Zero Punctuation: Ratchet & Clank
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Well, Drek and Quark were both villains in the original. The difference between the two games being that Quark was a legitimate asshole in the first one, and not some guy who was jealous but then finds redemption in the end. And Insomniac keeps bringing Nefarious back because they know he's the best character in the entire series.Pallindromemordnillap said:
Anyway, the blasting action is, well... a blast, unfortunately the characterisation is flimsey and kind of cringe inducing. This series went from good, solid toilet humor, to sterilized, kid friendly comedy. The type grandma and grandpa won't be offended by.
I bought the Ratchet and Clank collection for PS3 about 2 years ago, and found that R&C 3 (Up Your Arsenal!) was
fucking
goddamn
giant scrotumly
AWESOME
gameplay 10/10
story and characters 10/10
graphics good-enough/10
visual design 10/10
2d contra-like minigames 10/10
overall rating: if it were a woman I'd ask to smell her farts/10
too bad you PS4 kiddies will never play it. Or Jet Force Gemini, for the N64, which had similar overall design (no rocket launchers, just tri-rocket launchers, because if you think you need one explosion, you actually need three). Oh well at least the newest console generation has the only CoD games with active online multiplayer, lol.
fucking
goddamn
giant scrotumly
AWESOME
gameplay 10/10
story and characters 10/10
graphics good-enough/10
visual design 10/10
2d contra-like minigames 10/10
overall rating: if it were a woman I'd ask to smell her farts/10
too bad you PS4 kiddies will never play it. Or Jet Force Gemini, for the N64, which had similar overall design (no rocket launchers, just tri-rocket launchers, because if you think you need one explosion, you actually need three). Oh well at least the newest console generation has the only CoD games with active online multiplayer, lol.
I mean, depending on who/where you ask, "Mary Sue" can mean anything between "the literal original Mary Sue character", "a character exhibiting a trait also common among Special Snowflake-type characters" and "a badly written character".Rawbeard said:
But from what I can tell the common definition among hobbyist writers revolves around Mary Sues being distractingly perfect: They have no significant character flaws to speak of (15s of sadness over not being a perfect hero or being "too beautiful" wouldn't be characterized as signficant), they are well-liked by all characters except the antagonists, and they kick ass in pretty much every way relevant to the story without breaking a sweat. The first part in "distractingly perfect" is also important of course: If a story has very simple characters in general for example and focuses on something different, or if the character comes out on top every time but you can see they're fighting tooth and nail every time, virtually perfect characters can usually get a pass.
This isn't so much about the review itself, but rather a thought that occurred to me after watching the jimquisition earlier this week:
Isn't it time to update the intro? It's been the same since 2008, save for a higher definition.
Isn't it time to update the intro? It's been the same since 2008, save for a higher definition.
Touche.Hawki said:No tribals.Flathole said:
No. Goddamn. Tribals.
Tribals aside, JFG was awesome. It's a console 3rd person mostly-shooter with boner-inducing weapons and hordes of semi-organized, semi-intelligent bugs to explode, RPG-lite charcater-growth elements, punctuated with huge boss fights and punishing diffuculty.
My point is if you like one, you'll like the other, even if you don't complete it entirely.
Close Second, although its been years since i've played either. I'm not even sure i'm remembering them right.Michael Prymula said:
What you're describing is a self-insert fan fiction character. Mary Sue (or Gary Stu) characters are not exclusive to fan fiction. The exact definition of of a Mary Sue/Gary Stu character seems to vary depending on who you ask. For example my definition is a character who is loved by everyone, is perfect at everything, and had few to no flaws whatsoever and if they do have any flaws their flaws only seem to make them more endearing (to everyone in-universe anyway).Rawbeard said:
True, but at least Nintendo wasn't willing to abandoned its old library at the drop of a hat. Hell, the Wii and PS3 (early at the time) were both backwards compatible. You could play GameCube games, while 360 would be BC some of the time. Nintendo's problem now is that they don't know how to advertise the U nor its third party support...or now lack of it. When think about it, this problem goes back all the way to the N64 era. At least during the 5th & 6th gen they bothered to advertise.Michael Prymula said:
Oh lordy, Yahtzee acknowledges Ratchet and Clank for (what feels like maybe) the second time in Zero Punctuation's history. And he didn't hate it. Can't say I saw that coming, but pleasantly surprised.
It is worth a look though, if you can get through how pointless the story is. It's neat to walk through a much prettier version of planets like Kerwan and Rilgar (complete with a few of the old secrets). Weapons are also less generic and more versatile than the original (though I wish they kept the Tesla Claw or Visibomb). The jetpack from Into the Nexus returns so you can zoom around Gaspar in a big open zone. Also, strafing! Sweet, glorious strafing!
Ya, that's more or less what happened. Ratchet finds Clank in the crash, they shake hands, friendship happens, end of arc. That's literally all that happens, unfortunately. I like the game, but the story just isn't there (especially between Ratchet and Clank themselves). I know Ratchet was an obnoxious, abusive knob in the first game, but there has to be a happy medium somewhere. It was a decent arc and only needed some cleaning up. My guess is that it had to be altered due to the length of the movie and the target audience (game itself is also few hours shorter than the PS2 games, but is at least listed cheaper)aegix drakan said:
It is worth a look though, if you can get through how pointless the story is. It's neat to walk through a much prettier version of planets like Kerwan and Rilgar (complete with a few of the old secrets). Weapons are also less generic and more versatile than the original (though I wish they kept the Tesla Claw or Visibomb). The jetpack from Into the Nexus returns so you can zoom around Gaspar in a big open zone. Also, strafing! Sweet, glorious strafing!
Yeah I have no interest in trying this one out, for all the reasons listed already. I really enjoyed the first 3 (along with Gladiator... even if it had done away with the space battles) but Tools of Destruction didn't grab me the same way so I haven't played any since.
As for the backwards compatibility thing; yeah, it would be nice if the PS4 could play older games, but why does purchasing a new console demand that you sell/burn/throw-away your old one? Most places will only give you like 10-20% of whatever you paid for it, which will only be a drop in the bucket towards the new console price so it's never worth it. I've yet to get a PS4 but I still have my PS2 and even my PS1 around somewhere, just in case I ever do want to play something on those again (and which I have done a few times now). I'm sure as hell not gonna see how far I can throw my PS3 once I can afford a PS4.
As for the backwards compatibility thing; yeah, it would be nice if the PS4 could play older games, but why does purchasing a new console demand that you sell/burn/throw-away your old one? Most places will only give you like 10-20% of whatever you paid for it, which will only be a drop in the bucket towards the new console price so it's never worth it. I've yet to get a PS4 but I still have my PS2 and even my PS1 around somewhere, just in case I ever do want to play something on those again (and which I have done a few times now). I'm sure as hell not gonna see how far I can throw my PS3 once I can afford a PS4.
i never figured out whether I liked R&C 2 or 3 best, but the first game was deeeefinitely not my pick for the best, it established the series well and the character interactions were well developed (and apparently lost here?), but gameplay-wise the future games crushed it. Even Deadlocked, as flawed as it is, still probably had better gameplay (though not level design, of course).
I don't have a PS4 and will probably never experience this reboot myself but it sounds like I don't need to, anyways.
I don't have a PS4 and will probably never experience this reboot myself but it sounds like I don't need to, anyways.
To me Ratchet & Clank suffer the Disney problem. For me personally, if you want real and interesting characters, they have to have flaws. Bugs Bunny is a wise guy, Daffy Duck has jealousy and temper issues, etc., Ren & Stimpy are flaw dioramas. Disney don't want any of their characters to have flaws. Neither does Nintendo. Hence why I find most of their characters and stories as boring as f***.
I know people love their heroes but I find most stories aimed at kids fairly dull because of the fear in making them flawed. The whole reason Pixar films became so popular is because the characters had flaws, character arcs. But that's happened less and less with their films, the dilema of their films have moved more to situational conflict, not character conflict. And so their films have become less memorable or popular.
It's an opinion.
I know people love their heroes but I find most stories aimed at kids fairly dull because of the fear in making them flawed. The whole reason Pixar films became so popular is because the characters had flaws, character arcs. But that's happened less and less with their films, the dilema of their films have moved more to situational conflict, not character conflict. And so their films have become less memorable or popular.
It's an opinion.