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.

UN-charted

UN-original story, UN-likable characters, UN-interesting locations, UN-necessary side-characters, UN-der developed antagonists, UN-inspired and UN-varied gameplay, it's UN-derwhelming beginning to end.

It feels pointless to complain about this game; everyone knows the sequels are better. Be that as it may, I don't see any good reason to revisit this game anymore. Play Drake's Fortune if you want, but don't feel obligated to do so even if you are going to play the sequels. If I can give this game credit for anything, it's very consistent with Drake's motto: Uncharted is a franchise with greatness from small beginnings.

If you can do one thing really well, why shouldn't you?

Doom is a true return to form for classic shooting games. Throughout the years, many tedious additions have been made to first-person shooters. Reloading, stamina gauges, and fall damage are considerations which added a layer of realism to shooting games that is often made at the expense of fast pacing and
distinct gameplay. Doom 2016 throws all that out and takes the genre back to its roots, providing a visceral, bombastic gameplay loop of nightmarish enemies, ridiculous(in a good way) weapons, and hellish landscapes all delivered at a breakneck pace. The shooting mechanics of this game were indeed polished to a bright shine, but one that could be overbearing after a while.

Shooting is essentially all you'll be doing in this game. This basic gameplay structure was acceptable for 1993, but Doom 2016 lacked in alternate gameplay styles, meaningful story development, compelling characters, and varied locations when it had the resources to expand more on the classic game's structure. I found Doom 2016's gameplay so repetitive I could only play the game in short bursts.

Structurally, Doom 2016 is an incredible game by the standards set in the nineties, but only a good game today. I'll recommend this game to any fan of first-person shooting in a heartbeat, but for a game to truly be considered a masterpiece by today's standards, I expect a good deal more.

Well that was fun: basic, but fun.

The campy tone and self-aware humor of Ape Escape 2 are enjoyable: the varied level design and gadget use spiced the gameplay up enough for me to see the trip through to the end.

However, I grappled with a frustrating camera, questionable control schema, and enough repetitive and unmemorable gameplay to make another playthrough unlikely.

It is always so obvious and easy how to catch certain monkeys and progress that the gadget variety doesn't add much; The levels look nice, but feel empty and go by too quickly to leave much of an impact; And the optional collectibles are satisfying, but putting the coins into the machine and running it over and over again makes it not worth it to get them given how long that can take.

Most importantly of all: If you do play this game, I must insist on playing the PS4 version. Otherwise, you'll be listening to Ash and Misty the whole time: That is a hard no for me.

I can't believe how well Samus controls in this game.

There is such a satisfying flow and speed to Samus's movements as you're tearing through gorgeous levels and stringing together attacks from Dread's useful, varied move pool. Gone is the charcuterie board of useless alternate weapons which bogged down other games in the franchise, every single weapon and ability in this game is intuitive, useful in its own right, and satisfying to use(except one, but I'll discuss it in a second)

The strong level design, enemy variety, and sense of progression kept the experience consistently rewarding throughout my 10-hour playthrough, and I'll happily be going back for hard mode some day soon. This may actually be the only Metroid game I've ever played where the huge supply of missiles proved useful. The tense E.M.M.I. encounters and phenomenal, cinematic boss fights will stick with me for a long time.

Sadly, there were a few issues that took away from the experience at points. Ironically, Dread has a noticeably thinner atmosphere than previous Metroid games; I very rarely felt immersed in the world or frightened by the monsters. The story is also rather clumsily-told, opting to use long, dialogue-heavy cutscenes which clash heavily with the game's otherwise brisk pace and environmental storytelling. Oh, and the speed booster sucks balls. It is so clunky and frustrating to use I cannot believe the same people who programmed it programed the rest of Samus's move set, and the places where you need to use it are consistently the worst parts of the game.

As long as I'm not speed boosting or watching an expository cutscene, this game is awesome. It doesn't matter if you're a diehard Metroid fan, haven't played one in a while, or a newcomer: I'll recommend Metroid Dread all the same.

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.

I really like Spyro 3, but I consider it a weaker game than its predecessor.

It feels almost pointless to talk about what I love in this game: Of course I love Spyro 3, everyone does. I could talk about imaginative level design, charming characters, wonderful music, and strong core gameplay; However, I feel like I would mostly just be rehashing my Spyro 2 review if I did that. So, this will be less of a review of Spyro 3 and more of a detailed explanation of why I prefer Spyro 2.

Let's not beat around the bush and instead just dive into Spyro 3's biggest problem, a lack of focus. There are seven playable characters in this game and 150 main collectables. The fact that you only play as Bentley four times in the entire game, and one of those four times his gameplay style is radically different shows how scatterbrained the experience can be.

Also, the overabundance of collectables makes their collection wane in satisfaction as the game goes on. Bianca appears before you at the beginning of the game and states she's hidden the eggs in places you'll never find in 1,000 years, you then turn around and there is an egg in a clearing right behind you. This seems like a minor grievance, but it is a perfect example of how far too many eggs are far too easy to find, and they stop being satisfyingly to collect after a while.

I have other, smaller issues with the game: the level themes aren't as unique as previous games, the main villain is pretty lame, the 100% completion reward is bad, and even the game's best levels usually have at least one lousy pace-breaking minigame which hampers the experience a bit. But far more important than all that, the game's two biggest issues: the scatterbrained gameplay and excess of collectables, can lead the game to feel disjointed and monotonous by the end. When this game goes out of its way to include a skateboarding minigame, a first-person shooter, a submarine minigame, and so many other gameplay styles I could see in so many other games, I can't shake the feeling it isn't celebrating what makes Spyro unique.

I've been pretty mean to this game, so let me reiterate: I love Spyro 3. There are many things it does as well or better than its predecessors. The soundtrack is on par with the others, the levels feel even bigger and grander than Spyro 2's, the base ending and epilogue are both delightful, and the gameplay is still really fun the majority of the time even if it can feel jarring. I'm hard on this game because I've come to expect great things from the purple dragon.

I will still happily recommend Spyro 3, just make sure you get the greatest hits version.

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

Timeless

The charming designs and fantastical levels of Spyro are as magical now as they were twenty years ago. The game is very impressive for an early PS1 game. The simple, streamlined control scheme ensures that players can be hooked in minutes, and soon they'll be charging through imaginative levels, fighting distinct enemies, and listening to one of the best soundtracks on the PS1.

Admittedly, the game can be rather basic by today's standards. The gameplay lacks variety, rescuing dragons is repetitive, the voice acting isn't great, the boss fights are embarrassing, and the game is over much too quickly. I think the game works best as a serene, relaxing journey be played in short bursts; those looking for something more substantial may find themselves disappointed.

This game is delightful for those going in with reasonable expectations, even if I do prefer the Reignited version. Perhaps, if the core gameplay of this game could be improved, it could go from one of my favorite platformers on the PS1 to my favorite. Maybe that could happen nudge nudge wink wink

They nailed it.

Make no mistake, I'm glad they continued making MegaMan X games after this (mostly just for 2 and 4), but they could have stopped here, and I'd have been completely content. The X series is the inverse of the original MegaMan series, which had a troubled start, but a lot of potential for improvement. Here, they hit it out of the park on the first try.

From the first frame of the game, MegaMan X hits you with stellar music, strong enemy design, and a revamped move set that feels loyal to classic MegaMan while adding just enough new mechanics to make X entirely its own thing. The player gains a sense of accomplishment from blasting through imposing enemies, but that is stripped away when you are easily defeated by Vile. His mech suit is a clever way to show he isn't using his full power, and being saved by Zero is reliving, but humbling. I remember playing this game for the first time and being hellbent to redeem myself after that humiliating loss. Honestly, I could devote the entire review just to the first level of the game, But I don't wish to imply the rest of the game falls short.

Every single enemy, boss, and level are distinct, fair, and look good even by today's standards. The upgrades in the game are all worth the effort to find, being well-hidden without being unreasonable. Trust me, you'll need every rewarding upgrade, varied boss weapon, and ounce of resolve to get through this game, as its infamy for high difficulty is well deserved. Be that as it may, it is a challenge I will be revisiting for a long time.

So, in short, not bad for a first attempt.