View Mode: threaded | watch thread A quick tromp around the intertubes shows most discussion of this game amounts to it's a piece of shit that's not good for anything but padding one's gamerscore. No reason is offered why people would play it on platforms other than Xbox 360. While the graphics aren't great by 360 standards, this game is one of the main reasons I got a 360. I played the demo on my brother-in-law's system and was quite impressed by the weather effects and cinematic feel, not to mention its fresh take on fps conventions. (frikkin javelins!) Is there some crappy part coming up, or are a lot of people just stuck in some idea that movie-based game=teh suk?
What you see now is what you're going to see for the rest of the game, along with some beautiful views every once in a while. It's a slow-paced game, and I suspect people didn't warm to the constant torch puzzles, dragging foot speed, and running out of ammo. It seems to take a special breed to look at heaving handfuls of sharp sticks at an angry Velociraptor as a "fun challenge." I mostly liked how it took some of Trespasser's ideas and executed them better. I certainly wouldn't have bought it, but it made a fine rental, and was completely worth playing. If you like it so far, you'll like it until the end.
(Edited by Sam Jeffreys Re: Where's the suck? Sam Jeffreys I haven't played it, but the graphics look nice and I've read some positive reviews that say it's not perfect, but it is a lot of fun.I think the movie is the suck. Peter Jackson's remake, that is >:) I agree with Retro. If you played the first five minutes, you've played the entire game. And expect a pretty disappointing ending with King Kong in the city.
I never played to the end, but I actually liked the exploring, even though the game is very much on rails. It's like a theme park ride. I heard the ending was anti-climatic, and the portable versions are horrible, but I thought the PS2 version was quite good.
| |||||