PlayStation OM (UK): Prince of Persia Review

Well, he's certainly a lot more charming on PS3. This new Prince is much changed from his last-gen predecessor. He's new and improved, with a knack for witty one-liners and even sharper acrobatic skills, but none of the time-shifting powers that dropped his PS2 equivalent into a royal mess of Nazi fancy dress proportions. Instead he has a magical sidekick lady called Elika, who he meets at the start.

[chaosatom]

"none of the timing shifting" oh man, that was the best part aside from combat about POP.

[UltimateIdiot911]

I wasn't too big of a fan on the whole time shifting thing. It was nice but for some reason, it didn't hook me but PoP as of now, has me hook.

[chaosatom]

i had to disagree.

Time-shifting was one of the most fascinating things about POP, especially reversing Time.

I guess we can agree to disagree.

[andron]

Too bad it's gone. But from what I have read in reviews they use the girl as a safeguard. She will help you if you mess up...

[badz149]

me too! I don't like the path PoP is going! I love Sand of Time and the time things made it a great game/experience! the new PoP feels like it wants to copy other games and lost its own identity in the process!

[yoshiroaka]

Yea the sand of time used feel really awesome to use and to see it in next gen visuals would have been great. I am disappointed that they took that out but im glad that the game is overall good. I was really afraid that it might flop.

*whew*

[Mikelarry]

looking forward to this. its gonna be weird without the sands ability but hopefully i will be impressed by it.

[Ryo-Hazuki]

For some reason this PoP has me more interested then the others. Maybe its because of its new style and art direction. Hope its good because im looking to buy this.

[Gue1]

This year the 8's have been raining...

[Nextil81]

Are you implying that 8 is a bad score?

[Elimin8]

But you have to admit, some games that are out there deserve higher or at least a point 8 or 9 added to the 8......Think they've been saving those 8's for a rainy day... cause like one mentioned it sure is raining 8's...

[bviperz]

On a scale of 1-10, 5 being average.

[ZorinInc]

7 is the average, IGN have to give it more than a 7.5 for me to even consider it and pay anything over £25.

Tomb Raider, Mirrors Edge and this all fall into the category of wait till mid January.

[Figboy]

on a scale of 1-10, 5 is average.

1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10.

5 is in the middle, hence, average.

6 is slightly above average. in game terms, this is the equivalent of a Spider-Man game from Activision. it's a game that's not completely broken, and has some fun stuff, but it's still barely reaching the bar.

7 is more than above average. in game terms, this is the equivalent of a game like Lair, Too Human, and Haze. the games have decent gameplay mechanics, but other issues, be it bland level design, some camera/control issues, or inenthusiastic story keep it from being an 8 and above. it's a RENTAL at best.

8 is well above average, and is more in the "buy me range." games like Heavenly Sword, Fable 2, Ninja Gaiden 2, Folklore, fall into this category. these are games that are not classic, but are certainly above rental status, in that the gameplay they offer is solid, and things like control/camera/story/visuals, work well for the genre it inhabits. it's not revolutionizing the industry, but well worth a purchase.

9 is very good. firmly planted in the "must buy" range. in game terms, Bioshock, Resistance 2, Mass Effect, and Uncharted fall into these categories. they are games with excellent controls, beautiful visuals, good to excellent stories, spot on gameplay and level design, and are basically, GOTY candidates. these are the games you threw down all that money down for your system for.

10 is above and beyond the standard. they are either genre defining, revolutionary, or so goddamned good that it spoils you for other games in that genre. these games are also so few and far between that very few warrant this score. it does NOT mean "perfect." it means they elevate the gaming experience, genre, or provide an experience unlike any other game on the market. they don't have to revolutionize or redefine a genre, or even be very innovative, they just have to represent their genres like no other title does. Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Super Mario 64, Metal Gear Solid (and MGS4 for a recent example), Little Big Planet, Halo (the original), God of War, and Ocarina of Time are examples of games that go above and beyond the call of duty in terms of delivering an unparalleled gaming experience.

not perfect, but most certainly pushing the boundaries of gaming with fantastic gameplay, controls, and even emotional resonance with the player. not many games warrant such praise, and reviewers have forgotten what a 9/10 and 10/10, or A+ game REALLY is these days, and they are unable to separate the wheat from the chaff in terms of what TRUE quality is.

here's an example:

play Dark Sector on the PS3 (or 360). THEN play another 3rd person shooter like Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, or Metal Gear Solid 4. the difference between the quality of the two titles is PALPABLE.

WHY THEN, have some review sites given Dark Sector similar, if not BETTER scores than Uncharted and MGS4 (to name only 2)?

how can a 3PS with sluggish controls, generic visuals and story, little to no character development or growth, boring set pieces and enemy encounters, and a rather uninspired world score on the same level (or BETTER), than another 3PS with spot on controls, jaw-dropping visuals, a fun story with excellent characters and character development, exciting set-pieces, tense enemy encounters, and a world that is as inspiring and intriguing as the mystery the story is unravelling? can you guess which title is Dark Sector, and which title is Uncharted? (here's a hint; Uncharted is the GOOD GAME)

a 7 score is good enough to play and rent.

an 8 score is good enough to play and keep if you really like it

a 9 score is a must buy.

a 10 is an instant classic that deserves to be in every gamers collection.

reviewers this generation have completely DESTROYED the rating system, with the seemingly arbitrary handouts of 9s and 10s, and A's and A+ to undeserving games over the past three years, since this generation has began.

now, they're trying to fix it, by giving appropriate scores to games, but the curve has been shifted, and it's having the OPPOSITE, and rather adverse affect, on gamer perception of review scores to the point where 7 is average. 8 is also average. 9 is a rental. and 10's are must buys.

it's absurd.

i don't know how to fix it, but sites also need to have some consistency when it comes to reviewing games across like genres, and games across individual genres.

there's no way MGS4 and Dark Sector should be scoring in the same ballpark, when it comes to the 3PS genre.

there's no reason why Gears of War 2 should be mentioned in practically EVERY REVIEW of Resistance 2. Gears is a 3PS. Resistance 2 is a FPS. funny, how Gears of War (the original), was never mentioned in MGS4 reviews, and they're in the SAME DAMN GENRE!

it's as silly as the fanboys that were comparing Halo 2 to GTA: San Andreas when those two games came out. BOTH are quality, and deserve good scores, but WHY in god's name are they being COMPARED, when one is an FPS, and the other is Sandbox?

CONSISTENCY. that's all i ask from reviewers these days. unfortunately, that's NOT what we've been getting the past 3 years. it's one of the primary reasons why i don't take much stock in reviews. i haven't even BEFORE all this crap with the gaming media began, but i haven even LESS incentive to listen to what they have to say now.

it's no longer objective opinion, but moreso a series of nitpicks, and or blind praise, overlooking rather important flaws (ie, terrible framerate and laggy online;*cough*ShoesoriginalGea rsofWarreview*cough*), on certain games from certain consoles. or complaining about things that are STANDARD for the genre, but suddenly BAD and HORRIBLE in a new game (*cough*ign'sreviewofHeavenlyS word*cough). or, the worst travesty of them all: rating games based on HYPE (see the review of EVERY PS3 exclusive released last year, good or bad, and how many a review rated the game down for not "living up the hype" of the PS3, or "adding nothing new" to the genre).

reviewers need to get their heads out of their asses and become REVIEWERS again. reviews, no matter the site, count for sh*t these days.

there's no need for the fabled "moneyhats" when the reviewers are oh so quick to get caught up in the fanboy wars and their OWN bias that it begins to affect the way they review games.

[KidMakeshift]

1-10 rating scale is broken and misinterpreted

I believe in letter grade scales or no overall score at all

[forevercloud3000]

You have totally blown my mind with your epic RIGHTNESS!!! I agree with virtually everything you said in exact precision. I didn't know if there was anyone else in the world that thinks exactly like me.

BUBBLES FOR YOU DUDE! AND AN AGREE TOO!!!!

[bviperz]

As in middle. Great post, btw, Fig. Hit it right on the nose.

[Figboy]

it's just the state of reviews this generation really pisses me off.

in previous console generations, there was this feeling of fairness amongst review sites and magazines.

even the Official Playstation Magazine would praise a game like Halo or KOTOR on the Xbox, because they were good games, worthy of praise.

even the Official Xbox Mag acknowledged that games like God of War and Metal Gear Solid were excellent games.

but now? now you have reviewers that are as snooty and pompous-elitist as movie critics. they literally pick apart games, actively searching for ANY excuse to bring the score down, and what makes it worse is that this behavior isn't even consistent across ALL consoles, but ONE: The Playstation 3.

no matter how good the exclusive on the PS3 (see, Motorstorm, Heavenly Sword, Warhawk, Folklore, Ratchet and Clank Future, and even Uncharted), reviewers have found reasons to mark those games down lower than they deserve.

whether it be "too short," "too much variety," "not enough puzzles," or "not redefining the genre as we know it," or "living up to the hype of the PS3," they found a way to bring those scores down, even if other games in the genre have similar, or WORSE. it's despicable.

i haven't trusted a review in AGES, but nowadays, for me, it's "Play the game for myself and make up my own damn mind about it's quality." it's worked so far. and i've had some fantastic gaming experiences with games that reviewers have said were not worth my time. shame on them, honestly.

there's a difference between making your opinion known, and nitpicking. i beat Heavenly Sword in 9 hours. that was sufficient for me, and i beat it two more times to unlock everything, each of those playthroughs taking about 6 additional hours. i felt i got my money's worth, and the gameplay was enjoyable enough to warrant playing through those two extra times. reviewers marked HS down to a 6/10 because of the game length. i suppose that the fact that the reviewer had a mountain of games to review, and they generally rush through EVERY title (see the complaints about Assassin's Creed being "slow" to see my point) due to deadlines, i hardly take a reviewers complaint about game length to heart.

i took in EVERYTHING i could in Heavenly Sword. really absorbing all the pretty graphics, and enjoying the fights, toying with my enemy, then dispatching of him when i felt like it.

reviews are worth sh*t these days, but gamers swear by them anyway, even when obvious media bias is being shown, or a media preference fora particular genre - nowadays, FPS games tend to score unreasonably well, despite the quality of some but the most god awful - there's no reason for games like Rainbow Six Vegas and The Darkness, as good as they are, to get scores in the 9/10s, and A/A+ range. they are good, but not worthy of such scores. games like Half Life 2, Call of Duty 4, and Resistance 2 are worthy of those scores. there's no reason for games like Dark Sector to score as high as it did when games like Gears of War, Uncharted, and MGS 4 are it's better in EVERY CONCEIVABLE WAY.

[Danja]

I'll have to give this game a rent 1st..not too sold on it...

[blackbeld]

Agree ^^^^ Try first .... bubbles for you

[aiphanes]

I am buying it...I have been waiting for a new Prince or Persia game for like forever!

[Tacki]

IGN likely will. They've been talking about how they think it's a game of the year contender afterall.

Personally, I'm getting this game regardless of the scores (though they haven't been bad so far) it receives because it really looks like the best Prince of Persia since Sands of Time if you ask me. Don't LOVE the art style... but the gameplay looks nice. Only thing that could be weird is having the same voice actor who did Nate's voice in Uncharted. I'm gonna be thinking of that game every time he opens his mouth.

[UltimateIdiot911]

I, too look forward to this game, but I will probably purchase this in the future just don't have the cash. I personally like the new art style and clean color look to it.

[caladbolg777]

... I'm very interested in this game. The graphical style and acrobatic gameplay might sell this one for me. If I'm worried about anything, it's that the game will be "too easy".

Prince of Persia girl = vita-chambers?

Hopefully there will be the option to turn her off, just like the chambers.

[na2ru1]

looks more emo to me, and i hate.

sands of time had the best theme, character and music with one of the most compelling stories i have ever come across last gen. the prince recapping on the events whilst your playing was a touch of a genius. he was only young and naive, which lead to disaster. he killed his dad. his determination for correcting this was very motivating, the princess adding more reasons to keep going...

POP2 killed it with its ugly, dark, and gothic look and music.

[Alcohog]

The videos haven't looked great so far. Animations look awkward, but those were early builds I suppose. Will be interesting to see what other reviews say.

[DarkBlood]

oh i thought this was rated m not that i care or anything but im looking forward for this game for christmas

[Figboy]

but other games with similar mechanics (ie, Uncharted's platforming sections), convinced me that i don't need to rewind time to be good at monkeying around a level.

besides, PoP looks too damn beautiful for me to pass up.

the art design is FANTASTIC, and the combat looks top notch.

i loved Sands of Time, Warrior Within, and Two Thrones, and count them as one of the best trilogies i've ever played in gaming (granted, not too many trilogies manage to maintain quality throughout. say what you will about the angsty art design and "heavy metal" of Warrior Within, the combat and level design was spectacular, and the Dahaka was a genuinely terrifying enemy).

i'm hoping this new Prince of Persia is the start of another equally classic trilogy.

[mastiffchild]

For a change this is a game that seems to have the reviewers all split. Can't make my mind up either. I haven't liked a POP game since SoT and this isn't meant to be much like that AND the jumping about is all down to one button so I dunno whether I'll like or not. Like the cel-shaded(or whatever new name they've given it this time)visuals and don't think Elika will be that annoying-from the vids I've seen she looks better animated than the prince himself-but if a game ever embodied the words "rent it first" it would be this one for me.

[KidMakeshift]

I don't like the voice work. Why do they sound American. It feels out of place

[SaberEdge]

8 is a very good score and I was planning on getting this game no matter what reviews it got. I am a huge Prince of Persia and Assassin's Creed fan and I will definitely be getting this for my 360.

[RPG Guy]

I actually read the whole review and the combat issues are a total turnoff for me. I ain't buying it, sorry Ubi, but I'll keep at it with Far Cry, if that makes you feel better.

[Robulos]

Bubbles and an agree for you!