Despite releasing just two years prior to TimeSplitters 2, TimeSplitters finds itself noticeably lacking in a number of key areas. It’s not dissimilar to how the gap between 2 and Future Perfect felt, though that was of course three years.
Just as Future Perfect pulled a lot of content from its predecessor, 2 would in turn pull a lot from TimeSplitters. Though, unlike Future Perfect, which felt like a retread lacking creativity in a number of areas, 2 feels like a realisation of the vision that started here with the original.
With a threadbare campaign, running barely an hour, and fewer modes to explore, the amount of content on offer is much smaller. But that’s not to say that it’s lacking.
There is arena mode, though with fewer modes than the sequels. And challenge mode makes its debut, surprisingly with the largest scope in the series. The sequels would have a smaller selection of challenges, but the nixed choices, such as escort missions, are welcome omissions.
Despite releasing before TimeSplitters 2, the auto-aim actually functions better here as well. It’s more generous with assistance, thanks to the poor feel of the manual aiming, but bizarrely it can better handle verticality better than its successor.
Of course, visual fidelity is unsurprisingly the weakest of the series. Launching first, it’s to be expected, though the degree of detail, or lack thereof, is hard to ignore. Textures don’t have much definition and visually it looks like it's stepped out of the PS1 era, rather than something that was exclusive to the PS2.
That said, the charm and creativity of the series is still present. While not a great game in its own right –especially compared to its sequels – it still offers a decent gameplay experience and helped to lay the groundwork that allowed TimeSplitters 2 and Future Perfect to expand upon.
Comments 18
You can still play a fully remastered version of Timesplitters 2 if you buy Homefront The Revolution and enter a code.
Time to split!
Wait, wait, wait Graham @gbanas92 (and hello 😊) ...this scores lower than the 'corporate' sequel? So, in essence going the 'corporate' route was the right thing to do and rather than have it as a negative it should've been viewed as an improvement.
What do you think, mate?
@riceNpea FP also scored less than Concord aka Sony's biggest ever first party failure.
To say "I do not agree with these Timesplitters reviews" would be lowballing it at this point.
@LifeGirl you've mischaracterised my question.That's OK👍It's not the question I'm asking Mr Banas. I'm asking if the decision to go corporate with Future Perfect, which he thought of as a negative, was actually a positive considering its subjectively a better game than this, in his opinion.
I'm not disagreeing with him over either review, I'm engaging with him again because last time I misunderstood him and he kindly cleared up my confusion.
No way, this is like an easy 9. Whilst I respect the reviewer he has clearly went mad giving this a 5 lol
Whilst 2 is the objectively better game, I always found 3 a bit soulless but Timesplitters 1 is a stone cold classic, one of the best early PS2 games. I picked it up on release a played it non stop for months. Not that I’m nostalgic about it or anything…
The first game is like a tech demo sort of thing and it shows how great the second game is with how much it improved.
@LordFunkalot When I first played it as a brand new game, I would have agreed with you on your score. Playing it now, I would give it a 4/10. The layouts of the levels are confusing, there's zero story, the gameplay is so behind Half Life 1 that came out what, 2 years before? But I don't think I played HL until it came out on PS2. I wanted to enjoy it like I did back in the day but it's aged terribly imo.
@TomasVrboda Isn't that just two levels or so, rather than the full game?
@BecauseBecause The level layouts are terrible lol, you’re not wrong there I didn’t remember it being that bad. Like the reviewer, I completed it on rerelease on normal under an hour and thought really was that it!?! (I had to YouTube one of the exits TBF lol). I remembered it being much bigger and easier to navigate the levels, I guess that’s how we played back then trial and error with multiple runs until you know maps inside out.
I also found it strange that most of the levels you have to get back to the start with the artefact and then the last few levels the exit is in a different place nowhere near the start making it much harder, awful idea lol
Definitely one of those games when you go back to it, it’s not as good as you remembered
Still I’m very nostalgic for this and love its roughness and shortcomings. Being objective it has aged terribly you’re right.
I think at the time they rushed it out for the PS2 launch. Playing it now, it’s like it’s missing the story. I think a big thing for them at the time was it running fast and smooth in multiplayer, that’s why I think the graphics are a bit basic.
Half life was awesome, groundbreaking at the time, I was just thinking about it the other day funnily enough. I played it on PC back in the day, my mate got the PS2 version. Good times
@LordFunkalot So sometimes.. a game is best left in the past. Or the future!
Oh dear, I'll get my coat. Time to split!
@BecauseBecause lol good one ☺️👍🏻
Worse score than Concord? It may be seen by some as a tech demo, launched alongside the PS2, but it has objectively stood the test of time compared to the aforementioned game. Push Square reviews are incredibly confusing.
@AK4tywill No, you can play the full game, you just have to look up the code to play it. It was a developer secret because they didn't know if a Timesplitters collection was going to be released at the time.
@TomasVrboda When I tried to play through it that way, it crashed on my PS5. A couple of levels worked okay but the rest felt fragile until the inevitable crash. It was easier to just play on my PS2 through component cables
Damn lads a mini review on timesplitters cmon lol, the game is a classic and should be left on the couch with our mates, back in the day you could complete most games in an hour😂 and this is coming from a lad that's still trying to complete manic miner from the 80's.
@riceNpea More of an "in relation" to the rest of the series. The lineage is important. Future Perfect going more "corporate" is a step back from 2, but I'd still rather play it than the first title, even if I still wouldn't call that particular change a good one! But Future Perfect also improved in a couple of major areas. Outside of maybe the aim assist being better at verticality like I mentioned, there isn't really anything about 1 I would consider to be better. By nature of how I feel about 2 and FP, 1 necessarily has to be lower than the other 2 as I think it's the weakest of the 3. Not surprising though, since it was the first one! They were still working out the formula!
@BecauseBecause Haha yep, close to 2 years to the day between Half-Life and then Timesplitters!
@LordFunkalot Weirdly I could swear the levels were more elaborate back when I used to play the game too! I had the same reaction haha.
I'm not sure where the shortcomings come from to be honest. There are a few possibilities that I could think of. Not enough budget, so they couldn't achieve the vision they wanted (well not until 2 at least!), or it was rushed like you said, trying to launch alongside the console. Or just the devs weren't familiar with how to develop for the PS2 quite yet. Would have been their first one on the console naturally, so they may just not have figured out how to unlock the full potential of the console until the next time around!
@TomasVrboda One of the best things about the game! haha
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...