[i]From Russia with Love[/i] takes us back to the beginning of the James Bond franchiseA
Mate Bors
Ever since I played [i]Spiderman[/i] on the PS1 (which was absolutely amazing) and read and collected the comics, I wanted one thing: to be able to play as Venom. Venom is my favorite villain, and I like him as much as Spiderman, or perhaps even more. Of course, I prefer the [i]Amazing Spiderman[/i] series to the new one, [i]Ultimate[/i], and I would have preferred the first by a mile. This game is not called A
If you’ve played [i]Ghost Recon 2[/i] on the Xbox, then you have yourself a pretty good military shooter, despite the enormous changes between the first [i]Ghost Recon[/i] and the sequel. And if you might think [i]Ghost Recon 2[/i] is the same on the Xbox and the PlayStation 2, then you are very mistaken.
The PS2 version was brought to us by Red Storm, and it is rather questionable as to how on Earth they managed to pull off a pretty good game on Microsoft’s console, and a poor game on the PS2.
The reason the PS2 version sucks is because it wants to mimic the [i]Socom[/i] games too much. In fact, this game could fit in with the series, except unlike [i]Socom[/i] games, [i]Ghost Recon 2[/i] is rather mediocre.
It’s hard to control your team, and it’s hard to control your main character. The controls aren’t too great, and it’s a pain when you’re trying to ambush some baddies; but thanks to the controls, you’re screwing around and they spot you. The AI isn’t exactly cutting-edge either.
There is also no in-game saving. I absolutely despised this in [i]Socom[/i], and I still hate it in this game. It was included in the Xbox version, but why not in this one? I would have liked the game a LOT more if I could have saved. It was rather annoying reattempting the same mission six times and then constantly dying in the end.
The graphics are rather passableA
I never really got into the [i]Far Cry[/i] game for the PC, so I can’t really tell the difference between the two versions, and I only know a few things. For starters, [i]Instincts[/i] was developed by Ubisoft Montreal-not Crytek like the PC version-and the story is also a little different, along with some new features.
Let me be honest with you guys. I used to love FPS games about two years ago. I would eat, dream, drink and bleed FPS games. I loved the graphics (because FPS games are games that truly show graphics), and I loved blowing people away (mainly Germans in WWII games and zombies in everything else). But over the years, I realized one thing: I’m getting bored of them. So why did I pick up [i]Far Cry Instincts[/i]? Well, mainly because I trust Ubisoft (although I’m starting to lose faith), and I heard a lot of good things about the game. I don’t know what’s up with FPS games, but it’s pretty rare that you don’t kill: a) Germans; b) zombies/mutants; and c) aliens. I was honestly hoping for an exception with [i]Far Cry Instincts[/i]-I really was. So how did [i]Far Cry Instincts[/i] go?
The story isn’t that extraordinary, so I am not really going to get into it. You are Jack Carver, bla bla bla, and you are against 600 million evil dudes, with a lot weapons, and some people help you progress … you get it, it’s the usual.
The graphics are stunning. The game feels almost like a next-generation title. I find it hard to understand that a game like this boasts one of the best water effects, but a game that came out around the same time, [i]King Kong[/i], looked awful. The fire effects are jaw-dropping, the light effects are almost real (it hurts your eyes!) and shadows are just awesome. However, graphics don’t make a game. For all I care, the game could look like it’s on the N64 if the gameplay kicks major ass (oh, hello there, [i]Goldeneye[/i]).
The first half, or two-thirds, of the game is awesome. At first, the game is just your regular FPS set in a beautiful jungle island. You use your guns, dual wield (and does it better than [i]Halo 2[/i]) and you can also lay traps (more on that later). I was really enjoying the game until the zombies, the mutants and the dark, [i]Doom 3[/i]-like environments started appearing. I hate this, and I’m a bit angry/disappointed, and this was the factor that disallowed me to give it the rating it would’ve otherwise deserved. Why couldn’t Ubi just stick to the freaking sunny jungle environment and work the story differently, huh? Oh, because everyone loves to shoot zombies and mutants, because we love dark environments, because these are brand new ideas, and we’ve never seen them, right? Bah!
Fortunately, there is good that balances the bad. Other than having phenomenal graphics, [i]Far Cry Instincts[/i] has a few really good gameplay bits. After a few hours of play, you start to get your feral powers (as you progress, you ‘unlock’ a new one). The feral powers consist of the punch, jump, run and the (night/ thermal) vision. Feral punch is basically a ‘mega punch,’ and I love this. Creep up behind a guy (or even during combat), press B and send the sucker flying. This is quite humorous when you are on a huge cliff, and you punch someone down. You can just see them fall to their demise. Feral running and jumping are combined. Press Y, and you enter feral running, which makes you run extremely fast. To jump, just hold down A and then release, watching yourself jump as if gravity was non-existent. Feral vision lets your see/smell enemies in the dark, and also lets your find your way across dark areas (hold down Y). Sadly, this comes to much use later in the games.
Laying traps is a really good idea, but it almost never works. In fact, I was probably able to use it about twice in the whole game. You lay your trap far away from the enemy so they don’t spot you. However, when you try to lure them close with throwing a rock, the enemy usually spots you and starts shooting you. Of course, while trying to get away from the bullets, you run back, but often you’ll run into your own trap (oh, the irony) and die.
A variety of vehicles are at your disposal: quads, boats, jet skis, jeeps, hand gliders, and more. They work well and are well implemented into the game. I love using the handglider-it’s pretty realistically controlled and quite fun too.
Another thing that really pissed me off is the inability to skip the intro at the start of the game … no matter whenever you load it. I mean, if you can’t skip the company logo, whatever, but an intro that is minutes long is stupid. Also, loading times are horrible. I found sometimes that the game loaded for more than a minute, and almost two at times! Maybe it was just my version, but it’s really annoying.
Lasting appeal can be increased with playing multiplayer. Sadly, I can’t talk about that since I don’t have XBL. You can also replay levels, and the levels tend to be non-linear at times, especially in the beginning. The story will take quite some time too-probably around 10 hours. If you have the chance, or want to, online gaming can increase the replay value greatly, but single-player isn’t worth full price.
I can tell you, if all this clichA
Without a doubt, [i]King Kong[/i] was one of the best movies this year. Like almost every movie, it was inevitable that it would receive a videogame based on the film. We all know that most movie-based videogames are usually crappy, but [i]King Kong[/i] was in the hands of Ubisoft, a company responsible for such great games as [i]Splinter Cell[/i] and [i]Prince of Persia[/i]. This was a big relief because Ubisoft is a company I trust, and they don’t often let me down. The task was hard: make a game based on a very good Peter Jackson film. Did Ubisoft succeed?
[i]King Kong[/i] is a unique first-person game. I’m not really going to call it a first-person shooter, mainly because you don’t use your gun as much as in traditional shooters. You’ll often have to rely on spears instead of your gun. With the spear, the game is much more intense than pumping some creature full of lead. The spears were also useful when you could light the end and set bushes on fire to clear the path, or just roast up some dinos or other nasty creatures Skull Island has in store for Jack Driscoll and the other members on the journey. Your weapon is not always drawn; you need to press a specific button to draw it and another to shoot. Another way that [i]King Kong[/i] separates the player from other shooters is the lack of ammo, little variety of weapons (pistol, shotgun, rifle and Tommy gun) and the ability to carry only one weapon (plus a spear). I found that quite dumb because it’s possible to carry a pistol and then another weapon, but I’m not going to lose sleep over this aspect.
Another thing that makes [i]King Kong[/i] a unique game is the lack of any HUD. There is no health bar, no crosshair, no nothing. You have to rely on your instincts. Of course, players who find this too hard can turn it on in the options menu, but that robs [i]King Kong[/i] of its cinematic experience. When you get hurt, the screen will turn red a bit, and if you get hit again, you die. If you manage to stay alive until the screen goes back to normal, it will be as if nothing happened.
Playing as Kong is a totally different experience. You go into third-person mode, and you use your fists to fight. You can relive epic moments of the film as Kong versus the T-Rex (and you do this much more than in the movie), or as you fight for your survival in New York. You often have to protect Ann (the female protagonist) or fight off enemies while she does something (usually burn a blockade so you can proceed).
I didn’t really like that the game barely follows the film. Yes, we have the concept that Carl Denham’s filming crew and some sailors get to Skull Island where Ann is captured, and then she gets taken away by Kong, and then Kong gets captured and gets taken to New York, etc.-but basically, nothing goes on as it does in the film. I found this quite strange and misleading, but it’s up to the player to decide if he or she likes it or not. I know I didn’t.
The graphics look nice on the PS2. Although at times, the game slowed down a bit, it still looked quite nice. I found the water effect disappointing and ugly. Perhaps because of the swampy water, perhaps not-it just wasn’t nice. On the other hand, the fire effects were nicely done. The characters looked a lot like the actual people on whom they were based from the film, which was a nice thing, and they were nicely portrayed in the game.
The music was pretty good; however, I felt it lacking. It was well done and orchestrated, but when compared to other works like this, it’s nothing special. The noises that the animals and beasts made on Skull Island were cool and added to the cinematic experience. The voice acting is done by the real actors, which is a good addition.
The game does have some flaws. An example of a bug is when I got to a place where I should’ve been with Carl and Hayes, but I wasn’t, and there was nothing for me to do; I couldn’t go where I was supposed to go, or go back. I decided to save and quit, and when I reloaded, Carl and Hayes were with me, and everything was rolling. Not a major bug, but it should have been fixed. I also hated it when I was with other characters when playing Jack, and they would decide to run ahead and not bother to wait up for me, so I had to go wondering around where they might be. Also, after a while, the lack of scenery and objective change can make the game dull.
While the [i]King Kong[/i] videogame is a decent movie adaptation, you’ll beat it quickly, and there is no reason to go back for the extras (no multiplayer, which is up to the player to decide if it’s good or not). There is an alternate ending, though, where Kong lives, but you have to play the game a lot to get this, which most people won’t bother with. If you want to see a different kind of first-person shooter, mixed with some third-person Kong action, or if you just really enjoyed the film, then by all means, rent this game. Overall, I think Ubisoft made a fairly decent game, and I hope they will have more movie adaptations in the future.
