BEFORE YOU START READING/FLAMING:
This may see like a wall-of-text, but it is split up into quotes, bolded keywords, and the like. Feel free to skip around as much as you please.
Why I'm doing this: I enjoy it. I'm interested in gaming journalism, and appaled when people get paid to do garbage work in a field that I see as a dream career. I'm also bored =p.
What I believe: I believe that a game review should leave as much personal taste from the material as possible. For example. I dislike GeOW, I do not enjoy it as much as others do. However, I made myself write a full 3 page review on the game and i ended up giving it a 9.2/10.
Afterall, writing reviews is like recommending games to people. I'm not going to tell a friend to drop $40 on Final Fantasy Tactics, despite how awsome I may think it is -- I know that he probably won't enjoy it. So when writing the review, you have to make sure you let your audience know what this game is about, and who it would appeal to.
As for Aaron, I don't think he should insult a game for things that only he found as negatives. Now, of course, a review is an opinion -- just as this dissection of his review is nothing but my opinion. I understand R&C isn't for everyone. That's why I use gamerankings when researching games. When you find something that all the reviews agree on, you can get a better picture in your head of what the game will be like. However, when there is one great review of out many (i.e IGN's folklore 9.0) or one sour review out of many (Aaron's 7.5), than you have to dig deeper and draw your own opinions.
Well I dug deeper, and this is my opinion:
First Paragraph:
"Over the course of five games the Ratchet & Clank franchise has crafted its own identity and a large following as well. It's odd, then, that the duo's first outing on the PlayStation 3 finds them facing an identity crisis of sorts. The game just can't decide what it wants to be. The story tries to be epic in its scope and appeal to an older audience, but the game is extremely easy and the story's premise is thin and the ending disappointing. The core gameplay of shooting and platforming is as solid as ever, but it's diluted by too many uninteresting minigames and unnecessary gameplay mechanics. Although these issues prevent the game from achieving the same high level as previous entries in the series, it's still a very good game."
So let's get this straight Aaron. The R&C franchise has a, what you call an identity of some sort, that it has built through its previous installments. But you say that because it adds so many new mechanics, it doesn't feel like Ratchet and Clank anymore.
Well anyone who's played the R&C games can tell you that they add quite a bit of new, if not ridiculous content with every game.The first game had gameplay elements like hoverboard racing. The second introduced the ability to level up weapons, space ship combat, and the ability to purchase armor. The third combined all of the 2nd's elements, and mixed in missions and the Captain Quark mini games.
I am clearly skipping a lot of features that all of these games offer (like cystal collecting and playing as Clank, both big and giant), but then isn't it obvious that the R&C games have always featured a plethora of gameplay mechanics and is arguably the reason they are so fun to begin with? It seems all you wanted to do was shoot things, even though R&C as a franchise has offered so much more than that -- and is the reason for its previous positive feedback. And while you may not enjoy this variety, arn't you supposed to review a game based on what others will enjoy?
So Aaron, R&C ToD has everything BUT an "identity crysis", if anything it has lived up to what it has become known for.
And Aaron, sweetheart, why did you put a conclusion paragraph in the beggining of your review? And what's up with your word choice: "a very good game." I thought you were a journalist?
2nd paragraph:
"A good story would have been nice, but this sort of game is really all about gameplay, so it doesn't hurt too much that one of Tools of Destruction's weakest aspects is its story. You play as Ratchet, the last of the lombax, which are a race of catlike creatures. Apparently one living lombax is one too many for the game's villain, a feisty, diminutive, big-headed alien named Emperor Percival Tachyon. He has a bit of a Napoleonic complex, and his goal is to finish off the lombax once and for all, so of course you've got to deal with that. But that's not your only goal. Ratchet knows very little about his race, but he learns that the lombax have some sort of secret, so he makes it his mission to discover it. Clank, Ratchet's robot sidekick, has his own issues to deal with. He's been interacting with some cute little aliens called zoni that only he can see. Naturally, everyone thinks he's nuts every time he brings them up. The game's script is well written and the dialogue is quite funny, but the story is barely fleshed out enough to give you reason to go from one level to the next. It's not helped by a cliffhanger ending that does everything but plaster "Find out the exciting conclusion in the sequel!" across the screen."
"A good story would have been nice, but this sort of game is really all about gameplay, so it doesn't hurt too much that one of Tools of Destruction's weakest aspects is its story."
Again, word choice. You really like the word "good", and "nice" isn't much better. Now you say this game is all about the gameplay, however you clearly called the gameplay mechanics "diluted" in your previous paragraph.
You also changed from speaking in 2nd person to 3rd person. That's a No No.
As for the story, I honestly don't know what you were expecting. Again, you say this game suffers from an identity crysis, but R&C has never been a story orientated game. All of the stories have been downright silly and their stupidity is part of the game's humour. Not to mention, other reviewers claimed this story was the best in the series 0_o.
3rd paragraph:
"Thankfully there's some really good gameplay along the way. Like in the previous games, the action is viewed from a third-person perspective and is primarily a mix of platforming and shooting, with an emphasis on the shooting. One of the game's best aspects is the controls, which are simple and very responsive. You'll be jumping around and blowing bad guys away in a matter of seconds. As always, Ratchet has a large arsenal available to him, but he starts off with only a blaster, grenades, and his trusty wrench, the latter of which he uses to pummel foes. He'll have to purchase the good weapons and armor with the game's currency: bolts. These can be collected from fallen enemies or found by smashing crates. The weapons Ratchet can use are extremely varied: There are grenades, rockets, spikes, blasters, a whip, bouncing saw blades, and a whole lot more. The game does a nice job of encouraging you to use different armaments. Not only are certain weapons more useful against specific creatures, but as you use a weapon, its level will increase and it will get more powerful. You can also improve weapons' range, ammo-carrying capacity, rate of fire, and more by collecting crystals that some enemies drop."
This is arguably the most poorly wrriten part of the entire article. The amount of useless information in this paragraph makes up about 80% of the text.
"Thankfully there's some really good gameplay along the way." -- You just don't get it do you Aaron?
"Like in the previous games, the action is viewed from a third-person perspective" -- Useless info
You'll be jumping around and blowing bad guys away in a matter of seconds -- if you are trying to make yourself sound more amusing -- you fail miserably.
"...but he starts off with only a blaster, grenades, and his trusty wrench" -- Useless info
"He'll have to purchase the good weapons and armor with the game's currency: bolts." -- how exactly did you get your job here on GS Aaron? I know kids who are trick-or-treating right now that have better English skills than you.
"You can also improve weapons' range, ammo-carrying capacity, rate of fire, and more by collecting crystals that some enemies drop".
-- that concluding sentence made me gag. You are being way to wordy.
And again, Aaron, you change from 2nd person to 3rd person in your writing almost randomly.
4th paragraph:
"Ratchet also has a lot of gadgets at his disposal. These can be purchased from a vendor or found throughout the game in crates. He can release a swarm of nano bees that will attack anything that gets near; toss up a disco ball and blast his enemies as they dance; use a leech to steal their health; turn foes into penguins; and even break out a holographic pirate outfit for those occasions when he needs to be all piratelike. Switching from one weapon or item to another is done by pressing the triangle button and then selecting a different item from one of three screens. It's possible to fill all three screens, and the game lets you switch out items, but the mechanic for doing so is poorly implemented. Although the game does a good job of encouraging you to use different weapons, devices, and gadgets (there are over 30 total), you'll find that there are a handful that work extremely well (and some that are useless), so it's possible to get into a rut of using the same attack patterns over and over because they're so effective. This makes an already easy game even easier."
"Switching from one weapon or item to another is done by pressing the triangle button and then selecting a different item from one of three screens." -- useless info
"Although the game does a good job..". -- *sigh*
Not much else to say here, Aaron writes in a very dull matter-of-fact way, and I find his entire tone quite boring.
5th-6th paragraph:
"There's a lot more to Tools of Destruction than platform jumping and shooting--perhaps too much. There are so many different gameplay mechanics that you get the sense that the developer didn't say "no" to any idea that was presented during the design process. Some of these mechanics add to the experience, but others feel as if they're here just because they could be. On a few occasions, Ratchet will roll around in a gyroball similar to the Super Monkey Ball series. To open certain doors, he'll have to dress as a pirate and do a brief dancing minigame. There are two or three times when you'll have to jump into the water and swim through mine-laden tunnels to get somewhere. Sometimes Ratchet will hop on rails and grind his way across a level while jumping gaps, and dodging trains and missiles as he goes. Every now and then, when you're flying to another planet, you'll actually have to fly your spaceship and shoot down enemies in brief, not-all-that-fun on-rails Star Fox-like sequences.
All of this, and we haven't even gotten to the Sixaxis stuff yet. Early on in the game, Clank learns he can sprout wings, so there are a few times when you'll fly around levels while tilting the controller to steer. It's kind of fun, but ultimately pointless. Ratchet can also cut through some surfaces with a laser that you control by twisting the controller, and he can even hack security systems with motion controls by rolling a ball around and conducting electricity. Lest we forget, there are a few times when Clank goes solo. These situations are more puzzle- and platforming-oriented than Ratchet's, and you'll have to use the zoni aliens to help repair items and manipulate bridges. They say variety is the spice of life, but there's such a thing as too much spice."
This is where Aaron really confused me.
He lists several examples of different gameplay instances during the game. However, he claimed earlier that R&C had an identity, that it supposedly lost because of this installment.
Can anyone who's played R&C games, hoenstly say, that none of the things he listed sound remotley like a R&C game?
Everything he stated is what makes R&C...--R&C!! The clank sequences, the new security bypass gameplay, the flying, the spaceships, the mini games, the rails, fooling around with guards -- most of it has been done in previous R&C games and the new additions are only appropiate and expected.
So Aaron, your going to sit there and tell me honestly that you've played previous R&C games and find this game as an identity crysis for the series? And do so by repeating the word"good", using words like "stuff", and phrases like,"kind of fun" -- all in the syntax structure of a Honor's English Freshman highschool student?
I'll dismiss the next few paragraphs because they basically cover graphics, sound and enviroments in the usual Aaron dribble. Not to mention I'm getting kind of tired of writing this.
So let's look at the conclusion:
"Try as it might, Tools of Destruction doesn't achieve the same level of greatness as its predecessors. It's too easy, the story falls flat, and the "throw everything in including the kitchen sink" ****of gameplay takes too much of the focus off the tight platforming and fun combat. That said, the gorgeous visuals and generally fun gameplay are enough to make Tools of Destruction worthwhile for the series' fans and newcomers alike."
A.) All Ratchet games were easy. It's the amount of things you could do in the game that made it so fun
B.) You said the story didn't matter in a game like this, yet you include it as a main point to bring it down in the conclusion?
C.) You say it doesn't live up to its predecessor's name, when it did exactly what made its predecessors successful 0_o.
D.) You say all of this as if your going to give this game a 2.0/10, but you throw in that last sentence because you think the game is "generally fun."
Oh, and Aaron, your review score disagrees with nearly all other professional media outlets by a whole 20%.
Log in to comment