The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
OK, so I heard Devil May Cry 2 is shipping on 2 DVDs, one for Dante and one for the other character, the girl. Ratchet and Clank, a game I'm playing through at the moment, lets you play as either of the eponymous heroes. Resident Evil Zero has a revolutionary system where you can switch characters at any time, even when you're getting your face chewed off by the undead. But really, is there any real need?
Let's take a look at Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty. Konami may know how to keep a secret, but they don't know how to make a good secret to keep. Just about everybody that bought Metal Gear Solid 2 did so because they loved the first one, and wanted to play more as the wise-cracking neck-snapping Solid Snake. What did they get? A 'male' with long blonde hair that did cartwheels. The backlash was large enough to force Konami into remaking the game to let you play through the whole thing as Snake (MGS2: Substance), when really if they hadn't have been so intent on giving the player 'a bit of a change', they could have saved a lot of time and money. In fact, they probably wouldn't even had to have made Substance. In this case, Raiden wasn't used as a selling point because nobody was supposed to know about him until they actually got to play as him. Some may call it a con, with Konami misleading millions into buying a game only to not be able to do what they wanted in it. I'm sure Mr Kojima would call it 'a great feature'. In fact, just about all game developers think lots of playable characters are a good idea...where the hell did they get that idea from?
Much like Big Head Mode, this is something that is put in tonnes of games, but it's something that you either ignore, or hate. Do Capcom not realise that if you play as one character throughout a whole game, you feel closer to them? In films, the protagonist is normally left unchanged throughout, letting you identify with them, start thinking about what's going through their mind. In Resident Evil, in between obvious set-pieces and hammy dialogue, you trade characters. It all feels a bit gimmicky...well, really it feels very gimmicky. Spyro: Year of the Dragon is one of my favourite platformers ever, yet it was a horrendous offender in the playable character stakes. Does Nintendo think it's funny to suddenly play as crappy Toad instead of the iconic Mario? No. But Insomniac were determined to let you be not only a fire breathing dragon (which really would have been enough) but also a kangaroo, a cheetah, and even a flipping pengiun! Games magazines encourage this sort of behaviour, lauding the playable character count as if it means anything. Sony thought they'd scored big when they saw how many different things you could be in Spyro...but really, all it did was change the way you went about a level. Giving Spyro a jet pack or a double jump could have attained the same effect without the laughable supporting characters.
In games like TimeSplitters 2, you get a load of characters to choose from in Multiplayer. This serves a purpose. In multiplayer, you're not playing a game, you're you, playing against you friends. In the single player, you're the same person all along (although with different skins) and although in an FPS this doesn't really matter, it's the kind of thing other games should do. I could be here all day listing reasons why The Getaway won't live up to expectations, but one is that you play as two different characters. Sure, this gives you a cops and robbers both sides of the story angle, but why couldn't you have a whole game as the henchman, always having to obey his master and trying to evade the long arm of the law. Alternatively, you could spend a whole game as the copper, trying to nick the snitch to grab the bigger baddie. The Geteway will probably give you two alright chapters, rather than one great one...and it's a shame.
Just imagine if, the first time through, you didn't have all that Pliskin nonsense. Imagine if you could just be Snake, just do what you did in the first MGS, only in a bigger, more beautiful PS2 environment. MGS2 wasn't the excellent, triple A unit shifter it should have been, and one reason why so many customers were left unsatisfied was the need for another character. People got so excited when they heard Devil May Cry 2 let you play as a woman, as well as Dante. Why? Game developers don't have to give us lots of different characters to be...one's more than enough.
Thanks for reading,
-El Blokey
Let's take a look at Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty. Konami may know how to keep a secret, but they don't know how to make a good secret to keep. Just about everybody that bought Metal Gear Solid 2 did so because they loved the first one, and wanted to play more as the wise-cracking neck-snapping Solid Snake. What did they get? A 'male' with long blonde hair that did cartwheels. The backlash was large enough to force Konami into remaking the game to let you play through the whole thing as Snake (MGS2: Substance), when really if they hadn't have been so intent on giving the player 'a bit of a change', they could have saved a lot of time and money. In fact, they probably wouldn't even had to have made Substance. In this case, Raiden wasn't used as a selling point because nobody was supposed to know about him until they actually got to play as him. Some may call it a con, with Konami misleading millions into buying a game only to not be able to do what they wanted in it. I'm sure Mr Kojima would call it 'a great feature'. In fact, just about all game developers think lots of playable characters are a good idea...where the hell did they get that idea from?
Much like Big Head Mode, this is something that is put in tonnes of games, but it's something that you either ignore, or hate. Do Capcom not realise that if you play as one character throughout a whole game, you feel closer to them? In films, the protagonist is normally left unchanged throughout, letting you identify with them, start thinking about what's going through their mind. In Resident Evil, in between obvious set-pieces and hammy dialogue, you trade characters. It all feels a bit gimmicky...well, really it feels very gimmicky. Spyro: Year of the Dragon is one of my favourite platformers ever, yet it was a horrendous offender in the playable character stakes. Does Nintendo think it's funny to suddenly play as crappy Toad instead of the iconic Mario? No. But Insomniac were determined to let you be not only a fire breathing dragon (which really would have been enough) but also a kangaroo, a cheetah, and even a flipping pengiun! Games magazines encourage this sort of behaviour, lauding the playable character count as if it means anything. Sony thought they'd scored big when they saw how many different things you could be in Spyro...but really, all it did was change the way you went about a level. Giving Spyro a jet pack or a double jump could have attained the same effect without the laughable supporting characters.
In games like TimeSplitters 2, you get a load of characters to choose from in Multiplayer. This serves a purpose. In multiplayer, you're not playing a game, you're you, playing against you friends. In the single player, you're the same person all along (although with different skins) and although in an FPS this doesn't really matter, it's the kind of thing other games should do. I could be here all day listing reasons why The Getaway won't live up to expectations, but one is that you play as two different characters. Sure, this gives you a cops and robbers both sides of the story angle, but why couldn't you have a whole game as the henchman, always having to obey his master and trying to evade the long arm of the law. Alternatively, you could spend a whole game as the copper, trying to nick the snitch to grab the bigger baddie. The Geteway will probably give you two alright chapters, rather than one great one...and it's a shame.
Just imagine if, the first time through, you didn't have all that Pliskin nonsense. Imagine if you could just be Snake, just do what you did in the first MGS, only in a bigger, more beautiful PS2 environment. MGS2 wasn't the excellent, triple A unit shifter it should have been, and one reason why so many customers were left unsatisfied was the need for another character. People got so excited when they heard Devil May Cry 2 let you play as a woman, as well as Dante. Why? Game developers don't have to give us lots of different characters to be...one's more than enough.
Thanks for reading,
-El Blokey
There have been no replies to this thread yet.
OK, so I heard Devil May Cry 2 is shipping on 2 DVDs, one for Dante and one for the other character, the girl. Ratchet and Clank, a game I'm playing through at the moment, lets you play as either of the eponymous heroes. Resident Evil Zero has a revolutionary system where you can switch characters at any time, even when you're getting your face chewed off by the undead. But really, is there any real need?
Let's take a look at Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty. Konami may know how to keep a secret, but they don't know how to make a good secret to keep. Just about everybody that bought Metal Gear Solid 2 did so because they loved the first one, and wanted to play more as the wise-cracking neck-snapping Solid Snake. What did they get? A 'male' with long blonde hair that did cartwheels. The backlash was large enough to force Konami into remaking the game to let you play through the whole thing as Snake (MGS2: Substance), when really if they hadn't have been so intent on giving the player 'a bit of a change', they could have saved a lot of time and money. In fact, they probably wouldn't even had to have made Substance. In this case, Raiden wasn't used as a selling point because nobody was supposed to know about him until they actually got to play as him. Some may call it a con, with Konami misleading millions into buying a game only to not be able to do what they wanted in it. I'm sure Mr Kojima would call it 'a great feature'. In fact, just about all game developers think lots of playable characters are a good idea...where the hell did they get that idea from?
Much like Big Head Mode, this is something that is put in tonnes of games, but it's something that you either ignore, or hate. Do Capcom not realise that if you play as one character throughout a whole game, you feel closer to them? In films, the protagonist is normally left unchanged throughout, letting you identify with them, start thinking about what's going through their mind. In Resident Evil, in between obvious set-pieces and hammy dialogue, you trade characters. It all feels a bit gimmicky...well, really it feels very gimmicky. Spyro: Year of the Dragon is one of my favourite platformers ever, yet it was a horrendous offender in the playable character stakes. Does Nintendo think it's funny to suddenly play as crappy Toad instead of the iconic Mario? No. But Insomniac were determined to let you be not only a fire breathing dragon (which really would have been enough) but also a kangaroo, a cheetah, and even a flipping pengiun! Games magazines encourage this sort of behaviour, lauding the playable character count as if it means anything. Sony thought they'd scored big when they saw how many different things you could be in Spyro...but really, all it did was change the way you went about a level. Giving Spyro a jet pack or a double jump could have attained the same effect without the laughable supporting characters.
In games like TimeSplitters 2, you get a load of characters to choose from in Multiplayer. This serves a purpose. In multiplayer, you're not playing a game, you're you, playing against you friends. In the single player, you're the same person all along (although with different skins) and although in an FPS this doesn't really matter, it's the kind of thing other games should do. I could be here all day listing reasons why The Getaway won't live up to expectations, but one is that you play as two different characters. Sure, this gives you a cops and robbers both sides of the story angle, but why couldn't you have a whole game as the henchman, always having to obey his master and trying to evade the long arm of the law. Alternatively, you could spend a whole game as the copper, trying to nick the snitch to grab the bigger baddie. The Geteway will probably give you two alright chapters, rather than one great one...and it's a shame.
Just imagine if, the first time through, you didn't have all that Pliskin nonsense. Imagine if you could just be Snake, just do what you did in the first MGS, only in a bigger, more beautiful PS2 environment. MGS2 wasn't the excellent, triple A unit shifter it should have been, and one reason why so many customers were left unsatisfied was the need for another character. People got so excited when they heard Devil May Cry 2 let you play as a woman, as well as Dante. Why? Game developers don't have to give us lots of different characters to be...one's more than enough.
Thanks for reading,
-El Blokey
Let's take a look at Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty. Konami may know how to keep a secret, but they don't know how to make a good secret to keep. Just about everybody that bought Metal Gear Solid 2 did so because they loved the first one, and wanted to play more as the wise-cracking neck-snapping Solid Snake. What did they get? A 'male' with long blonde hair that did cartwheels. The backlash was large enough to force Konami into remaking the game to let you play through the whole thing as Snake (MGS2: Substance), when really if they hadn't have been so intent on giving the player 'a bit of a change', they could have saved a lot of time and money. In fact, they probably wouldn't even had to have made Substance. In this case, Raiden wasn't used as a selling point because nobody was supposed to know about him until they actually got to play as him. Some may call it a con, with Konami misleading millions into buying a game only to not be able to do what they wanted in it. I'm sure Mr Kojima would call it 'a great feature'. In fact, just about all game developers think lots of playable characters are a good idea...where the hell did they get that idea from?
Much like Big Head Mode, this is something that is put in tonnes of games, but it's something that you either ignore, or hate. Do Capcom not realise that if you play as one character throughout a whole game, you feel closer to them? In films, the protagonist is normally left unchanged throughout, letting you identify with them, start thinking about what's going through their mind. In Resident Evil, in between obvious set-pieces and hammy dialogue, you trade characters. It all feels a bit gimmicky...well, really it feels very gimmicky. Spyro: Year of the Dragon is one of my favourite platformers ever, yet it was a horrendous offender in the playable character stakes. Does Nintendo think it's funny to suddenly play as crappy Toad instead of the iconic Mario? No. But Insomniac were determined to let you be not only a fire breathing dragon (which really would have been enough) but also a kangaroo, a cheetah, and even a flipping pengiun! Games magazines encourage this sort of behaviour, lauding the playable character count as if it means anything. Sony thought they'd scored big when they saw how many different things you could be in Spyro...but really, all it did was change the way you went about a level. Giving Spyro a jet pack or a double jump could have attained the same effect without the laughable supporting characters.
In games like TimeSplitters 2, you get a load of characters to choose from in Multiplayer. This serves a purpose. In multiplayer, you're not playing a game, you're you, playing against you friends. In the single player, you're the same person all along (although with different skins) and although in an FPS this doesn't really matter, it's the kind of thing other games should do. I could be here all day listing reasons why The Getaway won't live up to expectations, but one is that you play as two different characters. Sure, this gives you a cops and robbers both sides of the story angle, but why couldn't you have a whole game as the henchman, always having to obey his master and trying to evade the long arm of the law. Alternatively, you could spend a whole game as the copper, trying to nick the snitch to grab the bigger baddie. The Geteway will probably give you two alright chapters, rather than one great one...and it's a shame.
Just imagine if, the first time through, you didn't have all that Pliskin nonsense. Imagine if you could just be Snake, just do what you did in the first MGS, only in a bigger, more beautiful PS2 environment. MGS2 wasn't the excellent, triple A unit shifter it should have been, and one reason why so many customers were left unsatisfied was the need for another character. People got so excited when they heard Devil May Cry 2 let you play as a woman, as well as Dante. Why? Game developers don't have to give us lots of different characters to be...one's more than enough.
Thanks for reading,
-El Blokey