The Ratchet games have always looked pretty but I've never actually played one. I'll read your review...soon...I promise...

you seem more into the 3D platformers of recent generations. i have little interest in games like jak & daxter, ratchet & clank, or klonoa, or the sorry extension of the banjo-kazooie series into current-gen territory.

those games just bore me, really. the 3D mario games seem to always manage to elevate themselves above the rest though.

It's just you.

@just_nonplussed

3D platfomers are pretty new to me actually. Unless you count Crash Bandicoot, the first 3D platformer I ever played was probably Super Mario Galaxy and that game tried really hard to be accessible. I loved Galaxy, by the way.

I played through a good portion of Mario 64 and definitely like it, but it has too many obstacles, I don't like fighting with the camera, it feels like a chore, and a product of bad game design. Mario Sunshine also got boring pretty fast.

I think the only 3D platfomers I like are the ones were you don't have to tinker with the camera. Crash Bandicoot, Galaxy and Klonoa are the only ones that come to mind. I really liked Klonoa as well, I feel it's more like a 2D game with 3D graphics then anything else though.

Anyway, 3D Mario games do tend to have interesting level designs. Ratchet just doesn't really have anything that sticks with you. The experience is over and you have no real memory of it. It is just a product of the game consumption industry, like so many games. It just doesn't stick to you.

@evrdayblues:

it's got no soul, man! got no soul~~~~

;p

I think you vastly overstate the game's complexity. I haven't played the first one, but the third one is no more complex than the average FPS on the thick of the battle.

I'll say one thing: I'm definitely the product of the times. I control cameras like Hollywood veterans. In fact, Galaxy's biggest annoyance was the fact that it made the camera nearly static.

Oh, and check out Jak and Daxter's draw distance in 2001. The game has one load time at the beginning; the rest is all streamed to the user.

http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/action/jakanddaxterthepl/images/0/122/

Well I just bought R&C Future, so we'll see!

I read it. The title/final line works, well.

I think I understand what you mean, when you say that it's a blast for the first 5 hours, and then it becomes boring, because I have played a similar top rated 3d platformer-action hybrid game, "Daxter" for the PSP. The latter also tries to impress you with the variety of weapons... I vote for "Crash Bandicoot 3", classic value, and always very fun and a challenge for the player.
Also, I don't know if I'm going to be bearnt in hell for what I will say, but I also never liked the idea of a super hard action-3d platform game, like the "Prince of Persia. Sands of Time". May god forgive me.
Very good review by the way, as always!

@Aberinkulas

I most likely did overstate the complexity, but the level designs did fail to impress me.

Holy cow, Jak and Daxter pwns in the draw distance department. The PS2 was darn good at streaming, unlike the XBox...

Ratchet is also devoid of loading times and runs at a solid 60 frames per second. Impressive stuff for 2001-2002.

@Rheinmetal

Thank you for your kind words, man. At least one person understands my point!

I agree 100%, Crash Bandicoot 3 is teh king, albeit it hasn't aged too well, it still holds a dear place in my memory. It strikes a good balance between fun, replayability, action, challenge...

Truly an amazing game.

-

Prince of Persia never clicked with me either. I tried playing Warrior Within, the sequel to "Sands of Time", and I got bored very fast with the complex combat. I loved the platforming bits though, they were very well designed. But ultimately I was not willing to put up with boring combat just to get to swing around the beautifully rendered and designed levels.

-

I had a feeling people wouldn't agree with this review...I guess I'm too attached to the simplicity of 2D classics...

@Rheinmetal

Huh? Sands of Time is not super hard in the least. It even lets you rewind time if you screw up. It's actually quite breezy and the combat is very fluid. What exactly were you having trouble with?

@clicketyclick: The camera and the controls were unfriendly, and the game was unforgiving. You died very easily. Of course you could always rewind the action, but overall it seemed to me the whole thing as a burden. Probably you are right it's not super hard, but for me it wasn't my cup of tea.

You say you're "too attached to the simplicity of 2D classics", and I must say it can kill your review for some people. When you write that a "3D platforming game is never going to match the pure and simple fun of a good side-scroller" your statement can be seen simply as prejudice; because it sounds like no matter how good a 3D platformer can be it will never be good enough for you.

That said, good review - you make me read reviews of games which I have no interest in. That's a good sign for a reviewer, isn't it?

@julianozuca

Thanks, I'm glad you enjoyed it!
-
Yeah, it's pretty much prejudice, but after 17 years of playing games, I tend to judge games quicker as I have less time to play and less money to spend on them. But you're right, I was a bit too hard on the game, I really tried to play past the annoying parts, but could not.

Somehow, I still truly do believe that a 3D game can never be as good as a 2D game, in terms of gameplay. I think 3D is somewhat unnatural. I mean, 3D games can have amazing presentation, immersion, atmosphere and realism, but the gameplay can never be quite as pure and fun, can never be simple and charming. 2D games are immortal, they barely even age! However, 3D games are always bested in the "next-generation." I guess it's just a matter of taste.

-

What are your thoughts on 3D vs. 2D?

I totally agree with the simplicity thing - something that makes every 2D game familiar and a comfortable place to be.
But I do think that a 3D game can be as good as a 2D game - IF... the player doesn't even NOTICE that a camera exists. If this is possible - to make a camera work perfectly - then we'll have a perfect 3D game.

(P.S.: I'm playing Super Mario Galaxy, De Blob and Okami; all great games and even so all have camera issues that keep them from being perfect.)

@julianozuca

I agree, if the camera works perfectly and the gameplay is streamlined (i.e. not too much menu fiddling, not too many buttons) it can be as good as a great 2D game.

Galaxy comes really close, but you're right, the camera is not quite perfect, but it works much better than what I've seen in any other 3D platfomer.

Actually, Metroid Prime games tend to also be really good even compared to 2D Metroid. It all depends on how talented and passionate the developers are.

It's not easy to translate the essence of 2D gameplay into a 3D game.
(That's basically the thesis and the main point of my review, I guess.)

read your review. it's okay, but you need to say why the level design was lacking. you mentioned that it was, but not why.

also, about the weapons, and weapon-swapping; i wasn't sure if it was like in zelda where you need the exact gadget to progress (like a key), or whether there were just extra gadgets and weapons for variety's sake.

"Somehow, I still truly do believe that a 3D game can never be as good as a 2D game, in terms of gameplay"

-what is 'gameplay' to you? level design? movement? mechanics?

"2D games are immortal, they barely even age! However, 3D games are always bested in the "next-generation.""

-purely in terms of graphics, i think some 3D games will age very well - zelda: wind waker, rez, mario galaxy, etc.

it's more the strictly photo-real games that will suffer because poly count and texture resolution is always increasing, along with advances in lighting, etc. but i do see some games surviving this if they are well-produced. it was more in the psone/dreamcast/n64 days that 3d was just begining (the 2d equivalent is something like the atari, that was very basic). if you look at final fantasy 10, the character models still look good.

2d games, while they seem never to age, do. super metroid doesn't look as good as zero mission or fusion, and zero mission is a lot smoother, control-wise.

you also have to consider how a game design might age as well. even if 2d games still look presentable today and play well, the type of design may be outdated due to improvements in later games. for example, turn-based battles. now the norm is to have semi-real time battle, or real-time action. i can't go back and play many turn-based games now. so they haven't aged well for me.

actually, if you look at a lot of side-scrolling shooters in the 90s', they're trying to be photo-real, but they look cartoony. if those games were made with today's tech, they would probably look a lot more realistic.

--

the problem with 3d is that it rarely feel as 'tight' as 2d. a lot of gamers long for the 16-bit era and have favourites from the snes or megadrive, because that's when 2d games were at their creative and technical best.

for 3d classics, i'm thinking.. half-life 2 (not the best game, but well balanced and well designed), ico (even though the camera is not perfect), okami (even though it's a bit padded out), vagrant story, metroid prime, resident evil (GC remake), pikmin 2, deus ex, zelda: ocarina of time, shadow of the colossus, super mario galaxy etc. etc.

my point is that 2d games age as much as 3d games, as long as 2d games continue to be made (which they do), and some companies have managed to perfect 3D cameras.
but no game is perfect.

you'll notice a lot of 2D games now are blending with 3D and trying new aesthetics (wario ware, rhythm heaven, world of goo, muramasa), while a lot of 2d games in the past were doing the exact same 'incremental graphical improvement' as today.

@just_nonplussed

You're right. I think I posted the review too soon. I'll have to redo it sometime in the future.
You made me realize that I need to get my ideas together and dig a bit deeper in my descriptions. It was a quickly written and very shallow review. Man, this is why I don't want to review a game like Shadow of the Colossus just yet. My reviewing and writing skills are not quite where they need to be.

Thanks for your feedback, that's the sort of thing one needs in order to get better.

i think developers are often too ambitious with their game designs, wanting to do everything now, in the same game, rather than focusing on a couple of well-made elements that work well together. maybe this is the reason for games that have bad cameras.

all in all, they both (2d and 3d) have their strengths and weaknessess. FPS is better to do in 3d, because in that kind of game, you're looking through the character's eyes, and this immediately feels more like life, and in life, you can walk around things and through them.

sonic is essentially like pinball, and pinball machines work better in 2d! lol, imagine a 3d pinball machine..

Hmmm, actually a 3D pinball machine could be cool...but how could you design one? It would have to have perfectly weighted balls and all obstacles would have to be set in a manner such that the ball always bounces in the same direction, in three dimensions. It's nearly impossible! But it would kick butt.