RandomContent
Wow, I am getting myself in serious trouble with this review score. Alright, I've got skin in the game now, so let's keep going.
The aspects of TotK I found disappointing were outright unforgivable: it fixed almost none of my problems from the previous game, which I already think was very flawed. TotK kept BotW's weak combat system bolstered by the same weapon degradation mechanic no one likes; it copies the story structure point-for-point even though diehard BotW fans can admit the story was the weakest part of it, and TotK managed to tell an even weaker story with more plot holes, worse storytelling, and more timeline nonsense; The map, most enemies, and most of the side characters are copy-and-pasted from the previous game, making this feel more like an expansion pass than a new campaign. The only flaw from BotW that was fixed was the boss roster: these bosses are actually pretty decent, but they aren't enough.
This game may offer expansive exploration, but I found this exact map sparse and underwhelming in 2017, and I feel the same way now. The new layers of the map were a good touch, but the sky is so barren and the underground is so bland that it doesn't add much.
The only thing in the entire game that feels exceptional at all is the building mechanic. You can get wonderfully creative putting those contraptions together, and I'm sure people have had hours of fun just fiddling with it. But, while using Zoni parts to make a Hylian airplane or a rolling execution chamber is fun, if I can only have it at the expense of a compelling story, strong characters, varied combat, new enemies, a new map, and any of the thematic brilliance or narrative innovation Zelda games have enraptured me with for as long as I can remember, then it wasn't a good deal.
I got through about half the shrines, and then I just hit a wall with this game; I really didn't want to play anymore, so I rushed to the end and experienced the game's disappointing ending which, just like every other aspect of the story, was lifted from the previous game and done worse. The ending rung so hollow for me, and I don't see myself ever revisiting the game.
I tolerated many of the aforementioned flaws I noticed in BotW because that game was new, innovative, and took so many risks. I never agreed that it was one of the all-time greats, but I agreed it laid the foundation for such a game. I thought a sequel could grasp that unused potential and create a game I liked every bit as much as everyone else liked BotW, and I was very disappointed.
Do you want to know why my expectations were so high? Because, about half-a-year ago, I plaid God of War Ragnarök. That game is everything this one should have been. Taking the previous game's foundation, and fixing every single narrative and gameplay problem I had; providing an excellent story, endearing characters, great performances, fun combat, enemy variety, adding new themes to the story and new development to the characters, and making re-used maps feel fresh with new assets and seasons. I can't expect every game to be GoW 5, that game really is one of the all-time greats, but the idea that some people are giving TotK perfect scores when games like GoW 5 exist just baffles me. That game deserves five stars; this one is getting three.
I know I got really negative while writing this review, and I don't fault people for enjoying this game, for there is definitely fun to be had with it. But, for me, the best thing I can say about Tears is that I no-longer need to wonder what my least-favorite mainline Zelda game is. Clearly everyone else will be satisfied if the next Zelda game follows this exact formula with few changes or improvements and good for them. But, if this trend continues, I'll be playing something else.
The aspects of TotK I found disappointing were outright unforgivable: it fixed almost none of my problems from the previous game, which I already think was very flawed. TotK kept BotW's weak combat system bolstered by the same weapon degradation mechanic no one likes; it copies the story structure point-for-point even though diehard BotW fans can admit the story was the weakest part of it, and TotK managed to tell an even weaker story with more plot holes, worse storytelling, and more timeline nonsense; The map, most enemies, and most of the side characters are copy-and-pasted from the previous game, making this feel more like an expansion pass than a new campaign. The only flaw from BotW that was fixed was the boss roster: these bosses are actually pretty decent, but they aren't enough.
This game may offer expansive exploration, but I found this exact map sparse and underwhelming in 2017, and I feel the same way now. The new layers of the map were a good touch, but the sky is so barren and the underground is so bland that it doesn't add much.
The only thing in the entire game that feels exceptional at all is the building mechanic. You can get wonderfully creative putting those contraptions together, and I'm sure people have had hours of fun just fiddling with it. But, while using Zoni parts to make a Hylian airplane or a rolling execution chamber is fun, if I can only have it at the expense of a compelling story, strong characters, varied combat, new enemies, a new map, and any of the thematic brilliance or narrative innovation Zelda games have enraptured me with for as long as I can remember, then it wasn't a good deal.
I got through about half the shrines, and then I just hit a wall with this game; I really didn't want to play anymore, so I rushed to the end and experienced the game's disappointing ending which, just like every other aspect of the story, was lifted from the previous game and done worse. The ending rung so hollow for me, and I don't see myself ever revisiting the game.
I tolerated many of the aforementioned flaws I noticed in BotW because that game was new, innovative, and took so many risks. I never agreed that it was one of the all-time greats, but I agreed it laid the foundation for such a game. I thought a sequel could grasp that unused potential and create a game I liked every bit as much as everyone else liked BotW, and I was very disappointed.
Do you want to know why my expectations were so high? Because, about half-a-year ago, I plaid God of War Ragnarök. That game is everything this one should have been. Taking the previous game's foundation, and fixing every single narrative and gameplay problem I had; providing an excellent story, endearing characters, great performances, fun combat, enemy variety, adding new themes to the story and new development to the characters, and making re-used maps feel fresh with new assets and seasons. I can't expect every game to be GoW 5, that game really is one of the all-time greats, but the idea that some people are giving TotK perfect scores when games like GoW 5 exist just baffles me. That game deserves five stars; this one is getting three.
I know I got really negative while writing this review, and I don't fault people for enjoying this game, for there is definitely fun to be had with it. But, for me, the best thing I can say about Tears is that I no-longer need to wonder what my least-favorite mainline Zelda game is. Clearly everyone else will be satisfied if the next Zelda game follows this exact formula with few changes or improvements and good for them. But, if this trend continues, I'll be playing something else.
Water, Ear - er Lightening, Fire, Air
Long ago, the four Divine Beasts lived together in harmony. Then, everything changed when the Calamity attacked. Only the Hero of Time, master of all four runes, could stop it. But, when Hyrule needed him most, he vanished. One-hundred years pass by and my Wii U and I discover the new Hero of Time: a young swordsman named Link, and, though his weapon-breaking skills are great, he has a lot to learn before he's ready to save anyone.
But, I believe, Link will dick around in shrines for 150 hours then watch Zelda save the world.
Long ago, the four Divine Beasts lived together in harmony. Then, everything changed when the Calamity attacked. Only the Hero of Time, master of all four runes, could stop it. But, when Hyrule needed him most, he vanished. One-hundred years pass by and my Wii U and I discover the new Hero of Time: a young swordsman named Link, and, though his weapon-breaking skills are great, he has a lot to learn before he's ready to save anyone.
But, I believe, Link will dick around in shrines for 150 hours then watch Zelda save the world.
1995
Every frame of this game has me questioning my grip on reality.
I pull cows from flowers and protect them from aliens. I use a mouse in a cage to start a meat grinder and use it for transportation. I take a break from floating through an intestine pinball machine to participate in a game show. Have you called the men in white coats yet?
Even barring the surreal level themes, this game is bizarre metatextually as well: how are the difficulty spikes this sharp? How can a hour-long game have almost no consistency in terms of gameplay? How did anyone ever finish this game before the switch's rewind feature? This game is making me crazy.
If you want an acid trip, smoke some weed and watch a lets play. If you want a fair, balanced platformer, play something else.
I pull cows from flowers and protect them from aliens. I use a mouse in a cage to start a meat grinder and use it for transportation. I take a break from floating through an intestine pinball machine to participate in a game show. Have you called the men in white coats yet?
Even barring the surreal level themes, this game is bizarre metatextually as well: how are the difficulty spikes this sharp? How can a hour-long game have almost no consistency in terms of gameplay? How did anyone ever finish this game before the switch's rewind feature? This game is making me crazy.
If you want an acid trip, smoke some weed and watch a lets play. If you want a fair, balanced platformer, play something else.
2023
You can't outdo perfection, but this was a valiant attempt.
This game honestly reminded me of Spyro 2 Reignited in that it's a really good game and you should absolutely play it, but I can't bring myself to say it's better than the original. In both instances: improvements from the source material are present but rare, The voice acting is missing some of the original's distinct charm, and some(not many but some) of my favorite elements from the original were weft out.
If you want my full feelings about this game, just read my review of the original RE4 and note that this is that with a bit less enjoyable camp, a touch weaker voice acting, and a few less memorable set pieces.
Believe me: this game is amazing, and I'd be a lot more excited about it is it wasn't riding on the heels of one of the all-time greats, but those are big shoes to fill. Still, I feel this remake did the 2005 original justice, it just didn't replace it.
This game honestly reminded me of Spyro 2 Reignited in that it's a really good game and you should absolutely play it, but I can't bring myself to say it's better than the original. In both instances: improvements from the source material are present but rare, The voice acting is missing some of the original's distinct charm, and some(not many but some) of my favorite elements from the original were weft out.
If you want my full feelings about this game, just read my review of the original RE4 and note that this is that with a bit less enjoyable camp, a touch weaker voice acting, and a few less memorable set pieces.
Believe me: this game is amazing, and I'd be a lot more excited about it is it wasn't riding on the heels of one of the all-time greats, but those are big shoes to fill. Still, I feel this remake did the 2005 original justice, it just didn't replace it.
2019
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.
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.
Instead of reviewing these games, here is a boss ranking:
Every boss gets a score out of five:
16: Dr. Cortex
Game: Crash 2
Score: 0/5
The namesake boss of Crash 2 is an embarrassment; I'm not even comfortable calling it a boss. He never attacks you and there is no remote element of combat. The boss is tedious if you don’t know what to do, and pitiful easy if you do; It still blows my mind how bad this boss is.
15: Papu Papu
Game: Crash 1
Score: 1/5
Objectively just as bad as the previous fight, but at least he attacks you, and he has the excuse of being the first boss of the first game. Still a terrible note to start on.
14: Ripper Roo
Game: Crash 1
Score: 1/5
Still no element of combat. A unique setup can’t make up for this boss feeling more like a level hazard; the timing on the TNT crates can be irritating as well. Fortunately, there is another boss further down the list that uses Ripper Roo’s setup much better.
13: Ripper Roo
Game: Crash 2
Score: 2/5
Really not a big fan of Ripper Roo boss fights. This one has more interesting attacks and slightly better aesthetics, but still just feels like a level hazard and is really boring on future playthroughs.
12: Komodo Bros
Game: Crash 2
Score: 2/5
This fight would rank much higher if not for one thing; the area is too big. It’s almost impossible to get hit by anything, and there is no challenge as a result. Great aesthetics can’t make up for that unfortunately.
11: Pinstripe Potoroo
Game: Crash 1
Score: 2/5
You could lob the first half of his health bar off all at once in the original ps1 game. This version is slightly harder, but still too easy and basic to be noteworthy.
10: Tiny Tiger
Game: Crash 2
Score: 3/5
The second-best boss in Crash 2 barely made the top ten; Crash 2’s bosses aren’t very good. Tiny is a fine encounter; it takes Ripper Roo’s mechanics and improves them by having the boss actively pursue you. Tiny is fun, but very basic. The best thing about him by far is the music, which is common for Crash 2.
9: Koala Kong
Game: Crash 1
Score: 3/5
The first good boss in the series. I could almost tie Kong with Tiny, but I put Kong slightly higher because he has more attacks and slightly more complex mechanics. Kong is basic fun, nothing more, nothing less.
8: Dr. Cortex
Game: Crash 1
Score: 3/5
Dr. Cortex fights run the gambit in terms of quality. This one provides a worthy challenge and an appropriately epic setting for the game’s conclusion. I have no idea how the next Cortex fight was such a downgrade, but maybe the one after that will be way better.
7: N. Tropy
Game: Crash 3
Score: 3/5
The weakest fight in Crash 3 is in the upper half of the list; five of the top seven bosses in the trilogy are just Crash 3; That should tell you something about Crash 3’s boss quality compared to the previous two games.
Tropy is a solid fight. He has challenging attacks to dodge and the fight itself has good aesthetics. I’d be happy to rank it higher, but the rest of Crash 3’s bosses are just too good: Which reminds me…
6: N. Gin
Game: Crash 3
Score: 4/5
This fight is objectively the longest and most varied in the trilogy. Unfortunately, it also stands out as one of the very few that was notably better in the ps1 version: This fight is much easier, and you feel much less impact from damaging the parts of the robot. Still a great fight, but a bit of a downgrade.
5: N. Brio
Game: Crash 1
Score: 4/5
My favorite Crash character is also my favorite fight from Crash 1. Honestly, this fight is so varied and clever that it’s hard to believe it’s from the first game. The actual gameplay of this fight is nothing special, but the setting, mechanics, and the boss character are among the best in the trilogy.
4: Tiny Tiger
Game: Crash 3
Score: 4/5
Best first boss in the trilogy without question. Twinsanity and Crash 4 may have had better first bosses later on, but this one set a new standard with an excellent area, varied attacks, and being the first boss to give you an upgrade after defeating him. Tiny provides a challenge early on that doesn’t feel overwhelming given your place in the game. I have no idea how they’ll top this.
3: Dingodile
Game: Crash 3
Score: 5/5
They topped it. Wildly creative area and boss character, unique mechanics, and the best boss theme in the trilogy. The fact that you earn the double-jump from this fight, which can be used to cheese this fight on a second encounter, is just icing on the cake. This is probably one of the best bosses I’ve ever seen in a platforming game.
2: N. Gin
Game: Crash 2
Score: 5/5
The saving grace of Crash 2’s boss roster. N Gin has so many attacks, a great boss theme, a cool voice, a good design, and a fair challenge. His attacks will even vary depending on if he has one or two shoulders left. That attention to detail is admirable. Crash 2 would be right alongside Spyro 1 as a posterchild of good games with bad bosses if not for this encounter.
1: Neo Cortex
Game: Crash 3
Score: 5/5
Have you all figured out by now I really like Crash 3 bosses? Especially those with excellent music, varied attacks, memorable areas, and a climactic sense of scale? This fight has it all: an epic 2-v-2 encounter with two foes built-up throughout your entire journey, and one where you must win without taking damage due to Aku-Aku’s pre-occupation fighting his brother. Much like Spyro 2’s final boss, the added hurdle of winning with no damage adds a lot to the encounter and helps forgive the lack of difficulty. You can argue that N. Gin or Dingodile have the better gameplay, but I think Dr. Cortex’s Crash 3 fight is the complete package.
I reviewed each ps1 game individually and these game are just those with streamlined controls, better graphics, some dated elements of progression removed, and optional time trials across all three games. This trilogy is great, and you don't need me to tell you that.
Every boss gets a score out of five:
16: Dr. Cortex
Game: Crash 2
Score: 0/5
The namesake boss of Crash 2 is an embarrassment; I'm not even comfortable calling it a boss. He never attacks you and there is no remote element of combat. The boss is tedious if you don’t know what to do, and pitiful easy if you do; It still blows my mind how bad this boss is.
15: Papu Papu
Game: Crash 1
Score: 1/5
Objectively just as bad as the previous fight, but at least he attacks you, and he has the excuse of being the first boss of the first game. Still a terrible note to start on.
14: Ripper Roo
Game: Crash 1
Score: 1/5
Still no element of combat. A unique setup can’t make up for this boss feeling more like a level hazard; the timing on the TNT crates can be irritating as well. Fortunately, there is another boss further down the list that uses Ripper Roo’s setup much better.
13: Ripper Roo
Game: Crash 2
Score: 2/5
Really not a big fan of Ripper Roo boss fights. This one has more interesting attacks and slightly better aesthetics, but still just feels like a level hazard and is really boring on future playthroughs.
12: Komodo Bros
Game: Crash 2
Score: 2/5
This fight would rank much higher if not for one thing; the area is too big. It’s almost impossible to get hit by anything, and there is no challenge as a result. Great aesthetics can’t make up for that unfortunately.
11: Pinstripe Potoroo
Game: Crash 1
Score: 2/5
You could lob the first half of his health bar off all at once in the original ps1 game. This version is slightly harder, but still too easy and basic to be noteworthy.
10: Tiny Tiger
Game: Crash 2
Score: 3/5
The second-best boss in Crash 2 barely made the top ten; Crash 2’s bosses aren’t very good. Tiny is a fine encounter; it takes Ripper Roo’s mechanics and improves them by having the boss actively pursue you. Tiny is fun, but very basic. The best thing about him by far is the music, which is common for Crash 2.
9: Koala Kong
Game: Crash 1
Score: 3/5
The first good boss in the series. I could almost tie Kong with Tiny, but I put Kong slightly higher because he has more attacks and slightly more complex mechanics. Kong is basic fun, nothing more, nothing less.
8: Dr. Cortex
Game: Crash 1
Score: 3/5
Dr. Cortex fights run the gambit in terms of quality. This one provides a worthy challenge and an appropriately epic setting for the game’s conclusion. I have no idea how the next Cortex fight was such a downgrade, but maybe the one after that will be way better.
7: N. Tropy
Game: Crash 3
Score: 3/5
The weakest fight in Crash 3 is in the upper half of the list; five of the top seven bosses in the trilogy are just Crash 3; That should tell you something about Crash 3’s boss quality compared to the previous two games.
Tropy is a solid fight. He has challenging attacks to dodge and the fight itself has good aesthetics. I’d be happy to rank it higher, but the rest of Crash 3’s bosses are just too good: Which reminds me…
6: N. Gin
Game: Crash 3
Score: 4/5
This fight is objectively the longest and most varied in the trilogy. Unfortunately, it also stands out as one of the very few that was notably better in the ps1 version: This fight is much easier, and you feel much less impact from damaging the parts of the robot. Still a great fight, but a bit of a downgrade.
5: N. Brio
Game: Crash 1
Score: 4/5
My favorite Crash character is also my favorite fight from Crash 1. Honestly, this fight is so varied and clever that it’s hard to believe it’s from the first game. The actual gameplay of this fight is nothing special, but the setting, mechanics, and the boss character are among the best in the trilogy.
4: Tiny Tiger
Game: Crash 3
Score: 4/5
Best first boss in the trilogy without question. Twinsanity and Crash 4 may have had better first bosses later on, but this one set a new standard with an excellent area, varied attacks, and being the first boss to give you an upgrade after defeating him. Tiny provides a challenge early on that doesn’t feel overwhelming given your place in the game. I have no idea how they’ll top this.
3: Dingodile
Game: Crash 3
Score: 5/5
They topped it. Wildly creative area and boss character, unique mechanics, and the best boss theme in the trilogy. The fact that you earn the double-jump from this fight, which can be used to cheese this fight on a second encounter, is just icing on the cake. This is probably one of the best bosses I’ve ever seen in a platforming game.
2: N. Gin
Game: Crash 2
Score: 5/5
The saving grace of Crash 2’s boss roster. N Gin has so many attacks, a great boss theme, a cool voice, a good design, and a fair challenge. His attacks will even vary depending on if he has one or two shoulders left. That attention to detail is admirable. Crash 2 would be right alongside Spyro 1 as a posterchild of good games with bad bosses if not for this encounter.
1: Neo Cortex
Game: Crash 3
Score: 5/5
Have you all figured out by now I really like Crash 3 bosses? Especially those with excellent music, varied attacks, memorable areas, and a climactic sense of scale? This fight has it all: an epic 2-v-2 encounter with two foes built-up throughout your entire journey, and one where you must win without taking damage due to Aku-Aku’s pre-occupation fighting his brother. Much like Spyro 2’s final boss, the added hurdle of winning with no damage adds a lot to the encounter and helps forgive the lack of difficulty. You can argue that N. Gin or Dingodile have the better gameplay, but I think Dr. Cortex’s Crash 3 fight is the complete package.
I reviewed each ps1 game individually and these game are just those with streamlined controls, better graphics, some dated elements of progression removed, and optional time trials across all three games. This trilogy is great, and you don't need me to tell you that.
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.
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.
1991
Why is the final boss of a dinosaur game a blue devil? Because this is a golden era where games didn't need to make sense
2020
It looks a lot better and it fixed some of the enemy placement, but I still don't love it.
Battle for Bikini Bottom this is not.
Cosmic Shake made me appreciate BfBB a lot more: The hallway level design with no room for exploration made me appreciate how expansive BfBB's levels were; the confusing, overelaborate narrative of Cosmic Shake made me long for BfBB's elegant simplicity; CS's abundance of forgettable, tacked-on minigames and side-modes made me remember BfBB's excellent gameplay balance; and the lameness of Cosmic Shake's boss roster made me long for the grandeur of Robot Patrick.
I was re-watching classic Spongebob a few weeks ago and a season four episode somehow got mixed in with season three. I watched it, and the downgrade in quality was immediately apparent. The episode, while decent, was so much more generic, had less heart, and just wasn't as funny. It made me remember how special Classic Spongebob was: the first three seasons truly were lightening in a bottle and it's important not to take them for granted. The later seasons have their moments, but the magic of the classic series can never truly be re-captured. That's essentially how I feel about Battle for Bikini Bottom vs Cosmic Shake.
Cosmic Shake is a fine way to spend a few hours if you're a diehard fan. But, if you go in expecting something that will live up to Battle for Bikini Bottom, you'll be disappointed.
Cosmic Shake made me appreciate BfBB a lot more: The hallway level design with no room for exploration made me appreciate how expansive BfBB's levels were; the confusing, overelaborate narrative of Cosmic Shake made me long for BfBB's elegant simplicity; CS's abundance of forgettable, tacked-on minigames and side-modes made me remember BfBB's excellent gameplay balance; and the lameness of Cosmic Shake's boss roster made me long for the grandeur of Robot Patrick.
I was re-watching classic Spongebob a few weeks ago and a season four episode somehow got mixed in with season three. I watched it, and the downgrade in quality was immediately apparent. The episode, while decent, was so much more generic, had less heart, and just wasn't as funny. It made me remember how special Classic Spongebob was: the first three seasons truly were lightening in a bottle and it's important not to take them for granted. The later seasons have their moments, but the magic of the classic series can never truly be re-captured. That's essentially how I feel about Battle for Bikini Bottom vs Cosmic Shake.
Cosmic Shake is a fine way to spend a few hours if you're a diehard fan. But, if you go in expecting something that will live up to Battle for Bikini Bottom, you'll be disappointed.
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.
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.
If Tools of Destruction and Quest for Booty were done better.
Into the Nexus takes its main plot and most of its plot elements and gameplay mechanics from Tools of destruction, but it also refines them, creating a game with strong level design, intimidating and well-established villains, a strong gameplay loop with no major low points, and a story that is well told; well paced; and free from major plot holes.
Quest for Booty's short length held it back because it had too many recycled elements from the previous game and too underwhelming a story for it to be memorable. Into the Nexus has a distinct story with distinct characters and meaningful plot events that stand on their own. Nexus can be described as a compact and polished chapter in the R&C saga, where Quest for Booty felt more like a redundant side-note.
Unfortunately, Nexus didn't deliver any major refinements to the R&C formula: The story is functional but nothing special, the gameplay is fun but not drastically better than any game before, and while the short length isn't a major problem, this is the only game in the series I do wish was longer as many of the ideas and characters could have been fleshed out more. It is better to want more than less, but Nexus still ends before a truly great impression has been made.
I still recommend into Nexus. It may only be five hours, but it is five hours well-spent.
Into the Nexus takes its main plot and most of its plot elements and gameplay mechanics from Tools of destruction, but it also refines them, creating a game with strong level design, intimidating and well-established villains, a strong gameplay loop with no major low points, and a story that is well told; well paced; and free from major plot holes.
Quest for Booty's short length held it back because it had too many recycled elements from the previous game and too underwhelming a story for it to be memorable. Into the Nexus has a distinct story with distinct characters and meaningful plot events that stand on their own. Nexus can be described as a compact and polished chapter in the R&C saga, where Quest for Booty felt more like a redundant side-note.
Unfortunately, Nexus didn't deliver any major refinements to the R&C formula: The story is functional but nothing special, the gameplay is fun but not drastically better than any game before, and while the short length isn't a major problem, this is the only game in the series I do wish was longer as many of the ideas and characters could have been fleshed out more. It is better to want more than less, but Nexus still ends before a truly great impression has been made.
I still recommend into Nexus. It may only be five hours, but it is five hours well-spent.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.