Topic: User Impressions/Reviews Thread

Yeah! In the climactic battle, I got hit by the bioforming ray which we had no defence for because Solano hid the data breach and I supported him as I didn't know he had been replaced at that point. I was also hesitant to just blown the enemy out of the sky at that point because I was still trying to help them. Urmott was in the section of the ship that got hit by the ray as he was trying to fix our communications. I also lost the young engineer you meet right at the start here and had to take him down. Once taken over, Urmott immediately started trying to sabotage the ship and I had to take him down. Really cool that was a unique interaction to my choices rather than a fixed moment in the story.

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (Series X) - Impressions

Just finished Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time after 8 hours of playtime. It was an enjoyable experience overall but it has quite a few issues.

First, I'd like to say that the game felt a bit misleading at the start. It felt like it was going to be an Uncharted type of game with a lot of action moments but it wasn't like that. It turned out to be a very laid-back puzzle/platforming/fighting game. This is fine but it's not an exciting game at all because of this, which is disappointing.

The platforming aspect is easily the most fun part of the game. Running on walls, wall jumping, swinging on bars, it's just so cool. This game was really ahead of its time.

The combat is easily the worst part of the game. Not only is there not much variety in terms of moves, but the enemies are mostly unfair and spawn for a long time during each battle. I've found myself in many situations where one enemy knocks me down, another hits me while I'm trying to get up and I fall back down again. Then this keeps happening until I lose all of my health. I literally cannot do anything. I would've disliked the combat even more, but then I realised halfway through that I needed to block more and that made the combat more bearable. But even so, it's still not fun at all.

I also didn't like the camera in this game. It kept changing when you get too close to an object and during battles, it would mess you up frequently.

The time mechanic is cool though. Being able to rewind time whenever you mess up a platforming section is a great idea, especially since you can easily mess up in this game. But even if you do, there's plenty of save and check points. It's a very forgiving game, except for the battles.

In terms of story, I genuinely didn't understand what the goal of the game was until the very end. For numerous hours, you're just solving puzzles, platforming and defeating enemies with no goal in sight. The final section of the game was really annoying as well. Taking away your rewind ability during tough platforming sections is so uncalled for. I did like the ending of the game though.

All in all, I enjoyed my time with Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. There are a fair amount of issues that plague this game. Awful and unfair combat as well as annoying camera to name a few. I do hope that the later entries fix these issues. Either way, I'm glad that I've finally started playing this series. I'm looking forward to playing the sequels down the line.

@RogerRoger Thanks for reading!

I think deep down, the upcoming game might have influenced me into starting up the first title. Other than that, I just wanted to play an adventure game in all honesty.

I think you'd like this series actually. The first game reminded me a lot of the older God of War games in terms of their structure: platforming, solving puzzles, fighting enemies, rinse and repeat. It also has the feel of an adventure game like Uncharted or Tomb Raider, even though it's more laid-back. Give it a go sometime! I don't know where you could play the first game on PlayStation though. Maybe it's on PS+ Premium as a PS3 title? It's too bad that the remake of the first game got delayed indefinitely.

@LtSarge It's on PS3 if he still has one. I had it still installed on mine when I found it in the basement earlier this year, but I likely won't play it now given the issues you brought up. Oh well, it's in a way my own fault for not playing it over a decade ago when I bought it.

@LtSarge Yeah, the series combat/adventure focus has waxed and waned over the years. That said, none of its previous incarnations have really gotten my heart racing. So glad the new one is basically just historical/fantasy Metroid Dread, lol.

Well, as with many classics, it sounds like the game probably doesn't hold up as well in 2023 as it did when it first came out. Such is the nature of an interactive entertainment medium.

@RogerRoger You're welcome. Like I said then, I doubt I'll ever play it given the issues mentioned, but it's my own fault. There are several games that I likely would have loved back then that I unfortunately never played that have aged really poorly. Like several other games, it will always be on my PS3's hard drive if I ever change my mind though.

The original Assassin's Creed is another perfect example. Even with the free 4K/60 "remaster" they put out for it on Xbox back when the Xbox One X came out, I still failed to play that much of it because some of the gameplay elements kill the game for me. I wouldn't have known any better back then, so I likely would have ignored issues I'd have with it today.

@KilloWertz Having played the original Assassin's Creed game when it came out, I still found it a but dull to play. The second game was such a huge improvement. It would be difficult going back to the first game having played some of the subsequent games in the series.

@JohnnyShoulder I still haven't played most of the old Assassin's Creed games, although I do plan on remedying that someday (just like with some other series). I have the Ezio Collection installed. I'm not sure how many of the open world AC games I had played at the time, but playing any of them probably didn't help with issues with the original. It was quite annoying not being able to walk around much at all without getting spotted and then not being able to run away as smoothly as you could in the new games.

The only pre-Origins game I've played is Syndicate. I love that game just as much as Origins and Valhalla (Odyssey being the high point of the series for me), but I know I have a lot of work to do. I know I will likely never finish the original, but it will be interesting to see how many of the others I do end up playing.

@JohnnyShoulder @KilloWertz Yeah, I couldn’t make it through the original Assassin’s Creed. The animus parts were really dull and the gameplay parts weren’t much better. Loved the Ezio games though and the rest of the Desmond arc in AC3. For whatever reason I didn’t get along with AC4 and that’s where I jumped off until Origins. Still need to get around to Odyssey one of these days.

@Th3solution Clear a good 150 hours if you plan on doing everything Odyssey has to offer. It's mostly all worth it though (a bit of the DLC is forgettable, but The Fate of Atlantis is fantastic).

@KilloWertz That’s the challenge. I am intimidated by the length.

I have too many lengthy or open world games on my menu right now. And AC Odyssey is down the list some.

Did you play Odyssey on PS5, and if so how is the port? I assume it’s got a nice smooth 60fps, dynamic 4K, and really quick load times.

Odyssey is the only AC game I genuinely love. Kassandra awoke something in me. The loot and light RPG systems go such a long way to keeping things interesting, as does the forgiving ability based combat and range of weapons. The story, world, range of mission types/world activities and historical details are just insane. But yeah, it is like a 100 hour long experience, so not for the faint of heart. Although I put similar hours into Valhalla, but that felt like an absolute slog despite the similar length.

@Pizzamorg How much focus is there on naval battles and/or “naval stealth”? That’s another concern for me because I was one of the few who really didn’t get along with AC4 and a big part of that was due to too much ship stuff. I didn’t mind it in AC3, but when it became it’s own focus for traversal it was tiring.

It’s kind of like swimming and doing underwater activities in games. It’s okay if it’s a slight diversion, but if I have to sway about and fight the water controls too often then I’d just rather not.

I’ll be honest, I actually don’t really remember. You do need to use your boat to push out into the world, both to progress the game but there there are also islands dotted around with really cool stuff on them, but are really there for you to discover rather than being part of the game’s core.

I think there were at least two bosses I faced in the sea (but I don’t remember if they were main or side), plus random encounters on the sea with enemy boats, but it made up a small part of my overall experience but I don’t have much memory of wall to wall sea combat, just using it as a means of transportation.

@Th3solution Fair enough as any game of that length is a pretty big commitment. I didn't mind it obviously, but I can understand as no matter how much you love a game, after that many hours burnout is only natural.

Anyways, I played it on the Xbox One X. I do plan on replaying it again sometime next year on the PS5 though. It's not a true PS5 version, but the patch did add 60 FPS. The resolution is the same as it was on the PS4 Pro, but I am really looking forward to playing it at 60 FPS. It was a good looking game at the time, so it's not like a lack of a resolution boost is a huge deal (it ran at 1620p on the PS4 Pro). If Origins is any indication, as I replayed that on the PS5 last year, load times will be much faster than last gen as expected.

@Th3solution I'm in a similar boat to you, and have held off from playing Assassin's Creed Odyssey. I don't think it is entirely down to how long the game is, as that kind of stuff doesn't bother me as much. But I have completed a few open world games which I wanted to play before, so may so how feel about it in the not too distant future.

While Iam not personally a fan of Assassin's Creed nor have I played many of the games but I find it cool to see the community rally behind the game. Hope you guys have fun with the games!

Not least feels it good to the see that people are enjoying more games then certain ohter titels (which seems to have taken over so much of the market)…

Wolfenstein Old Blood. A very cool and intensive shooter with some very interesting stealth elements. Can very much recommend it. I think its a game that must be experienced before any judgement can be made about it so yeah can really recommend to give the game a chance (you will probably not regret it). I would say its unique some interesting ways.. I think that Machine Games did such a good job with this one.

Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon (Wii U) - Impressions

Just finished Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon on Wii U after about 32 hours of playtime. I honestly really liked this game! There's something about its simplicity compared to the other FE titles that made it so appealing to me. I've been basically playing it nonstop for almost a week now. It's so addicting!

I feel like this game has finally made the series click with me. I first played Fire Emblem (2003) and it was quite challenging, but maybe it was because it was my first game in the series. Then I played Shadows of Valentia and I enjoyed that game a lot. Next I played The Sacred Stones and I really liked that game as well. Shadow Dragon was something else though. The simplicity and my previous experience of the series made me enjoy it more than the other three games. I'd rank the games as following: 1) Shadows of Valentia, 2) The Sacred Stones 3) Shadow Dragon and 4) 2003.

There's also a lot of things Shadow Dragon does that makes it stand out compared to the GBA titles. For starters, there are actual save points on the map, which is a fantastic feature! Imagine playing for an hour only to lose a character towards the end and you'll have to restart the entire map. Now that won't happen anymore. Second, you can reclass characters! So if you want more cavaliers, you can reclass other units to cavaliers. That's so cool! There are also other neat features such as being able merge weapons that have low uses left so that they won't break during a map and forge weapons to increase their stats such as attack power. All of these features feel so natural that it makes me wonder why it took the developers this long to add them to the series.

In terms of the story, it's rather lacking. Even though there is a lot of lore, there's not much happening throughout the maps. Instead, it's the gameplay that takes the front seat and it's so much fun that I didn't care about the story. Although it was cool to finally experience the game that Marth stars in. But overall, it's a rather forgettable game, which is probably why most people don't talk about it so much even though the gameplay is really good.

All in all, this is a fantastic FE game and I would highly recommend people who are new to the series to start out with either this game or The Sacred Stones. As I mentioned before, FE (2003) felt too challenging for me but Shadow Dragon feels just about right and it's not that long either. Granted, it took me 32 hours to finish it but that's because I did a lot of grinding in order to max out my units at level 20 before promoting them. It should take around 20 hours for a regular playthrough.

I've now played through all the older FE games that are available to me and I can finally start up the 3DS titles (except for Shadows of Valentia that is). So up next will be Fire Emblem Awakening. I'm really looking forward to playing the game that basically saved this series.

On a side note, I didn't talk that much about what FE is all about but that's because I already did so in my review of The Sacred Stones years ago. If you're interested in reading it, here's a link: https://www.pushsquare.com/forums/retro_and_other_gaming/user...