| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (111)

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:07PM Duke said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Um..he his posing like that trying to seduce us? It scares me.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:12PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Funny...it so turned me on.

French guys...SIGH
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 4:31PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I'd hit that.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 10:24PM linkario said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
...with a stick.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
What risks?
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:49PM Rollins said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Perhaps the risk of making nothing you do in-game a true risk.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 4:36PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Yep, thats nailed it.
I'm sure he thinks its amazing that you never die. "Why bother with checkpoints or lives?", he thinks.

Hey genius, if it ain't broke, don't try to "fix" it.
Theres a reason its already more than half price already and it never cracked the top 30 (PAL region).
We're all too poor atm to pay full price on a game we can plough through without much effort!
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 7:53PM Haggard said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I hope you guys aren't serious.

Elika saving you IS a checkpoint system.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 8:33PM original fred said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
"I hope you guys aren't serious.

Elika saving you IS a checkpoint system."

You don't seem to know what a checkpoint is.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 11:30PM nandokun said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
So it's easy because instead of having to sit through 5-10 seconds of reloading a save game every time you 'die', you simply revert back to the last time your feet were on the ground with no wait? How exactly is it any easier? The punishment for death should be being inconvenienced for longer? The punishment should be to break the immersion of the game?
Reply

Posted: Dec 24th 2008 2:21AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I've sincerely yet to grasp how the rescue system is indeed still a challenge as many are arguing. It's like playing Super Mario Bros, missing a jump and instead of playing through the level, getting to do the jump over and over again until you progress. I've played a significant amount of PoP and for me, "reducing inconvenience" has become a fancy way of saying that the difficulty has been completely castrated.

There's just not much thrill there when there are no consequences (and refilling a portion of the enemy's healthbar for losing a fight is NOT a consequence).
Reply

Posted: Dec 24th 2008 8:50AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"So it's easy because instead of having to sit through 5-10 seconds of reloading a save game every time you 'die', you simply revert back to the last time your feet were on the ground with no wait? How exactly is it any easier?"

A re-load doesn't have to take a long time and, indeed,doesn't in many circumstances of death im games. I agree a life system is a touch obsolete, but respawning just in front of the jump you messed up isn't hard. Game's are always more rewarding when you have to do a lot of slick stuff in a row, with the very real possibility of fucking it up and having to start over. It's part of the accomplishment.
Reply

Posted: Dec 24th 2008 12:53PM aristokrat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, going back to the beginning of the section you just failed isn't a checkpoint unless you get the requisite death screen in between. Who cares if the two are functionally the same, we all live and die by semantics around here.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:10PM Ben1001 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
It is my GOTY. I loved it on the 360 and am getting it on the PS3 for Christmas by far and away the best game I have played all year.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Wait.

Do you already own it for the 360?
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:34PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You might want to keep X360 version - as most multiplatform games it's the one to get.

http://yoda.dip.jp/Game/PrinceOfPersia/PrinceOfPersia_05_360.png
http://yoda.dip.jp/Game/PrinceOfPersia/PrinceOfPersia_05_PS3.png

2 other pictures
yoda.dip.jp/Game/PrinceOfPersia/PrinceOfPersia_09_360.png
yoda.dip.jp/Game/PrinceOfPersia/PrinceOfPersia_09_PS3.png

Video comparison (I recommend downloading full file and watching it full screen)
http://www.videogamer.com/videos/prince_of_persia_2008_video_comparison.html
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:59PM CPRxChris said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ anonim1979

I call photoshop!
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 4:19PM whymog said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's my game of the year too. All the complaints I've heard about it being too easy are ridiculous and unfounded. The game isn't easy; the penalty for failure is just streamlined to keep you in the flow of the game. That's a huge success in my book.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 4:18PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@CPRxChris

Really... the whole movie frame by frame too... ?
BTW. The pics are full RGB,HDMI, losseless PNGs.

And it's *slightly* offtopic to post as a "counter-argument" Assassins Creed youtube video?

If you want AC comparison maybe this ones will be better:

PS3 vs X360
http://www.gamersyde.com/leech_5356_en.html
(7MB small avi for framerate comparation)

2nd 360/PS3 comparison, retail version
http://www.gamersyde.com/leech_5418_en.html

(I recomend "Direct download" option and full screen viewing.)

Any comment? ;)
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 4:30PM Megadanxzero said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
whymog, it's not easy because nothing happens when you die. It's easy because it's just easy. You barely have to do anything. The platforming sections are like giant QTEs, only you have a ridiculous amount of time in which to press the button. There are entire platforming sections where you can just bash A to get through them. The game is easy...
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 4:30PM butaneko said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@anonim1979

Hmm, after closely analyzing those screenshot comparisons I can't say I found anything that would really make me prefer either version.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 5:03PM CPRxChris said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ anonim1979

It could be that they switched the settings or are not comparing it to the fullest potential. (Which is why I posted the Assassin's Creed video.) Or maybe they are using composite vs. VGA or anything, who knows?

Any comment? ;)
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 5:53PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Funny enough, coming from a 360 fanboy that I am, I wholeheartedly prefer the PS3 looks.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 6:33PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@anonim1979

In all these examples you give, it looks like the 360 version of the game(s) just have the contract turned up, and the brightness turned down slightly... something that can easily be done with television settings, or within some games.

I don't know if the point of your posts is to say: "There is really no difference between the two games"
but thats what the pics/videos seem to imply.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 6:51PM Slaziman said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Look at the plants in the second set of pics, at the place where you push the lever to open the door

The PS3 plants look like shit


Otherwise pretty much the same with different contrast/brightness
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:11PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Bawwwwww.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:17PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
The game was nothing more then a time killer...The whole light seed collecting gets old fast and has no replay value what so ever..
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:25PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I didn't get the appeal to this game at all either. THe jumping got old and it just never felt like there was any challenge to it at all, just tedious. Even the fighting was a big pain.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:49PM The Kong said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This came could be comparable to Shadow of the Colossus, i wouldn't call it art, but it is much more than a time killer. And some people like collecting items, like light seeds. Actually this game has a lot of similarities to SoTC
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:12PM aborkle said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Mattes has a stronger appetite for chest waxing than he wants to admit.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
PWNSAUROUS!!
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:12PM FxDr said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Hard worker feel under-appreciated, news at 11.

"...wonder if the games industry "has a stronger appetite for the familiar than it wants to admit.""

Well yeah, naturally. Sticking with tried-and-true formulae is a good way to ensure you'll at least break even. Even then, with dev costs as high as they are, one bad game can make or break a studio. Look at Free Radical.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:15PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Prince of Persia is a great game. I'll agree with him that the experience is VERY unique and one that has a lot of value when compared to other games made in this era.

However I did find some aspects of the controls to be a little clunky. All the whole Elika saves you thing is sorta a half love/half hate thing for me.

Last but not least I think they should have added that "hardcore" aspect he referred to in the game. Difficulty levels would have been nice. That way it would still be "accessible" to the causals while at the same time provide a challenge for those that want one.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:23PM FxDr said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Agreed, I loved every minute of the game.

My only issues - why did they make the game death-proof? Seriously? It should have been included as an option, not made mandatory.

The occasional camera freak-outs that have plagued these style games since the first Tomb Raider.

Quicktime Events. They weren't fun 10 years ago, they're not fun now. Devs need to drop them.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:16PM Zertoss said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
'Mattes doesn't concede failure – far from it – but does wonder if the games industry "has a stronger appetite for the familiar than it wants to admit."'

Sega would like a word with you. They've been taking Sonic in all kinds of new directions, and look at how successful they've been!

...

Maybe he has a point...
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:38PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah but Sega's Sonic problem is the opposite, A bunch of new gameplay and story ideas but people just want more of the same.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:50PM Zertoss said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Mattes: "We tried something different, but it seems people really want more of the same."

Sega keeps trying something different, but it seems people just want more of the same.

Yep, complete opposites.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 4:07PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The problem with the Sonic games is that they don't keep the core fundamentals, I have yet to see how the latest games keep that sense of speed AND the variety of path branching, the games are too straight forward with rather simple/empty paths....
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 8:28PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This game is too average to be noticed in a sea of block busters.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:31PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Doesn't take a genius to see that people only want to play the same shit over and over.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:34PM Roto13 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Sands of Time + Okami - Ability To Die != "Unbeaten Paths"
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:35PM FredFredrickson said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If you want to take high level risks and be recognized for it, you should do it with a new franchise.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 4:08PM Johnnynumber5 is powered by cell said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
My initial thought was similar but if you think about it further it's not really the case. Look at two of the most iconic gaming franchises in gaming history for proof. Mario and Sonic. Both franchises have had numerous spin offs and sequels. In the case of Mario you see with every generation there is a new version that completely changes the rules - Sunshine & galaxy. The sonic series has done the same thing except the execution was failed especially in it's last three iterations.

You don't need a new IP to have your changes in game play recognized you just need solid execution of the idea.

Prince Of Persia is pretty much the same style of game with a different art direction. That's not a big distinction when compared to making a completely new take on the franchise like Galaxy.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 4:41PM FraGNeM said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well, Galaxy's hardly a "completely new take" itself.

Overworld containing mini-worlds that unlock with collection of stars? Check.
Platforming-heavy? Check.
Arbitrary pie-shaped health system? Check.
Silly "stop Bowser from doing bad stuff" over-arching incentive? Check.

It had a fresh take on level design, some new power-ups, and a mostly unusued pointer interface for pointing-and-clicking fun, but it wasn't a real departure from the core Mario experience.

Solid mechanics and polish, along with a few new, fresh ideas, made Galaxy special.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 4:55PM Stix Remix said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
(Some fans:)This game is too much like the older games. We hate it! Can't you do something new for a change?

(Other fans:)Why did they try to reinvent this game? They should do so with new titles instead of messing up something that works.

(Developers:)Damned if you do, damned if you don't...
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:36PM Glorbo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
He can say what he wants, but his game ended up as an hour long game stretched long enough to charge 60 dollars for.

Your combat was interesting for the first fight, and then you stretched the exact same fight through your entire game. No increase in difficulty, no new elements as the game progressed.

You story was cute, for the 15 minutes at the beginning and the end, and the 30 second "movie" that played at the end of every chapter. Then you filled in the gaps will dialogue the author of Twilight could write better, and character backgrounds that build little to no empathy.

You platforming and puzzles were solid, and then you made them repetitive by requiring players to collect hundreds of ridiculous orbs.

A two page design document and some beautiful cell shaded graphics does not a good game make.

Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:39PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This seems like a ego trip to me. "Shake up the industrys and push things forward". THAT'S YOUR JOB. As a game developer, you should automatically be thinking of things to push the genre.

It's sad to me when people crave accolades. That to me says he's making games for the money and awards, not for the love of the medium.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 3:54PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
BigFat: What industry do you work in? My company is extremely profitable, and we pride ourselves on hiring only individuals that want to work for the best possible product, not to get paid. It's the difference between working to live, and living to work.
Reply

Posted: Dec 23rd 2008 4:34PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
No need for swearing. I agree that if you solely use this argument with EVERY profession, it does not work. There would be no janitors, fast food workers, sewage treatment workers, etc. But look on the other side of the scale. When all people work for is cash, you find yourself with company CEO's getting millions in bonuses when the company is receiving government bailouts. This country is built on free market capitalism, so if you are the richest with the most awards, you "win", no matter how many lives you ruin in the process.

Back to the thread: It's my opinion that he should be confident in his and his team's work that he doesn't need to go on a rant to IGN about not getting any awards or "pats on the back" for the game. The game is still young too. It's only 21 days released. Psyconauts was VERY critically acclaimed, but didn't sell hardly any copies. Where as "Marvel: Ultimate Alliance" ships 2.08 million in US (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games) and is horrible.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Remedy not done with Alan Wake

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 10:30AM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW