I want to love this game, but I can only like it.

The story seemed epic and impactful in concept, but there are so many tone-killing jokes and questionable detours in the story that it just doesn't resonate as well as it should. The side characters aren't well incorporated into the story, a number of plot points really aren't explained well, and there are a fair share of plot holes. ToD could have been a great space epic, but there were just too many rough edges that weren't ironed out.

The gameplay is great, for the most part. The six axis controls are gimmicky and frustrating, and the selection of guns isn't as good as R&C 2 or 3, but, for everything else, this was a blast to play. The excellent presentation adds so much to R&C's already strong gameplay loop. The satisfying crunch of broken boxes, the detailed enemy designs, the explorable open worlds rife with creative layouts and rewarding collectables. I don't normally place too much stock in a game's presentation, but Ratchet & Clank have had a huge role in pushing the envelope for 3D platformers in that regard. And, while I would still like this game fine even if it looked like trash, I like it so much more because it doesn't.

Tools of Destruction never lived up to its potential, but it was a fun time regardless. If you're a R&C fan, this is one to check out.

I'll bet you forgot this one existed.

As far as entire games that obviously should have been DLCs go, this one sure is an entire game which obviously should have been a DLC. The island aesthetic is beautiful, the writing is entertaining, and it keeps Tools of Destruction's strong gameplay loop while also adding some nice platforming challenges and offering a more consistent tone and fitting story. I can think to my self, 'wow, I might really end up loving this ga-' and then it ends.

Quest for Booty is a delectable side-course, but a flimsy main entrée. It's also worth mentioning that I played Crack in Time for the first time without playing Quest for Booty, and I was able to follow the story just fine.

Play it or skip it, you're fine either way.

Was Lord Vorselon actually Ratchet's Father's accountant? I'm legitimately curious.

The third time was the charm for the R&C Future games, because this one is great. Having been pretty underwhelmed with the previous two for their underwhelming gun selections, lack on interesting platforming sections, and gimmicky six-axis controls; I was delighted to dive back in to A Crack in Time: A game that fixed all of those problems among others.

The selection of guns in this game is the best since Up Your Arsenal, the platforming challenges are varied and compelling, the puzzles are numerous and add welcome variety and depth to the gameplay, and the hover-boots make traversal quick and seamless. If sheer gameplay were the only factor, this one would be my favorite.

The story, despite a few problems, is still better told and better paced than the average R&C game. Dr. Nefarious is funny as always and adds welcome levity to the narrative, the tone is more mature and emotionally resonant than any other game to date, it addresses a few plot holes from Tools of Destruction , and it has easily one of the best characters in the series: his backstory is tragic, his methods are extreme but understandable, he has a good design and excellent vocal performance, and his relationship with Ratchet is really strong. I'm sad that this game was his only appearance. Honestly, Crack in Time is such a strong package that I was ready to give it a nine out of ten and say it was tied for my favorite in the series. but...

The two worst things out of any Future game are in this game, and they both relate to the story. I can't even attempt to discus them without going into spoilers, so stop reading here unless you've played the game.

Problem 1) The Plot Hole: literally the only rule regarding the Great Clock is 'don't use it as a time machine'. They do that three times. They say you can't use it to open a rift to stop a genocidal lunatic years ago and save the Lombaxes, which is weird because they used it to open a rift to stop a genocidal lunatic years ago to save the Fongoids. Azimuth was completely right and this plot development makes his sacrifice seem pointless.

Problem 2) The Ending: The whole point of the game was about accepting that things change and you can't always fix or stop them. Ratchet and Clank spent the entire game learning to be independent from each other and make the universe a better place in their own way. The ending throws all that out and has Clank shrug off his responsibility in the Great Clock just so the game can be left open to a sequel. Honestly, if the ending were better, I would have said this was a good note to end the series on, but this ending makes the entire Future Trilogy feel pointless, and it makes me hesitant when I'm thinking of popping this game in.

Crack in Time may have tripped at the finish line, but I still loved it at least 80% of the time, and I'll still happily recommend. It may not be a perfect game, but it's a damn good one.

Do you want to play Battle for Bikini Bottom with fewer playable characters, less-interesting levels and objectives, and having the whole game be linear for some reason? No: well this game is hard to recommend.

Honestly, this game is fine in its own right. But, when compared to BfBB, it feels like a step backwards in so many ways. The charming characters, world exploration, and interconnectedness of the previous game played a huge role in making it such a classic. By comparison, this one ironically has the same issue Spongebob and Patrick have in the movie, taking themselves too seriously and pretending to be something they're not.

Still, if you loved BfBB, you'll probably like this one fine.

I thoroughly enjoyed the FF7 remake, but I was nervous when I heard it would be split into three chapters. After all, when you add three to seven, you get ten, and I didn't want that.

Final Fantasy ten is really bad. The characters are all frustrating and obnoxious in their own special way(Auron excluded), the repeated enemy encounters are irritating, the voice acting is embarrassing, and the story is contrived nonsense. I could only sit through so may hours of ear-bleeding, un-skippable cutscenes before I shelved the game. The only reason I don't give it a lower score is because I don't feel like I can get away with it, having not played the game in a while. I really don't want to play it again, so we'll settle on this. Perhaps the latter parts of the game are far better, and perhaps the remake is fantastic, in which case, I'll look like a fool; but, honestly, I doubt it.

I had an aggressive bias against Final Fantasy for years, and I blame this game for why honestly.

Amazing movie, boring game

Uncharted four did away with many of the amazing set-piece moments and unique gameplay scenarios from three, and I never stopped missing them. God of War's jump to PS4 worked so much better for me because the more grounded tone and mature characterization was complimented with more complex and personal gameplay: Uncharted wasn't. The gameplay of four feels practically identical to the original trilogy with few major alterations. The grappling hook is nice, but it's not enough.

I feel many people wouldn't care about that, and enjoy A Thief's End for the experience of a movie with a controller, rather than a game. If that is what you want, you've come to the right place: Uncharted four is still probably the most beautiful game I've ever played even after more then five years. The attention to detail, sharp writing, and brisk pace of the first half of the game is so captivating that I'm sure many wouldn't be bothered the gameplay isn't up to the same standard. Believe me, if I were jugging this game as an interactive movie, it would fare far better.

Unfortunately, even in that regard, it isn't perfect. I found the game's pace to waiver when you get to the latter half. Much like Uncharted Two, the gameplay devolves into repetitive shootouts and the level design varies very little toward the end. I also felt the game was rather halfhearted about the more mature tone; several characters make some very bad decisions and never need to face the consequences. Also...

Rant in 3... 2... 1...

I'M SICK OF JUNGLE LEVELS IN UNCHARTED GAMES! In Uncharted One you literally leave one jungle just to go to another and spend the rest of the game there. Uncharted Two has Borneo, and Uncharted Three has France. I haven't played Golden Abyss, nor have I played Lost Legacy in a while, but I'm pretty sure they're rife with jungles. Uncharted four had great level variety up to a point, but once you get to Madagascar, you're there the rest of the game and it goes on at least an hour longer than it needs to. The game's excellent final boss fight is the only thing that kept me going honestly: Uncharted Four's final boss is better than every final boss in the original trilogy put together. I also found Rafe to be an excellent villain in general: a perfect foil to Nate, all of the glory and none of the greatness. He felt like a version of Harry Flynn who had a motive that made sense and a role fitting his character.

If you like the idea of a movie with a controller, you'll probably like this game a lot more than I did. I still enjoyed my time with Uncharted Four, but I don't see where people are coming from when they say it is a better game than Three.

Seriously, I need to re-review Uncharted 3. That game deserves it.

Another banger.

Megaman X2 brings more of the great music, fast gameplay, and satisfying combat which made its predecessor a masterpiece. The new set of Mavericks were a blast to fight, the new items were satisfying to collect, and the addition of the three optional bosses was a brilliant touch which provided and added layer of challenge and helped X2 stand out from other games in the series.

Some consider this game as good as the original, and while I'd certainly call it a worthy successor, I can't say it's as good: some of the Mavericks were a bit too goofy, many of the collectables were more frustrating to find(the heart container in Wire Sponge's lair comes to mind) and not as helpful. The intro level was weaker and SIgma had much less stage presence. And no, that last problem won't get better in later games.

Nitpicks aside, I'm giving this game two thumbs up. Play it if you haven't already.

Just play the N. Sane version.

Inconsistent difficulty, tedious progression, a frustrating save system, bad hitboxes, bad storytelling, and a 100% reward not nearly worth the effort make for an experience more frustrating than fun.

If there's an upside, I'm very impressed by how well the remake turned out. Crash Bandicoot the N. Sane version is a blast; there's not much reason to revisit the original anymore.

A sequel done right.

Take the first game: add in more level variety, better storytelling and atmosphere, a better save system, reasonable difficulty, a 100% completion reward actually worth your time, and one of the best soundtracks on the PS1; and there's reason enough to be glad Cortex struck back.

With that said: the gameplay variety is somewhat lacking, the bosses are underwhelming(boss 4 is the game's saving grace, the rest aren't helping), and the game could have used just a bit more level variety.

I was going to give the game a seven out of ten, then I listened to the soundtrack on its own and decided to bump the game up to an eight, then remembered the final boss fight, then bumped it back to a seven. Maybe the title of the game should have been "Crash Bandicoot 2: Cortex's Back Struck"

Is this game worthy of being my 100th review? I think so.

Warped was my introduction to the series many years back, and I'm happy for it. Fantastic level and gameplay variety, enemies with some actual development and killer boss fights, and a soundtrack that, while not quite as good as Crash 2's in my opinion, is still great.

A slight lack of focus in gameplay styles, a few nonsensical objectives, and some level themes which don't fit the Crash gameplay loop do little to detract from the overall experience, as the game is so fast-paced you'll never be stuck with a gameplay style you don't like for long.

I love this game to pieces,; chances are, you do too. Some of my oldest gaming memories are with Crash Warped, and I'm proud it was my 100th review.

Best-looking video game ever.

The 11/10 score I'd give this game for presentation alone makes it worth every penny. The fluid motions, realized landscapes, and vivid textures paint a picture even the modern Pixar film would blush at. Ratchet and Clank has always pushed the envelope for video games with regards to presentation, and Rift Apart is their greatest accomplishment in that regard.

For everything ese the game is... good. It has a very weak and predictable story, though it is better paced and better told than the average R&C game. The level designs are great, the enemy variety is lacking, and the gun selection is average by the series' standers: though all three borrow just a bit too much from previous games. The gameplay variety and exploration are acceptable, though a step down from Crack in Time in my opinion. Lastly, the writing was forgettable: I remember almost nothing said by any character and I don't think I laughed once.

Rift Apart is a typical R&C affair but still a fun one. For many people, it was their first PS5 title, and I think it is a great way to be exposed to the console.

Jim Ward, you will be missed: I wish you a fulfilling retirement.

Best combat system I've ever experienced.

The intuitive controls, lightening-quick traversal, and satisfying duals with grunt enemy and intimidating boss alike make Sekiro a credit to FromSoft's already stellar lineup of interactive epics. I've waited my entire life to play a game wherein every encounter with every enemy felt challenging and engaged, and Sekiro made that possible by combining a skill-based combat loop that rewards strong reflexes and is bolstered by a section of inventive gadgets and an abundance of enemy variety. These legendary duals take place with a backdrop of atmospheric music and a gorgeous setting which captures the beauty of both historic Japan, and Japanize folklore.

Honestly, if this game had a story I cared about and a bit more variety in terms of bosses, it could have taken my top spot for FromSoft games. Sadly, Sekiro's boss roster would be sparce by FromSoft standards even without all the repeated encounters. I found the characters to be cliched and underdeveloped with lethargic vocal performances not doing them any favors for memorability; And the storytelling and lore also failed to captivate me. I would never say the game has a bad story, but it's not one that I will remember.

I can only say this game represents the best if gameplay is the only factor, but that gameplay will stick with me as long as I continue to play video games. FromSoft is among my favorite game studios, and I consider Sekiro among their greatest acomplishments.