Like ordering a pizza on a Friday night...
User Rating: 8 | Dante's Inferno: Shinkyoku Jigoku-Hen PS3
[Warning – rant ahead] Feel free to ignore this first bit... Just occasionally something reasonably 'new' will come along – Ico, say - though often it will remain a highly-rated, but under-selling 'niche classic'. But God of War (Action/Puzzler), Grand Theft Auto (Sand Box), Call of Duty (FPS), Final Fantasy (RPG)... Contrary to popular opinion, there are not games that invented a genre, but rather games that defined a genre at a moment in its development and so set a benchmark in terms of what can be achieved. To take a game at random, think back to Golden Axe on the MegaDrive (attacks, combos, magic, health and other potions, bosses, beasts to ride), before you think GOW came from nowhere. What's my point? Logic really. If one follows through a disdain for 'copies' or 'clones' to its rational end, then one is effectively saying that only those aforementioned genre-defining games are permitted to continue along their monopolised franchise paths, and all other games must somehow be new - which is generally very difficult - or purposefully ignore the innovations and refinements introduced by the former - which might make them less interesting or seem out-dated. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Perk-system in an FPS multi-player: shame on you, you derivative COD clone; no perk-system in an FPS multi-player: poor show, get with the times... A modern fantasy hack-n'-slash is by definition going to include some common elements (a range of upgradeable attacks and combos; new skills or magic; a range of enemies and bosses; some platforming and puzzling; collectibles); GOW was hardly the first to do any of these things – it just did them all extremely well within a coherent and stylish package. We don't criticise everything From Russia With Love, through Moonraker, to the later Casino Royale, or for that matter The Bourne Ultimatum, just because they are 'derivative' (or, in the case of the Bond series, the same film made over and over again) – but we do recognise that some are better examples of 'what they do'. So the question really is not whether Dante's Inferno is or is not 'just like' GOW, but simply how good is it at what it does?
With that rant out of the way... Dante's Inferno is pretty solid, if not without niggles. The graphics are solid. Some of the vistas are especially impressive, if losing something in later levels. Given a fixed camera third-person perspective, one might expect better (Inferno is no Uncharted 2 or COD 4, themselves games that are notably more impressive even given the greater requirements exacted by 360 rotation). Nevertheless, the 'style' is impressive, fitting and coherent; and the cut-scenes (whether cinematic or 'cartoon'-style) are realised well. The sound – often over-looked - is especially good, contributing significantly to the atmosphere and setting. The game-play is, put simply, enjoyable, in a sort of 'guilty pleasure' way. Some have criticised the 'button-mashing'; but this is not Ninja Gaiden, and it isn't trying to be. The sheer frenetic action is often exhilarating, especially as one combines close- and ranged attacks in a way that perhaps does not always require precision but does provide a visceral satisfaction all of its own (a bit like the difference between a fine wine and a good beer – both enjoyable if appreciated for what they are). Basically this is an up-market Conan (which was described by many as a down-market GOW, but got 7.5 on this site).
In short, if you really like hack-n'-slash, you'll likely creep towards 9. If the GOW-comparison issue is decisive for you, as it seems to be for many site reviewers, then you'll probably have it at around 7. I'm sticking with 8.0.
