User Reviews

There are no reviews for this game.

Our Users Say

Critic Reviews

MobyRanks are listed below. You can read here for more information about MobyRank.
Game Chronicles (Feb 02, 2007)
After completing the DS version of Arthur and the Invisibles, I didn’t think that the PS2 version would even come close to giving me the same level of entertainment. The DS version was a very solid game but so is this. In fact, the PS2 version is even better than the DS version, as it should be.
GameZone (Jan 25, 2007)
The game is relatively short, but still is a delight for the eyes. The story is familiar but presented very well, and has broad appeal – just like the characters. This is a platformer, with a finite set of puzzles to solve, but manages to be a title that is very entertaining and a treat for players of almost any age. Atari scores with this title.
IGN (Jan 10, 2007)
Arthur and the Invisibles does a fine job of blending different gameplay styles. It packs plenty of action and puzzles, as well as a high degree of polish throughout. What's more, it has enough real gameplay to warrant a look from just about anyone, not just kids or those who love the property. It's not a perfect ride, since a few AI glitches and camera problems due get in the way. Also, the pacing suffers when completing the puzzles. But these problems fail to drag the experience down by very much.
GameSpot (Jan 24, 2007)
Arthur and the Invisibles seems perfectly content to offer an entirely derivative gameplay experience, but the game dishes out a heavy helping of content that includes the ample storyline and the DVD-quality bonus features. The mostly stellar presentation also means you'll probably be more willing to put up with the game's shortcomings if you enjoyed the film.
Worth Playing (Feb 22, 2007)
Overall, Arthur and the Invisibles might be worth playing if you really enjoyed the film, or if you're just looking for a casual game that is easy to pick up and just as easy to put down. The title remains mediocre in most categories, and there really isn't anything remarkable here. Unfortunately, the game is plagued by a lingering feeling that this was just another movie cash-in that was rushed through the development effort.
60 (UK) (Feb 18, 2007)
But wait! What if I'm wrong? What if such sacrifice creates a martyr? What if, instead of hate, it breeds a benign tolerance? What if I've doomed humanity to a destiny of gaming ennui it actually likes? What if I've created a world of docile Eloi too passive to resist the whims of savage Morlocks (die-hard Ghost Recon fans and THQ developers), lapping up unlockable artwork like a kitten laps up creamy milk? No man was meant to hold such power. Let's stop this insanity before it's too late. I'm aborting this experiment right now. Let's just slap a score and a verdict on the bottom here and we can all forget the game ever happened.