brutal, feel-it-in-your-gut type of satisfaction that the other games don't quite reach. In addition, the traversal in this game is very entertaining, and the more close-up, tighter camera on Batman gives the game's quieter moments an inherently personal feeling, adding to some of the psychological thriller tone.
Asylum also sees its lowest lows here. The Titan Ivy island takeover is really the only thing I don't look forward to replaying, but there are also the boss fights to consider. This is something that the series infamously struggled to get right, with a handful of notable exceptions. There isn't much to rave about for having 3 different "boss fights" in the game that all boil down to playing Matador Simulator 2009. The final boss fight, while making decent use of the combat system, also feels like a little bit of a let-down. These are minor complaints, and they don't bring down my overall feelings of this game. The Killer Croc segment is a true bright spot, a simple but effective way to turn the tables on Batman, making the player feel more like prey than predator. The Scarecrow segments in the game offer a similar vibe, sometimes changing up the pacing by switching to 2.5D gameplay, and giving you a chance to delve into Batman's fears and worst memories. They offer the most hilarious and clever design choice I've seen in a game, maybe ever.
SIDE CONTENT
Asylum only has 1 side mission to speak of - Riddler Challenges. However, the collectibles offer a lot of lore about the history of the island, making the world feel more lived-in. It also gives a reason to return to old areas with new gadgets and explore all over again. Riddler doesn't appear, but the mission ends satisfyingly. Challenge Maps also offer a way to hone your skills and jump back into the action after the story ends.
FINAL THOUGHTS
The Arkham Series comes out swinging with this game. While it's not perfect, it's very entertaining and has enough unique appeal to bring me back time after time. Final Rating: 8.5/10.
Uncharted: Drake's Fortune (2007)
Is Instant-Onset Nostalgia a Thing?
The entire main-line Uncharted series is very near and dear to me, by far one of my favourite game series ever made. I bought the Nathan Drake Collection in late 2016 for like $30 on Amazon, because it looked like fun and had some good reviews. I was blown away by every instalment, and something I noticed on my first play-through was that even though I had never played this game before, it carried a sense of nostalgia. Playing this game made me feel like it was 2007 again and I didn't have a care in the world. The same can ultimately be said for 2, 3 and 4 as well, which is probably why the series holds such a special place for me and so many others.
Story: It's noted in a lot of reviews from the original 2007 release that this game, to its benefit, plays like an interactive blockbuster action movie. While this type of game is more pervasive nowadays, it was clearly groundbreaking at the time - and the game really does play like some kind of modern-day spiritual successor to Indiana Jones. The story centres on Nathan Drake, a tomb-robbing treasure hunter chasing the fabled El Dorado and following the path of his supposed ancestor, real historical figure Sir Francis Drake. Even outside of the story, the cast of characters make the game wildly entertaining, and most importantly, the three main characters are all incredibly likeable in spite of their flaws. Nathan's selfishness is superseded by his heroism, and he makes for a very charismatic gaming companion. Elena Fisher's relentless pursuit of a story gives way to genuine investment in the history. Victor Sullivan... kind of remains a greasy old bastard throughout the story - but his care and concern for Nate (and eventually, Elena) reveals a genuine heart under the gruff exterior. All 3 protagonists grow closer to one another, and the chemistry with all of them is just spot-on throughout the whole game. The story itself is not without its cliches, but they are easy to forgive. It also gets ridiculously outlandish at times, but the game does the right thing by sort of leaning in to the crazy nature - in a way, it relies on the power of pre-established cliches and plot elements to allow the player to just have fun with the game by accepting those elements at face value. You're not supposed to scoff at the idea of a race of mutant, centuries-old, Buff-Gollum-looking Spanish pirate zombie monsters that show up out of nowhere in the last quarter of the game - the game simply doesn't take itself seriously enough for that criticism, and that makes it easier to just enjoy the experience. What this game has figured out is that it doesn't need to have an airtight, logically flawless story to be a great story-based game. The engine that really drives the game is its cast of beautifully-realized and performed characters, and that leaves room for the writing to take liberties without detracting from the enjoyability of the game. In addition, the pacing of the game from start to finish just feels so consistent. It's not relentless explosions and action set pieces - there's room for navigational challenges and puzzles, along with some great character moments in the cut-scenes between gameplay. The game also features a couple background narratives - the feel that this path has been walked before is shown through in the story. This is one of my favourite elements of the Uncharted series, and would go on to become a series staple - especially in A Thief's End.
Graphics: I have only ever played the first 3 Uncharted games as part of the PS4 Remastered box set, so I cannot speak to the graphics of the original PS3 game here, but the remaster is mostly stunning. Graphically it is much more consistent than the remaster of God of War II, which originally came out in the same year. The environmental design is so immersive and beautiful that it kind of makes it a shame to move on from any one area, because you're barely done taking in the beauty of the place you're leaving. The majority of the plot unfolds across one island which the player discovers piece by piece, which keeps the overall environment of the game feeling very consistent. Somehow, even the elements of 20th Century / WWII German architecture fit into the overall vibe without feeling truly out of place in the game. The landscapes are all beautiful to behold, and pretty much every room or environment in the game is worth a look in Photo Mode. The one thing I will say is that the hair on the character models could really do with an update - especially Elena's, as they all simply look like odd helmets worn by the characters, and don't really behave like hair at all. I'd also like to call out whoever signed off on giving the 400+ year old skeleton of Francis Drake a full head of hair and thick beard. I can forgive the skeleton still being solid after so many years, but the hair just looks comically out of place. Jokes aside, though, these are minor gripes that are more than easy enough to look beyond when balanced against everything the game does right in the field of graphics / environmental design.
Gameplay: In this game is the birth of a gameplay formula that is central to every subsequent entry in the franchise - a balance of platforming/navigational challenges, ancient puzzle-solving, and wildly unfair gunfights with dozens of enemies at a time. It's ultimately a winning combination, and the franchise rightly refrains from reinventing that wheel in future entries, but that's not to say that it appears here, flawless and with no room for improvement. The gunfighting is a little clunky at times, and the aiming system is mercifully improved by future entries, but it's still enjoyable here, much as the improvement is remarkable by the 4th entry. There's little to be said for the hand-to-hand combat in the game - Nate has 2 basic combos to use on enemies, and you shouldn't use them in the middle of a gunfight. It doesn't need a great combat system, though, as the game is a cover-shooter and that's how it's supposed to be played. The puzzle-solving also changes drastically in the sequels, as it's pretty clear that the solutions to every puzzle in this game are basically handed to you in the form of explicit notes from Sir Francis's notebooks and maps. There's not a lot of critical thinking or puzzle solving required from the players here, but the puzzles do make a welcome change of pace from the gunfights. Last, there is the traversal system, which is really solid right from the get-go, and never feels boring or forced. The traversal flows really well, and for the most part it is easy for players to both intuit what their next move should be to get to the goal, and to then execute that move. This was a merciful change from the first Assassins' Creed game, which I recently played for the first time. The navigation system in that game had the potential to be great, but the user interface and controller commands just made it difficult to use properly. Uncharted suffers from no such problems, save for one or two points where you have to let go of the analogue stick and then re-position it to jump from one ledge to another - but I could probably count those instances on one hand. In addition, it's worth mentioning that the game takes an abrupt detour through the Survival Horror genre for about an hour of gameplay in the last quarter, and the gameplay transitions through that shift pretty seamlessly.
In conclusion, Uncharted 1 is a solid foundation for a truly brilliant series of games, even though it doesn't reach the level of prestige storytelling that one might expect from Naughty Dog based on their recent releases (which I also love). When I was reviewing God of War II, I figured that games should be judged on how well they succeed at simply being what they are. If you try and take Uncharted more seriously than Uncharted takes Uncharted, you're not going to enjoy it. But if you take this game as what it is - a wildly-entertaining thrill ride with lovable characters, some cheesy writing, and bombastic action set pieces - you'll see this game as it is seen by its many fans - myself included. Its cast of lovable characters and their electric chemistry make this game a comforting, familiar and nostalgic experience even for a first-timer, and give this game everything it needs to keep players thoroughly engrossed through its 8-10 hour experience, and keep coming back for more. The only reason I give this 8/10 is for the minor gripes I mention above that are remedied by future entries.
Assassin's Creed (2007)
Hoping for an improvement from the rest of the series
I started playing the Assassin's Creed games at the request of my girlfriend, who loves the series. I'm usually a fan of third-person action and stealth games, so I thought why not. I played her copy on the Xbox 360. The fact that the series is now so expansive and popular hopefully means that the series takes an upswing from now on, because while there are elements of a really good game here, those elements are hindered by a lot of flaws that made it really difficult to get into this game (the first 2-3 times I tried, I got maybe an hour or two in before losing interest).
Story: The story is definitely one of the stronger points of the game. Even though it's not super layered or complex, it was entertaining enough to keep me engaged. It's a simple arc of Altair, an assassin in the Holy Land during the Third Crusade, losing his honour and rank in his brotherhood, and having to earn back the trust of his leader, Al Mualim, by committing 9 assassinations at his behest. But as he does so, Altair learns things from his victims, and begins to lose faith in Al Mualim. The whole thing is framed by the story of Desmond Miles, a descendent of Altair, who has been kidnapped by a corporation and put into a machine called the Animus, to access "Genetic Memories" of Altair's story. The first couple of times I tried to get into the game, I found the frame narrative to be kind of unnecessary, a break in the immersion of the gameplay, when there was so little to be done in the levels played as Desmond. However, this time, I found them a bit more palatable, and providing a simple but decent second story in the game.
Graphics: As I said, I set up my girlfriend's old Xbox 360 to play this game, and for reasons unknown to me, the console was preset to run at a dismal 480p, worse quality than pretty much any video game in recent memory. The console was projecting a fullscreen 4:3 resolution onto my widescreen TV, whereas the game was actually in widescreen within those parameters, leaving massive black bars around every side of the screen and only using maybe half of the available screen space. I asked her about this and how to fix it (I've only used Playstation in the past) and she didn't know. So I started up the game, and stomached the terrible resolution for most of the game, until about 3/4 of the way into the game, when I figured there was no way that an Xbox 360 ever survived the gaming market if it only ran at 480p, so I went and messed around with some settings until I got it to fill the whole screen. Call me an idiot for taking so long to figure it out, but let me tell you, the change in graphic quality was instantaneous and astounding. It was like a weight had been lifted off my shoulders. At this new resolution, the game was much more on par with other games of the time, and while it still doesn't hold up brilliantly today, it's definitely passable. Environmental design is very detailed (although less awe-inspiring than games like Uncharted 1, which came out around the same time), characters look decent, but everything takes place in-game, and there are no pre-rendered or cinematic cutscenes - just the ability to take multiple angles on a scene when prompted.
Gameplay: This is where things really start to go downhill. This game just... isn't very fun to play. The free-running, for which the series is really famous, was surely something groundbreaking in 2007, but would often just slow down or completely stop from time to time, usually as soon as I needed to get somewhere fast. For some ridiculous reason, Altair, highly-trained assassin with a brilliant athletic physique and a prowess for scaling buildings, turns into a fumbling idiot when confronted with water. It is so stupid to me that falling into water will instantly kill Altair. And it wouldn't even be that much of an issue if the parkour system had better targeting. Too many times I tried to jump from one post to another, miss completely even though I was aiming properly, land in some dreaded water and have to start my mission again. In addition to the better parts of gameplay being much less polished than I had hoped they might be, the actual gameplay cycle gets really repetitive after 2-3 of the 9 assassinations. It just kind of kills the fun. Games are supposed to be fun. Even just making my way through the open world eventually got boring or frustrating, or being harassed non-stop by beggars in the street would constantly get in the way of a mission. Even rescuing the terrorized citizens of each primary location (which functions as a side mission throughout the game) boils down to the same combat encounter with the same copy-pasted bad guys, to always result in one of four dialogue options - which isn't nearly enough, considering that there are probably over 50 iterations of this mission in the game. Sword combat definitely feels like it's from 2007, with a very basic system of attacks, parries (which are clunky at the best of times), blocks etc,. And even the final boss fight does nothing to deepen or improve upon this. The only thing that really kept me going was wanting to see how the story ended, and gave me no desire to go back for any of the side content.
Overall, this game was a mildly entertaining story, decent 2007 graphics, and some impressive environmental design, marred by awfully boring gameplay loops, frustrating creative decisions, and clunky mechanics. I hope the rest of the series has more to offer.
God of War II (2007)
Not flawless, but insanely ahead of its time
I am writing this review off the back of my second play-through of the game, back-to-back with its 2005 predecessor - the first time streaming to my PS4, the second playing on disc, remastered for the PS3. At its core, God of War 2 is exactly what a video game sequel should be - an improvement upon the original in every conceivable way. It builds on the solid foundation laid by God of War (2005), improves on what was already great about it, and fixes most of the gripes I noted in my review of the first game.
Story: God of War (2005) benefitted hugely from it's single-focus story, and that goes double for the sequel. Right from the jump, this game is full-throttle, transitioning into the opening cutscene directly from the main menu, and barely taking its foot off the gas for a second until the end of the game. Linda Hunt's narration carries over nicely from the first game, punctuating important moments and revealing that she is the voice of the Titan, Gaia. The story knows the angle it's going for, and wastes no time showing the players what to expect from the game in the opening sequence: Kratos is violent and angry, a walking power fantasy; nobody can stand in his way, and he's going to take on one ridiculously powerful foe after another until he gets what he wants. The game makes this promise at the opening, and delivers on it repeatedly throughout. The whole story carries an epic sensibility to it, because Kratos is the underdog in just about every scenario. As soon as Zeus betrayed Kratos, I knew I was in for yet another wild ride of a revenge tale. Admittedly, I think everyone saw this betrayal coming a mile away, and very little effort is made to disguise this, but I can overlook it for the entertainment value of the game. Throughout the story, Kratos clashes with numerous other characters on similar quests to his - all looking to change their destiny by reaching the Sisters of Fate. This is a clever use of the mythos, both Ancient Greek and canon from the first game, and sets up some brilliant boss battles and one of the games few emotionally resonant moments. While the story overall is wildly entertaining, it offers little in-depth analysis of it's themes of revenge, fate, sacrifice, fathers and sons, cycles of violence etc - but that's not necessarily a bad thing. While I appreciate games that take the time to do this, not every game needs to have that angle; it's okay for a game to just be entertaining and fun, and God of War 2 has that in spades. One thing I will say, though, is that this game is where we start to see the version of Kratos that comes to be the face of the series to outsiders - the sort of one-dimensional, over the top, hyper-angry killing machine. That's not exactly what you get in this game, as it's not devoid of emotionally compelling moments (such as the segment when he finds out Zeus has destroyed Sparta, or the death of Athena), but it's certainly a few steps down from the level of sympathy I held for the tortured soul in God of War (2005). This is the only real negative I have about the story, as Kratos slowly begins to flatten out and lose his nuance.
Graphics: Let me start by saying this game, for the most part, looks absolutely stunning in the remaster for PS3. It's crazy to me that this level of achievement was reached even in the remaster, let alone on the native PS2 hardware in 2007. There are 3 levels of graphics in this game, and none of them are terrible. At the very top are the cinematic cutscenes, the pre-rendered movies that play at a few major story beats. These are utterly beautiful, to a level that feels impossible for the PS2 to have achieved - hats off to Sony Santa Monica for these scenes. Second would be the actual gameplay of the remastered edition. It's smooth as butter on the disc version (especially as opposed to streaming it on my home wifi), the combat animations look great, and the environments are all really visually appealing. Third and last, we have the in-engine cutscenes that fill most of the smaller story beats of the game. These do not seem to have received the same treatment as the gameplay, and look more like they were pulled directly from the PS2. They're not terrible graphics, but the age does show through, especially when compared to the pre-rendered cinematics. There is a very noticeable drop in visual fidelity when the two are placed side by side. The worst offender is the 10-second scene of Kratos being taken by the hands of Death, as it is sandwiched right between the scene of him being stabbed by Zeus, and re-awakened by Gaia to escape the Underworld, both of which are pre-rendered. It's a really jarring change in visual appeal, albeit a brief one. Overall, the variety of graphics quality across the game gives me the notion that if the game were to be re-made from scratch (a-la "Resident Evil" series), it could really be something special to witness on the power of the PS5.
Gameplay: This was the only facet of the original game that I had real issues with. However, the sequel fixes a lot of those issues, and improves upon the better elements from the predecessor. The combat is still super-fluid and satisfying and cartoonishly gory (if frustratingly difficult at times), there is now a counter-attack system, doors now open with R1 instead of R2, beams are wider (but still no auto-balance), puzzles are still intricate and clever, level design shows some good variety, and of course, the boss fights are a crowning achievement. Just to list all the boss battles in the game is staggering, and each of them stands out from the others, feeling distinct, even if some are decidedly less epic than others (looking at you, Perseus). But from the Colossus of Rhodes to the Barbarian King to Lakhesis and Atropos to Zeus, every fight is distinct and fully-realized, and the series is rightly famous for that level of achievement (both in this game and God of War III). However, the camera angle of the game is still fixed, and while it's not as much of a burden as the last game, it's still annoying from time to time. I understand the developers might want to steer the camera sometimes to show the scale of certain levels such as the Steeds of Time, and that the fixed camera is often used to hide collectibles, which is an admittedly smart way to force the player to explore everything, but I think the earlier games could have benefitted from a more Uncharted-style approach to camera (though I realize Uncharted was released after these two games) - in those games, the player controls the camera most of the time, but there are some segments where the camera is steered to show that sense of scale, and the epic feeling of the cinematography is still captured, without fully removing some of the player agency. Again, this is something that could be fixed with a Resident Evil style remake, which I would love to see. My last gripe with the game is that there are still some segments which, even played on Normal difficulty, are frustratingly hard to complete, and at times really detracts from the fun of the experience. It's not enough to really drive me away from replaying the game in the future, but I do wish some parts like that could be tweaked so I'm not dying 20+ times in the same spot.
Overall, this game is a marked improvement over its predecessor in just about every way. It's truly the pinnacle of PS2 graphics, and it has awesome gameplay (for the most part) and a great (though not super-deep) story. It has not completely done away with the gripes I had, but it is ridiculously entertaining and enjoyable, and is absolutely worth a play.
God of War (2005)
Surpassed by future entries, but still a solid game
After discovering the 2018 reboot, and while waiting for God of War: Ragnarok, I decided to go back and play the original games for the first time. I was not expecting to be as impressed as I have been with the franchise as a whole, because going into it, my impression of the original series was that it was a run-of-the-mill hack and slash affair. Essentially, I figured that it would boil down to a gauntlet of bloody, over-the-top battles with figures from Greek Mythology, with little to offer in the story department, starring a one-note, hyper-angry, over-the-top main character. While this isn't entirely incorrect, there was definitely more to the game than this, and I was very pleasantly surprised by what I found.
Story
At the outset, I did have one part of the story spoiled for me before I played this game, as it had been out for over 15 years by that time. However, this didn't stop the game from drawing me in with its interesting story structure, starting almost at the end, and only revealing Kratos's backstory in small pieces via flashbacks throughout the whole game. This felt like a very fresh way to tell a story, and there were enough layers to the backstory that each of the flashbacks feels like it has something important to add about Kratos, the Blades of Chaos, or the relationship between Kratos and Ares. Aside from the flashbacks, the main plot of the game is really well done, starting with one of the larger-than-life boss battles for which this franchise is so famous. As soon as I finished the opening segment on the Aegean Sea, maybe 25 minutes into the game, I was beginning to understand how this game stayed so beloved for so long. After this opening sequence, Kratos receives the mandate that will drive the rest of the game forward - Ares must be stopped, and Kratos is the only one who can do it. I always have an appreciation for stories with such a tightly-focused and singular A-Story, so this one goal driving the whole game really worked for me - even more so as the personal stakes for Kratos were slowly revealed. The rest of the minor plot points and enemies are built on a basic understanding of Greek Mythology, and I find it puts the source material to good use. I also enjoyed the background story of Pathos Verdes III, the architect who built Pandora's Temple, and his slow turning against the Gods of Olympus. Parallel stories discovered through messages are always a bonus, one of my favourite elements of games like The Last of Us (with Ish's story) and Uncharted 4: A Thief's End (with the stories of the founders and Burnes's Grandson). All in all, the story works really well, kept me very interested, and has a satisfying conclusion. It's clear that a lot of love and thought went into crafting this story.
Graphics
I played this game via PlayStation Plus, streaming the "Remastered" version for the PS3, rather than the original version built for the PS2. I think this created some wild disparities between the look of the gameplay, the in-game cutscenes and the pre-rendered cutscenes. At times the contrast between them was pretty stark, but accounting for the fact that this game came out in 2005, it was very impressive to see what Sony Santa Monica accomplished on the PS2 hardware. The violence admittedly felt cartoonish at times, but this didn't take away from my enjoyment of the game at all. The character design on all the characters was solid, with a couple of flaws showing here and there such as the appearance of the Oracle of Athens in gameplay, where she looks almost unfinished, or the faces of the gods as they grant you new powers and abilities - but again, this was the PS2, and the game shines everywhere else so it's easy enough to overlook.
Gameplay
I'll start with the positive. The game contains a simple combat system that is easy enough to use, barring an adjustment period for some odd choices such as moving the right stick to dodge. The combos are fun, and the magic system adds some good variety to help shake things up. The Blades of Chaos are an instantly iconic weapon, and control surprisingly well for the age of the game. I also appreciate the variety afforded by the Blade of Artemis, which brings a whole new combo set. Combat is, bloody and brutal, and for the most part, satisfying. The variety of enemies is also where this game shines. They stop the game from being a "mash square to win" type of experience, and challenge the player to think about their approach to any given combat encounter. In addition, this game had a large amount of appropriately challenging puzzles that force the player to think critically, and very rarely offered hints on how to solve them, which I respect. They were a high point of the game. The final battle with Ares is also impressively innovative, with Kratos and Ares sharing a health bar, almost tug-of-war style, meaning the player always had the opportunity to turn the tides of the battle by getting a few good shots in. I haven't seen a boss battle use such a mechanic before or since. However, the gameplay is also where my only major gripes with this game crop up. For all other intents and purposes, God of War has aged phenomenally from 3 console generations ago. However, parts of the gameplay just don't work for me. The fixed camera, while giving some parts of the game their insane sense of scale, also made some moments of gameplay really awkward, with moments where I couldn't see my objective, or the enemies I was fighting. It also made for some counter-intuitive moments, where Kratos is made to run towards the camera, which inherently feels as though you're going backwards, and makes you question if you're really supposed to be going that way. There is also no auto-balancing feature when walking along a beam. I understand that this is supposed to add another level of challenge to navigation segments, but they made some parts of the game pointlessly frustrating, though this may have been partly because of the lag I experienced in the Blades of Hades level that caused me to die so many times I lost count. Nevertheless, it left a bad taste in my mouth. Another thing that I was surprised the devs wouldn't change from PS2 to PS3 was the feature of rapid-tapping R2 to open a door. R2 wasn't a trigger button on the PS2, but it is on PS3, making it difficult to rapid-tap. This was changed for the sequel, but not this entry, and this is another feature that just makes certain moments needlessly frustrating, and seems like such an easy fix.
Overall
There were certain levels of this game that I found really frustrating, even playing on normal difficulty, sometimes due to the gameplay gripes mentioned above, but sometimes also because of how difficult the game insists on being. I like to be challenged by games, but at times the "git gud" mentality just goes a little too far for me, which is why I don't see the appeal of games like Bloodborne or Dark Souls. That being said, there is plenty about this game that is worthy of applause, especially considering its original release was in 2005. Due to gameplay and graphics advancements, this probably lands at the bottom of the list in the main-line games of the franchise, but that's not to say this is a bad game. All in all, it holds up very well, and I think it's definitely worth at least one play through - though on disc if possible, unless you have super fast internet and don't experience any lag while streaming.