The flawed yet powerful framework for dozens of games to come.

Dark Souls was among the most influential games of the previous decade. The punishing difficulty, hands-off storytelling and RPG-fueled hack-and-slash combat would be emulated time and time again. Dark Souls laid that foundation back in 2011, and the game is still very enjoyable even now.

Lordran is vast. Flying through that desolate land for the first time is unforgettable, fighting through waves of unforgiving enemies as you unravel the tale of four corrupted lords and a destroyed empire. In addition to being a great entry-point for the series, the new game+ options and hidden lore details make a trek through Lordran worthwhile even ten years later.

Sadly, like many games before it, it can't maintain the same level of quality in the latter half of the experience. The Nito quest is plagued by lackluster boss fights and terrible level design, and the Witch quest suffers from lackluster level design and terrible boss fights. I see fit to deduct one point for each.

This game committed an unforgivable crime, making me question if the previous games were that good to begin with.

It amazes me how flat the KH formula falls in this game. The storytelling is so bland and uncompelling, the characters so wooden and underutilized, and the tone alternates between overly serious and self-parody. The game is dominated by filler, leaving 80% of the best and most plot relevant moments for the very end. I don't want to play a game that doesn't become good until 20 hours in.

The gameplay is also too flashy and shallow, I struggle to remember any combat encouter in the game, and I fail to care. The optional content is easily the best in the game: Though it may be an amusing distraction, it saves nothing in the long run.

The game looks great, there are a few compelling character moments in the last third, and finding Mikey emblems is fun enough, but these things aren't nearly worth the tedious trek to reach them. Group all this together with the worst DLC campaign I've ever played, and KH3 has soured the entire franchise for me. I can't look at KH 1 or 2 the same way, and I have no interest in playing KH 4 when it comes out. This, to me, is another tragic instance of an inspired franchise being torn down by pandering and pretention.

KH3 needed to check its engine before slurging on a paint job.

I'll be blunt: I've played the Uncharted games pretty extensively, and I don't think this is the best one.

That isn't to say the game is bad by any means. By the minute you boot up the game, the improvement from the first game is palpable. Better graphics, better writing, more varied gameplay with a much more interesting story and fleshed-out characters. Uncharted 2 is a sequel done right.

I found the first half of the game to be fantastic: the story moved at a brisk pace with varied levels and strong set pieces to mix up the basic gameplay. The first half culminated in the iconic train sequence which was easily the best part of the game, and one of the best sections of any Uncharted game to this day. After a section as amazing as that, you'd probably think it's all downhill from there. Unfortunately, you'd be right.

The variety in levels from the first half of the game is gone going into the second half, I was so sick of snowy mountain levels by the end of the game I wanted to scream. The gameplay also felt noticeably weaker, devolving into repetitive shootout and repetitive climbing section on loop for what felt like hours, and I spent most of it longing to repay Uncharted 3. Throw in a disappointing final boss, and I have to say I barely enjoyed the latter half of the game, but that isn't even my biggest problem: that would be the characters.

They say strong characters can carry a weak story; it doesn't work the other way around. For that reason(and many others), I'll always prefer Uncharted 3 to 2. I may have said the characters were better than in Uncharted 1, but I didn't say they were good. The only two in this game who didn't annoy me were Tenzin and Sully. They were great; they were also barely in the game. Excuse me while I roast the rest of them:

I found Nate to still be a pretty cocky moron in this game: I hardly felt he had grown up since the first game, and I rarely enjoyed the scenes focused on him. I sorta hated Chloe to be honest: Her elegances changed so drastically it was legitimately pretty confusing, she came off as very selfish and short-sighted, and she became completely redundant the minute Elena came back, and the game seemed to know that and wrote her out of most of the rest of it. Elena was fine, but both of her out-of-nowhere appearances in the story were extremely jarring, and I didn't feel like she added much to the story. Karl Schafer is literally only necessary to the story because Tenzin can't speak English, and the game expects us to feel emotional at his death after knowing him for two minutes, just like it did with Jeff, I feel manipulated. Lazarevic is one of the goofiest placeholders for a character I've ever seen, he has very little stage presence, and his boss fight is one of the few parts of this game even diehard fans don't like. I'm amazed the game expects me to take him seriously.

And finally... let's talk about Flynn. Many in the Uncharted community regard Harry Flynn as the best villain in the franchise, and I couldn't disagree more. His motivations make no sense, why is he working for a guy who is obviously going to betray him and kill him? He doesn't even seem surprised when it happens. What was his endgame anyway? Money? That's boring. He needed a more personal motivation, like Rafe, if he was going to be interesting. The scenes with him are annoying, his dialogue isn't great, his death scene is really unsatisfying(yes, I understand that's the point, but it's a lousy point), and I have no idea where his distain for Nate came from. However, my biggest problem is how damn incompetent he is. Nate escapes when Harry has him at gunpoint five times by my count. Lazarevic was right; he hired the wrong guy.

I know I didn't say too many positive things about Among Thieves, but there are a million reviews you can read heralding this game as one of the all-time greats. I'm glad that's what you all think, but I can't relate, I'm mostly just bummed by how underappreciated Uncharted 3 is. I should really re-review that game, I didn't say half the good things I had to say.

If this game were longer it would be my new favorite Mario game.

My brief time at Lake Lapcat was a captivating medley of gorgeous music, beautiful visuals, and jaw-dropping level design. How the game managed to compress several entire levels of 3D World's style into compact islands without feeling cluttered is remarkable. Bowser's Fury was magical, a steadfast reminder of how Mario can keep us coming back year after year.

However, the majesty of the game's brief campaign compounded my feeling of anticlimax upon collecting the final Cat Shine. It is better to want more than less, but I want more! I have never been a fan of Nintendo's pricing and business practices, and slapping Bowser's Fury together with a game most of us already have and forcing us to pay $60 rather than just selling Bowser's Fury on its own for a fair $30 is very underhanded and it left a bad taste in my mouth I still haven't washed out. I would say watch for a price drop and then buy it, but this is Nintendo we're talking about >:(

I hate to indulge Nintendo's frugality, but unfortunately I still need to recommend this game. I won't even attempt to hide how excited I am at the prospect of an entire game in this style. Move over Galaxy and Odyssey, I may just have a new favorite.

A mile wide and an inch deep.

The game seemed to learn nothing from Banjo-Tooie's missteps, as it is loaded with overly-large levels that are impressive in scale but mostly empty. The gameplay itself is also rather unfocused, cramming in variety for the sake of variety and not doing anything particularly well. Unmemorable characters, lackluster boss encounters and unoriginal level themes hold back what could have been a very charming platforming game.

It is a shame really. I love 3D platformers, and I love to see them in the modern age, just not this one.

The level design in this game is fantastic, everything else in the game isn't.

The Level Design:

Gex 3 seriously has some of the best levels of any 3D platformer I've ever played. No two main levels have the same theme, even the hub worlds and some of the side levels are unique. Every main level feels big and sprawling, big enough to be impressive and give a sense of accomplishment for making it to the end, but linear enough so that the player doesn't get lost. Each level is loaded with background gags, unique enemies, and objectives that are well-separated enough to cut back on backtracking when going for different remotes(most of the time). Gex's unique costumes and quips for each level are a nice touch too. I can run through most of the levels in this game a thousand times and never get tired of them.

The Everything Else:

This game's story was likely the inspiration for Sonic 06. I find it hilarious that this random woman who never appeared in the previous games is suddenly the driving force behind the plot, and not hilarious in the way the game intended. The soundtrack is pretty good and Gex's quips are occasionally funny, but if you feel the need to throw your TV out a window by the end of the story after hearing Gex's 15th flirty conversation with a human playboy model, I won't blame you. The actual gameplay can be pretty stale and repetitive, and the 100 fly coin objective in each level would probably ruin the game for me were the levels not so good. The boss fights are joke(Rez excluded) and most of the collectables are worthless, only feeding into a lame 100% completion reward that is not worth your time. The main villain never has a speaking line in the whole game, making Gex 3's connection to the previous 2 games feel tenuous; this game has the Sly Cooper 3 problem. This game is unpolished and lackluster in many ways.

Altogether, I loved this game for the level design alone. If great levels themselves are enough to spark your interest, Gex 3 will scratch that itch. If that isn't enough for you, then I'm sad to say this is a game to skip.

I can deny it no longer: I like Dark Souls 2

Is the game amazing? No. Is it the weakest game of the trilogy? By a Lordran mile. Is it the worst FromSoft game due to its nonsensical enemy placement and bad level design? Actually no, have you played Demon's Souls?

Flaws aside, I don't want to sell Dark Souls 2 short. The attention to detail in this game is really admirable; finding all the shortcuts and hidden bonfires was always satisfying. All three DLC campaigns were strong, and the classic Souls combat and character building is as satisfying as ever, bolstered by worthwhile collectables and strong enemy variety.

The level design of Dark Souls 2 is excellent. If there is anything DS2 is the best of the trilogy for, it would be that. The levels don't feel as interconnected as in the previous game, but the endless hidden secrets, fair progression, and wealth of variety in themes and enemies made each location memorable and enthralling.

I won't pretend the critics of this game don't have a point: I didn't find the lore interesting, far too many ideas are lifted from the previous game, some graphics and designs can be banal and ugly. The game is also abundant in bad hit boxes, lame boss fights, and nonsensical enemy placement. DS2, while a worthy undertaking for sure, is unpolished at the best of times.

Darks Souls 2 deserves its bad reputation to a degree, but the positive aspects shouldn't be overlooked. If this installment truly ranks among FromSoft's weakest work, then they must be an amazing studio.

I can't recommend this game without the rewind feature from the legacy collection.

This playthrough reminded me a lot of the original DKC. While I think that game is dated and frustrating by today's standards as well, it still boasts a timeless art style and great soundtrack: This game can't even boast that. The game is simply ugly with uninspired levels and enemies. Your playthrough will be short and unsatisfying if you are very good, and a tedious slog otherwise.

As stated before, the legacy collection's rewind feature at least turns the game into a moderately-amusing way to spend an hour, but the game simply isn't worth playing without it.

Ok, I need to make sure I get this right; this game is really important to me. Even if no one reads this, it’s important that I get all these thoughts out, even if just for myself. Alright, let’s get started.

No game left an impact on me the way the original Spyro 2 did. I have vivid memories of being in kindergarten and feigning a stomach virus so I could stay home and play the game, howling in exaggerated pain every time my mother walked by. Nothing could ever measure up to the magic of playing Ripto’s Rage for the first time, and this game is one of my all-time favorites even after twenty years. I am going to discuss my love of this game in five main categories, the things that really make Spyro 2 stand out from other 3D platformers. These categories are: gameplay, worldbuilding, characters, charm/aesthetics, and completion.

Gameplay: Spyro the Dragon was a competent game; it controlled well, the camera was good, and Spyro had a unique feel compared to other game mascots. However, while the gameplay was good, it could be rather basic. The sequel managed to overhaul Spyro’s move set so that it felt like a perfect evolution of the first game, being much richer and more varied. The addition of new power-ups opened so many new possibilities for new combat and side-objectives. Little touches like the hover and ability to climb added so mobility and opened the areas up much more for exploration, but the aspect of Spyro 2 which the game doesn’t get nearly enough credit for is the swimming controls. Underwater exploration in this game has the exact same speed and feel as on-land progression, and the transition is seamless. Underwater traversal in just about any 3D platformer from this era almost always ends up being the worst part of the game, but here it’s a complete nonissue. It’s simply incredible how much depth and variety Spyro 2 adds to the first game’s gameplay without feeling gimmicky or unfaithful. It is also impressive how it manages to keep the gameplay consistent; adding so many new objectives without deviating from the core gameplay loop in any way that would feel jarring (take notes Spyro 3).

Worldbuilding: One thing you’ll hear me say a lot about all three Spyro games is that they’re all really good, and one thing they have in common is great level design. Every Spyro has big, sprawling levels which are equal parts creative and immersive. However, while I love them to pieces, the levels of Spyro 1 and 3 feel like levels in a video game, but the levels of Spyro 2 feel like living, breathing worlds.

The intro and outro cutscenes for each level add so much personality to each world. Not only does every level in the game have unique enemies and conflicts, but we also learn about much of it through gameplay. Whether you are flaming sentient tikis in Idol Springs, blasting stone apart with bagpipe music in Fracture Hills, or turning on a Fountain to stop giant elephant-snails in Mystic Marsh, each area is wildly creative and distinct from any other level I’ve seen in any other platforming game. Other details like characters in one world mentioning another, Zephyr being at war with Breeze Harbor, or worlds with adjacent portals having similar character models all go a long way to making the world feel cohesive and alive. Almost every side-objective in the game teaches you something new about the world you’re in, and the objectives manage to be so creative and memorable, rarely boiling down to ‘just go here and beat up a bunch of enemies’ (are you taking notes Spyro 3?)

Characters: The repetitive Dragon rescues from Spyro 1 were easily the most grating aspect of that game. They lacked in design variety, weren’t well voice-acted, and didn’t add much of a sense of accomplishment to find. Yes, the Reignited version fixed this problem, but that’s a discussion for another time. Ripto’s Rage improved this by having a much smaller cast of characters with much more personality.

Spyro himself has a much better voice actor this time around, but he hasn’t lost any of his spunk from the first game. Elora is a wonderful support who manages to have a lot of personality despite the limited facial animation, Hunter is an endearing companion with a lot of charm, the Professor and Zoe are alright, Moneybags is a funny punching bag, and Ripto is one of my favorite video game villains of all time; the way he can have so much presence and charisma despite his small stature is very impressive. His boss fight is one of my favorites as well.

Even the side-characters manage to be very distinct and memorable. Few of them fall into typical cartoon archetypes. The Juliet character in the game’s Romeo and Juliet spoof has a hilariously non-feminine voice, the fauns in Fracture Hills talk like valley girls because they live in a valley, and the game has a dancing skeleton. Unfortunately, many of these nuances were lost in the transition to Reignited. Many of the characters in the remake have typical voices and personalities, and it makes some levels less memorable. I still think the Reignited version of Spyro 2 is great; I love the revamped soundtrack and a lot of the new character designs and visual details, but a few questionable changes like removing the epilogue and some worse voice acting make me hesitant to call it the definitive way to play the game(they also needed to change Hunter’s age. Seeing him date Bianca is going to be uncomfortable knowing that he’s 42).

Charm/Aesthetics: As a grown adult, I can still listen to Spyro 2’s soundtrack while doing my job, it’s just so damn good. As stated previously, the game is filled with charming characters, unique levels, and beautiful music. There is no other game, even any other Spyro game, that looks like Spyro 2. The aesthetics and music of Spyro 1 and 3 are wonderful as well: this is the only category out of the five where they may actually be as good or better in my opinion, and this was definitely the category I had the least to say about, because the wonderful presentation of these games speaks for itself.

Completion: I was discovering new details and gameplay factors in Spyro 2 up until the remake came out: I spent twenty years coming back to this game, and I was always glad I did. The cutscene theater was a neat reward for the PS1 era, but the permanent super-flame may be the best 100% reward I’ve ever seen in a game. Having the option to neuter the game’s challenge as a reward for finishing the game the first time is ingenious and learning years later that I can start a new playthrough with it was incredibly satisfying. Years apart: I learned about the new game file with the super-flame, the deviously hidden skill point challenges, the cheat codes, the adorable epilogue you get for getting all the skill points, and there is a game-breaking double-jump which lets you skip massive parts of certain levels.

… this game man

I honestly could have kept going. This game was such a crucial, irreplaceable part of my childhood. I love the other Spyro games, and I love the remakes, but the original Ripto’s Rage will always be the best in my eyes. I’m so happy to finally be able to pay my respects to a fantastic game which made me happy and brought me back time and time again. The Purple Dragon has had some less-than-stellar games since the original trilogy, and the future of Spyro 4 is still uncertain. But personally, I’m not worried at all, because I know that no matter what happens, the original Ripto’s Rage will be there for me if I ever need it.

Thanks, Spyro
and thanks Insomniac

Flawed Masterpiece.

If you want to experience the best graphics, aesthetics, level design, gameplay, gameplay variety, and overall best platforming of any classic Crash Bandicoot game then you will... for about four hours. Crash four is so wildly insecure about its lack of content that it feels the need to bloat every singe aspect of the game: six gems per level, time trials, alternate versions of levels, new gems in alternate versions of levels, relics for collecting five gems at once, flashback tapes, and relics within said flashback tapes. It is safe to say that only the obsessed hold that platinum trophy. The obsessed like me, as I got to 106% on this game twice! No: I don't know what I'm doing with my life.

The amount of obvious padding in this game is shocking, and it is very hard to judge the game without the optional content, as the game is far too short without it. Honestly, if the N. verted stages were merely optional filters without collectables hidden behind them, and the N. Sanely perfect relics were removed(or at least not necessary for 106%), then I wouldn't complain. The main game needed to be really good for this tedious collection to be tolerable. Fortunately, it was.

Crash 4 did such a good job reviving the dated gameplay from the PS1 classics and making it acceptable for the current generation that it is inspiring. The beautiful levels of Crash 4 are given so much variety by the quantum masks and new playable characters. The levels of this game are much more lengthy and substantial than those found in the N. Sane Trilogy, and the levels manage to be very distinct from other crash games by making use of some much more inventive themes: Off Beat may just be my new favorite level in any Crash game. The moment-to-moment gameplay of Crash 4 is so strong that it really makes me wish I could regard the game higher.

Lastly, I want to talk about the two aspects of the game which I consider weaker than in N. Sane. Firstly, the music. Crash 4's music is fine, there are definitely a few stand-out tracks, but this game's music just lacks the punch and variety from the original trilogy. Second, the boss fights. Crash 4 blows its load far too early by opening with the best boss fight in Crash history, the rest of the roster simply cannot keep up: boss 2 is good, boss 3 is bad, and bosses 4 and 5 are fine except that they don't really feel like boss fights at all. N. Sane was much better for this.

So, in conclusion: This game is definitely worth at least one playthrough, 100% is worth it, 106% isn't, and the N. Sane Trilogy is better don't @ me.

There was no giant trashcan slime monster in the movie-

But there should have been.

As most of us remember this game is a banger. The big, imaginative levels are fun to explore, the soundtrack is great, the gameplay is really fun and varied, and all of the new enemies and locations fit the Toy Story aesthetic perfectly.

Unfortunately, the game also has a decent amount of backtracking, lame boss fights, and is over a bit too soon, so I can't say it's amazing, but it is well worth your time more than twenty years later.