Review: Shadow of the Colossus

Ico was the name of the game, an arty and beautiful vision of a young man with horns on a quest to save a silent princess. Like a pair of finely wrought bookends, Ico's spiritual successor sees the PS2 in its final days in the same way that the original title helped introduce the console to gamers at launch. Shadow of the Colossus is a breathtaking living canvas, with gameplay it's hard not to appreciate and a soul that everyone can identify with. Unfortunately, Shadow is not a perfect game. A few technical problems keep the title from achieving the zen-like state that it comes so close to achieving. Despite that, it's a title that no PS2 owner should deny themselves the chance to experience. Read on for my impressions of Sony's Shadow of the Colossus.

• Title: Shadow of the Colossus
• Developer: SCEI
• Publisher: SCEA
• System: PS2
• Reviewer: Zonk
• Score: 8/10

It was the summer after I'd graduated from college when I was introduced to Ico. My post-college abyss was a deep one, and beating smoke monsters with a stick was one of the activities that kept my mind away from the cruel realities of life outside of academia. The subtle and effective soundtrack, the gracefully wistful quality of the graphics, and the plight of two small souls set against the world was an experience that affected me greatly. So, it was with no small amount of anticipation that I considered the release of Shadow of the Colossus. Formerly Wanda and the Colossus, Shadow is tale of a young man on a mission. The woman he loves lies dead or comatose, and he has traveled far from the lands he knows seeking a way to revive her. In a desolate landscape he finds a seemingly deserted sanctuary. A presence exists within the shrine that, preying on the protagonist's desires, charges him with the destruction of sixteen massive beasts that roam the lands nearby.

Gameplay centers around the only real activity to be found within the game: finding and killing the sixteen Colossi. The lands you find yourself in are vast, and to travel quickly from place to place you have the use of your horse Agro. Agro is a swift steed, and sometimes difficult to control. After you've mounted, you essentially just aim the beast in the direction you want to go and then spur him onward. While he maintains a trot relatively well, you'll find if any turning is involved you'll have to continually encourage him. Once you're moving across the field the game allows you a simple way to locate your next quarry. By holding your sword up to the light, a beam appears. Focusing the beam of light until it points out a locale on the horizon tells you where the next creature you seek lies. Reaching the beast is a simple matter of navigating the beautiful landscape and locating the area that the shrine's presence indicated.

Once you've found the Colossus, a short cut scene shows the beast stirring and reveals the creature in all its majesty. Every Colossus is different, though they all share similar qualities. First and foremost is their size. The sheer magnitude of the creatures you face is awe inspiring. On many of them, your tiny form barely reaches their ankle (or whatever they use for that purpose). Some come in vaguely humanoid form, while others appear as flying or four legged beasts. No matter what shape they come in, all have a slow and graceful majesty about them that makes doing what you're there to do more than a little uncomfortable. Your tools for dispatching your prey are simple: a bow and a sword. The tools may be simple, but the task is not.

With the beast on the move, it's up to you to discover how to bring it down. Each Colossus has a weak point on it somewhere, a magical symbol that indicates it is vulnerable. The problem is their size. In order to reach the symbol you're going to have to clamber up their body and hold tight to do your work. While some creatures can simply be leapt onto, there's often some sort of trick to figure out in order to gain access to the thick fur that covers many of the creatures and provides you with a climbing surface. Clinging to their fur is draining, and a circle of energy in the corner of your screen represents how much longer you can hold on. This circle is also used for tasks such as holding your breath or keeping an arrow nocked. Most creatures have some sort of flat surface on them, meaning that scaling these enormous beasts holds similarities to assaulting a mountain. Once you reach a base camp you pause for a breath before continuing towards your goal: the symbol. At the symbol you draw back your sword, and plunge it into the creature's flesh. You can attack the titan anywhere on its body, but the only way to do a significant amount of damage is to reach the symbol. While the procedure is the same for each Colossus, the tactics are different every time.

The game is essentially a series of sixteen boss battles, and the razor sharp focus of the gameplay allows the player to appreciate every tense moment spent clinging to a shaking beast's fur. I can describe the gameplay, but words simply do not do the experience justice. Every single 'vertical dungeon' you encounter during the course of the game has a personality all its own, and despite some frustrations it never gets old actually trying to kill them. Without the distractions of a thousand little minions to kill or annoying puzzles to solve, individual moments in Shadow of the Colossus have a lot more weight. Just riding across the plains on the way to your next encounter is a joy, being able to watch the landscape roll past and enjoying the extremely adept environmental design.

Misty moors, jutting cliffs, and rune-covered ruins dot the plains that you explore. The soft, dreamlike style of Ico has been transferred successfully to a less abstract space here in Shadow. The shrine and its immediate surroundings are your first real experience with Shadow's world. Light streams in from above to illuminate the darkness of the shrine, playing over the ruins of whatever intelligence built the structure so long ago. The lay of the land comes at you in broad visual strokes, a green plain giving way to a dark slab of a mountain. A pass leads through the mountain to a secluded ruin surrounded by water. The water itself is fluid and reactive, extremely well rendered. The Colossi themselves are works of art. The humanoids evoke powerful warriors, while the animals are all vivid forces of nature. The flying creatures are particularly awe-inspiring. It's not every day something the size of a building takes to the air over your head. Whatever form they come in a gentleness emanates from the furry goliaths, even as they try to crush you under their feet. The emotional nature of the title and the beauty of your surroundings combines to create a truly unique experience. Additionally, Shadow supports 480p, widescreen, on HD screens. If you can arrange to play the game this way it is well worth it. What is already a magnificent title seems to leap off the screen due to the high fidelity of the image.

As awe-inspiring as Colossus fights are, as beautiful as the gameworld is, Shadow of the Colossus is not without its problems. Shadow was made in a world with flaws, and the title's execution reflects that reality. The camera is the primary problem. In an effort to afford you the most majestic view of your encounters, the camera will occasionally make extremely confusing decisions. While it might seem like a good idea to pull quite a ways back, allowing you to view your avatar as an ant on a beast's back, it is quite difficult to see what you're doing that way. In tight maneuvering situations the camera has a tendency to clip through the Colossus, often obscuring your view mid-leap or as you crawl around a corner. The beauty of Shadow's world doesn't come without a cost, as framerate slowdowns can be an issue during tense moments. While nothing catastrophic ever happened to me as a result of a slowdown it can marr what might otherwise be a scene from a motion picture. Finally, I encountered a few odd collision detection bugs. I managed to get Agro stuck in a pillar at one point, and despite my being able to dismount and call him he was unable to get free. Less humorously, in the middle of a fight with one of the truly majestic flying Colossi I became stuck in an upside-down crawling position. I'd been clinging to the beast's back, and somehow while I was crawling I tumbled and became stuck on my back. I fell from the Colossus and landed in a pond, where I quickly realized that I needed to leap out of the water relatively often so that I wouldn't drown. While it was amusing to swim around upside down for a minute or so, I was basically forced to reset my game. I'd gotten the Colossus down to only a small amount of health, and it was a frustrating decision to have to start all over again.

Shadow of the Colossus, then, pushes the edge of the art form that is the videogame. The story is essentially nothing more than a setup, with everything that follows simple acts that require you to make value judgments about them. The gentle nature of the Colossi would seem to make your acts violations, but the game's finale makes that a questionable assumption as well. The graphical presentation is beautiful and visionary, headily recalling the days when the PS2 was new. The game pushes the boundaries of what the PS2 hardware is capable of, and the title suffers as a result. The control scheme is intuitive, but can sometimes be unwieldy as events in the game get away from you. If you see past the technical problems, the biggest complaint you're likely to have is the brevity of the experience. The game's focus is such that only a few hours of concerted effort will be required to plumb its depths. There is replayability, in the form of a hard mode and time attack tests. The time attacks can net you new objects which you can use in the hard mode of the game, and little things like a different color for Agro.

At the end of the day Shadow of the Colossus is truly a work of art. It stands as a unique experience in the field of gaming, with intense action set pieces and hauntingly beautiful landscapes. Honesty requires me to talk about the technical problems that marr the perfection here, but for me personally they're not a consideration. Games that have the power to move the human heart are so few and far between today that most commentators are still tentative to call gaming an art form. It is titles like this that will make them see the light of day, titles that can move beyond coin collecting, monster fragging, or skull cracking. Not everyone can identify with a psycho killer or a misunderstood alien. Our common humanity binds us to the man who has traveled so far and sacrificed so much. Giant-slaying for the people we love is not merely a fairytale, after all. Shadow is a 10/10 in my book, and easily the best gaming experience the end of the year has to offer.

Comments

video review

[jacoplane]

view a video review of the game here:

http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/adventure/wandaandthec olossus/media.html

Yet another 8/10

[hsoft]

Why bother with a score if it's always 8/10?

Re:Yet another 8/10

[poodlehat]

Actually, the last line of the text called it a 10/10, yet the score at the top says 8/10. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

Re:Yet another 8/10

[timster]

The score has always been 8/10 (or sometimes an unadorned "8") since the early days of Slashdot book reviews. It's just a tradition, and I presume a testament to the folly of assigning numeric scores to work of art.

Re:Yet another 8/10

[carmaggedon]

better question: why bother with the numerical rating he's going to give it an 8/10 and then end the review by saying, "Shadow is a 10/10 in my book." which is it: 8, or 10?

Re:Yet another 8/10

[fightzombies]

or for that matter, why give it an eight out of ten when the last sentence of your review is "Shadow of the Colossus is a 10/10 in my book." ?

Re:Yet another 8/10

[Austerity Empowers]

I think it's part of the usual slashdot social foundation: we won't review really popular games that everyone already knows about, we won't review games so awful we'd be embarassed to admit to having bought/pirated it. It should be something somewhat offbeat, probably underrated or from a small unknown game shop. Hence almost everything is 8/10.

Re:Yet another 8/10

[fightzombies]

I don't think Sony Computer Entertainment qualifies as a small unknown game shop.

Re:Yet another 8/10

[fireduck]

Parent's comment isn't insightful, it's wrong. Take a look at the last few Zonk reviews:
Serious Sam II - 5/10
Black and White II - 7/10
Ultimate Spider Man - 7/10
Dragonshard - 8/10
Burnout:Revenge - 9/10
We Love Katamari - 8/10
Sims 2 Nightlife - 7/10

So, while it's clear that most reviewed games get high praise (why waste your time writing a full fledged review for something you felt was a waste of your time to begin with); it's also clear that there is some sort of metric being applied and not just a "let's give it an 8".

Re:Yet another 8/10

[hsoft]

Oh well, I've just been very unlucky with the review I read then. Every review I read had a 8.

Re:Yet another 8/10

[iabervon]

In his book, it's 10/10, but the slashdot review format doesn't allow for ratings other than 8/10. Reviewers ask for the variable rating feature every once in a while, but not often enough for it to actually get implemented.

Re:Yet another 8/10

[Zonk]

Being honest is hard. Personal opinions and experiences color everything we do, we can't do anything about it. 75% of what I'm thinking abot when I write a review is trying to be objective and come at the game from the opinion of "everybody". Taking into account the technical problems knocks the game down from a 9 to an 8, which was what I was going to give it until I found myself swimming upside down and drowing. :)

That said, objectivity is not the only goal of a review. I'm here to give you my opinion as well as let you know what kind of game it was. If this was the Zonk show, where whatever I liked was just the way it is, Shadow would have been a 10. I am sick to death of FPSes with soulless stories, Diablo clones, and RTS games with the usability of a brick. Shadow is a very different game, and having the chance to play something different made me a happy gamer.

Re:Yet another 8/10

[Anonymous Coward]

So, while it's clear that most reviewed games get high praise (why waste your time writing a full fledged review for something you felt was a waste of your time to begin with);

Because a review is about helping others make purchasing decisions. I'd like to know if that cool-looking game actually has horrible gameplay, long loading times or other major problems before I decide to plop money down on it. (And not every game can be rented at your local stores.) Sticking to the good stuff is only moderately helpful, as with the current batting average I can practically know before I read the review that it's another "pretty good but not perfect" title if I see the review on /.

When a periodical refuses to give anything a bad rating, always stopping at rating a game 'mediocre', people would immediately think there was something fishy going on. I can understand why there's some criticism about this.

it's also clear that there is some sort of metric being applied and not just a "let's give it an 8".

No, that would be clear if he actually told us how he determines the rating. Almost all the ratings you listed show a 7 or 8, with 5 being the only rating more than one degree away from 8. That may be variance, but it's not much of one. I'm not arguing either point is correct, but there is a pretty small degree of variance in the ratings overall. Then again, I consider it just a rating of how much Zonk liked the game, so I don't hold much weight to it either.

Re:Yet another 8/10

[NitsujTPU]

I could picture the review now, especially for some big powerhouse.

"Being a game reviewer, betimes, requires suffering for your art. Today, I played "Bob's Stupid Game," for 72 hours, endlessly, in order to write this review. First, I need to be honest, I'd rather be beaten to death with a rusty highway gaurd rail than have to play this game again..."

5/10 ;-)

Re:Yet another 8/10

[MilenCent]

Technical problems should take a back seat, in my opinion, if the game itself is compelling enough. It seems obvious, reading your review, that it'd be more accurate if the score was a 9. Games that are works of art deserve special consideration over "frame rate hitch when three demons shoot fireballs at once" types of things.

Ocarina of Time fully deserved the 10s it got from many places, even though the game is not perfect, from a technical perspective.

Re:Yet another 8/10

[ultranova]

Technical problems should take a back seat, in my opinion, if the game itself is compelling enough.

Have you any played Final Fantasy 7 in Windows ? The game is compelling in the extreme. It has an interesting storyline, great gameplay, and still manages to look good even today (mainly because it never tried to look realistic to begin with).

However, it is also buggy. Having Direct3D acceleration on makes it to crash about once an hour (every fifteen minutes in earlier versions). This turns the game into a panicked look for the next savepoint, before the inevitable crash, and thrusts the gameplay into the background.

Technical excellence cannot make a poor game good. But technical problems can ruin an otherwise good game.

Games that are works of art deserve special consideration over "frame rate hitch when three demons shoot fireballs at once" types of things.

No, they don't. Why on Earth would they ? Either the framerate hitch is serious enough to be a problem or it is not. That has nothing to do with the game being "artsy" or not.

If anything, an "artsy" game suffers more from the illusion being broken by a technical problem than a "nonartsy" game.

Re:Yet another 8/10

[Anonymous Coward]

Being honest is hard, eh?

I guess that explains why you don't do it very often then, now doesn't it?

Re:Yet another 8/10

[MilenCent]

Have you any played Final Fantasy 7 in Windows ? The game is compelling in the extreme. It has an interesting storyline, great gameplay, and still manages to look good even today (mainly because it never tried to look realistic to begin with).

Wow, I disagree with almost all those points.

However, it is also buggy. Having Direct3D acceleration on makes it to crash about once an hour (every fifteen minutes in earlier versions). This turns the game into a panicked look for the next savepoint, before the inevitable crash, and thrusts the gameplay into the background.

Zonk's review was of a game that had nowhere near this bad a problem. He actually said that he would give it a 10/10 except that he was trying to be "honest." Me, I'd say that 10/10 is the honest score, and 8/10 is second-guessing himself.

Re:Yet another 8/10

[vsprintf]

Reviews are a good thing, and the more the better to get different opinions. I'm going to buy it in any case because it was made by the same people who made Ico, and that had to be one of the best games ever.

I couldn't believe that Ico didn't sell well. Okay, they could/should have done away with the demons - they didn't add anything to the game, but some people need things to slash at. Once you figure out that Yorda is an asset and helps you along, it's a real gaming experience. I recommend Ico to anyone that hasn't played it. The controls were the most intuitive I've seen - you didn't need a training section. For people who played it and couldn't figure it out, I'd suggest you stick with FPS or RPGs or try it again and pay attention to Yorda. The game is not all about you.

Re:Yet another 8/10

[Max Nugget]

Taking into account the technical problems knocks the game down from a 9 to an 8, which was what I was going to give it until I found myself swimming upside down and drowing. :)

What's unfortunate about that particular breed of "technical problems" is that it's sort of like when you go to a restaurant that's generally very well-liked, and by random chance happen to have a bad experience, and you tell all your friends about your bad experience and so they never go, even though if they did go, there might be a 95% chance that their experience would be fantastic. Now let's pretend you're a Zagat reviewer. Your review is intended to inform the Zagat readers of what THEIR experience is likely to be like, and yet, you have instead (knowingly or unknowingly) provided them with a review that would be counter to the experience that 95% of your readers would have if they actually went to the restaurant. Yikes.

In Daytona USA for Sega Saturn there's a tiny piece of wall in the tunnel of one level that, if you aggressively scrape the car against that very specific section of the wall, will cause the game to freeze. I discovered this by accident while playing the game, and it was upsetting because it was on a late lap in a many-lap race. I was able to reproduce the bug with ease, but what are the chances of accidentally stumbling on this (what I believe is one of the only "crash points" in the game)? Miniscule. Without knowing specifically where this "crash point" is, you'd probably never encounter it by chance. We're talking probably less than 1% chance of this happening to you. If I simply wrote in a review that "the game freezes sometimes," the reader has no sense of proportion or perspective. "The game freezes sometimes." Look how bad that sounds, and yet it has such a minor rate of incidence that my statement becomes an unfair distortion of what most readers should expect to see.

Obviously Zonk's intent wasn't to unnecessarily bad-mouth the game, though -- he's clearly a fan of it. If you've only played through the game a couple times there's no way to know how similar or dissimilar your experience was to other people's. Myself, I've played through the game two and a half times now, and I have not had ANY issues like the one you describe. I've seen a small graphical glitch once or twice, (the floor disappearing), but nothing that interfered with gameplay. I've seen a couple similar complaints on the GameFaqs boards, but by and large I don't know that most people playing the game would experience any problems. So what's unfortunate is that although you clearly were affected by that gameplay glitch, because you're only one person and have only played through the game once or twice (or thrice?), you have no way of knowing whether the glitch you experienced is likely to happen in 1% of games played or 50%. If it's around 1%, it's unfortunate for that kind of information to make its way into a review that the other 99% of gamers will read and incorrectly presume is likely to happen to them.

By the way I don't know how common these glitches actually are in SOTC. I was just pointing out the dangers of pointing out glitches. :)

Re:Yet another 8/10

[MilenCent]

Wow, what is it with the -1 Overrated scores on these posts? Aren't there better uses for mod points than marking down an explanatory comment like this one?

It is a nice game but.....

[GmAz]

The land is so enormous and the enemies are spread out a little too far. Graphically, its not the most beautiful game I have ever seen, but its done in a way where you don't notice the graphics so much. Movement is great and the game play is fun. Just not enough enemies.

Re:It is a nice game but.....

[Anonymous Coward]

maybe try playing it set to something other than novice

Re:It is a nice game but.....

[GmAz]

Novice is for n00bs, and in my book, does not exist.

Re:It is a nice game but.....

[True_Requiem]

Try playing on a 55" HD-TV. You'll be blown away. The colossi are the aim. Anything else would have been obvious filler. If I had to kill 500 lil bad guys on my way to the colossi, I would have quit. I want to climb and kill these giant beasts, not piddle with their underlings. They knew this game was going to be short. I'm mildly impressed they didn't try to cram it full of the little guys to stretch the game play. It was short, but fulfilling.

Re:It is a nice game but.....

[Anonymous Coward]

But the GayStation 2 doesn't do HD for most games so no matter how big your HD TV is it's not going to fix the fact that the GayStation's graphics are low-res. Blowing them up on a big screen is going to make things even worse. Seriously PS2 games look horrid on my projector with its 6ft wide picture.

Re:It is a nice game but.....

[vsprintf]

I want to climb and kill these giant beasts, not piddle with their underlings. They knew this game was going to be short. I'm mildly impressed they didn't try to cram it full of the little guys to stretch the game play. It was short, but fulfilling.

That sounds like a good thing. As someone who has to work for a living and can only do gaming in short stretches, I'm really fed up with games with very long levels and restricted saves that only serve to make the game longer. I'm more interested in good game play and interesting puzzles, and I appreciate games with saves that are available anywhere (or at least frequently).

Re:It is a nice game but.....

[Anonymous Coward]

"But the GayStation 2 doesn't do HD for most games so no matter how big your HD TV is it's not going to fix the fact that the GayStation's graphics are low-res. Blowing them up on a big screen is going to make things even worse. Seriously PS2 games look horrid on my projector"

All of the current gen consoles look "horrid" on big screen HDTVs.

"with its 6ft wide picture."

You must be so proud. Be happy mommy and daddy bought it for you.

"...GayStation 2..."

Go back to Teamxbox, troll.

Ico

[ninjakoala]

In my books Ico is one of the most overrated games for the PS2. Sure, it's got a very special look and technically it's well executed, but the game itself was fairly standard fare and felt much like a mixture of Sleepwalker and Prince of Persia (of course it's worth mentioning that neither of those games had been redone in 3D at the time).
I guess the game just never connected with me.

I hope Shadow of the Colossus will be different, but I'm not getting my hopes up. The concept is at least interesting and fairly unique this time and the graphics are breathtaking for a PS2 game.

Re:Ico

[HAKdragon]

...felt much like a mixture of Sleepwalker and Prince of Persia (of course it's worth mentioning that neither of those games had been redone in 3D at the time).
 
Actually, there was a 3D Prince of Persia released in either '99 or '00. I don't remember hearing much about it when it was released, but it did come out.

Re:Ico

[tgibbs]

I think Ico is still the single most enjoyable game on the PS2 platform. I found it perfect in almost every respect: graphics, style, atmosphere, emotional resonance, music, plot, difficulty of puzzles, balance between action, puzzle, and platform activity.

I'm only partway through Shadow. A beautiful game, but at this point I doubt if it will supplant Ico in my affections.

Re:Ico

[Scrameustache]

In my books Ico is one of the most overrated games for the PS2. Sure, it's got a very special look and technically it's well executed, but the game itself was fairly standard fare [...]
I guess the game just never connected with me.

I hope Shadow of the Colossus will be different,

Since I'm glad it's not, I would recommend you keep your money for games with a less subtle appeal.

Re:Ico

[ninjakoala]

Since I'm glad it's not, I would recommend you keep your money for games with a less subtle appeal.

So you're saying you're playing the same game over again?

Sarcasm aside I obviously meant it would be different in the sense that I'd find it interesting. The premise is certainly different and unlike Ico it seems like a rather unique concept, which is why it has my attention. Not that there are as far between unique games as there used to be (for a long while).

Re:Ico

[Scrameustache]

The premise is certainly different

"Fight monsters to save girl"? Nah, pretty much the same. ;- )
But now they're big stone monsters instead of multitudes of smoke monsters.

What I meant was that it feels a lot like Ico, the look, the gameplay, etc. If you couldn't enjoy the masterpiece that was Ico, for reasons which are your own, then I wouldn't expect you to enjoy the sequel. Though, mileage may vary... meh, use the usual strategy: Rent it first.

Re:Ico

[xero314]

I guess ICO wasn't for everyone, and SoC won't be either. I personally list ICO as one of the best games of all time (tied pretty close with Katamari). Ico was not entirely original, but it had some interesting puzzels that were not overly complex. It was not bogged down with meaning less violence, tasks that require perfect timing, and long puzzels that you would end up doing over and over again. I walked through it from begining to end having to revert to a save very few times. The look and feel of the game is certainly one of the best I have ever seen , not in pixel/polygon count, but instead in beauty and simplisity. The characters have feeling, and you even begin to feel for them (if you're not totaly devoid of affect).

SoC on the other hand, has an interesting concept. It was very short (yes shorter than ICO) and not as visually impressive. The scale of the colosii was great, but the puzzels were mostly simple (specially when they gave you obvious hints). I had really hoped for a more Ico esque game, with deep puzzels and characters I could care about. SoC is fun and I suggest it, but it is a disappointment to Ico fans. If your not an Ico fan you just might like it more than those that are.

Re:Ico

[Zoid]

I've found that people who didn't find Ico to be one of the best games they played is because they didn't really buy into the feelings between Ico and the princess. A big part of the game is the sense of being alone with just the two of you and that she was entirely dependent on you. I've found people who thought she was annoying or didn't enjoy interacting with her generally didn't like the game.

Re:Ico

[grumbel]

From a pure game mechanics points of view I agree with you, the puzzles aren't so special and the fights are actually plain boring. Nothing so great in that area. So if you are looking for great game mechanics you probally won't find them in Ico. However, except the fighting, which I really consider pretty annoying and pointless, the stuff doesn't get much in the way either and in the end the game really is more about the experince and athmosphere then about the pure game mechanics. Few games before or after it manage to create such a dense and uniq athomsphere and thats what the game is all about in the end, its an experince and less something that is actually fun in the normal sense. It takes quite a while to get into and you probally need to be in the right mood for this type of game, but if you are it simply makes you go 'wow'.

Hardware limitations

[phpm0nkey]

Games like Shadow of the Colossus are what really make me excited about next-generation consoles.

Yes, it's a work of art. Yes, the landscapes and the colossi are absolutely stunning. But the choppy framerate detracts from the great view. Terrain renders moments before you're walking on it, and characters are noticeably pixelated. When Resident Evil 4 was ported from the Gamecube to the PS2, the main character's polygon count had to be cut from 10,000 to 5,000 to support the hardware. Can you imagine if these Colossi had 10,000 polygons, or 20,000, or 50,000?

I'm not complaining; I love this game. But I can't help feeling that the creators' artist vision was constrained by the technical limitations of the hardware. Xbox 360 and PS3 games will not be better than their predecessors by simple virtue of the fact that there's more power under the hood. However, for great, ambitious games like this one, the less game designers have to worry about what the hardware is capable of, the closer we will get to the kind of epic, cinematic experiences they envisioned.

Re:Hardware limitations

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree. I think I would crap my pants if they re-released Shadow on the PS3. Hell, that would be enough for me to go out and buy a PS3 I think.

Re:Hardware limitations

[leather_helmet]

Very true - The RE4 point was a good one, I heard rumors at E3 that it was going to be ported to PS2, though my colleagues had the same hesitant thoughts - the poly count was going to be significantly lower and indeed it is - all that said, i think capcom did a great job with the port - The latest GD mag has a great post mortem with the director of RE4 - he does not really touch the subject of the PS2 port, however he gives insights as to the artistic pipeline they worked with for the GC version

Re:Hardware limitations

[Allaran]

Anyone know any of the details about the PS3's backwards compatibility? If the PS3 can run PS2 games, will it be able to run them better? In other words, will the framerate issues that you see playing Shadow on the PS2 improve on the PS3? I might wait until the PS3 comes out to play if so.

Re:Hardware limitations

[ronjeremysjohnson]

The next generation is going to have the same exact problem. Imagine SoTC being ported to the Doom 3 engine, it would look great right? Well not great, the main character would be a conehead. So maybe the generation after?

I think art also has a lot to do with realizing your vision with the tools you have. I have a high end pc, and have seen some great visuals in the latest and greatest games, yet I think SoTC looks great. The fur looks great, I was actually suprised the PS2 could be made to do that so well.

Re:Hardware limitations

[Fulcrum of Evil]

If the PS3 can run PS2 games, will it be able to run them better?

Probably not. PS2 games oeprate with the assumption of a fixed hardware config, and modifying the platform by increasing the speed is likely to have a number of unforseen effects.

Re:Hardware limitations

[MenTaLguY]

They pulled a really clever trick for the fur/hair/grass in SotC -- they stack polygons with transparent textures that are cross-sections of a large area of fur/hair/grass. The cross-section of each individual hair is an opaque dot in the texture.

That way you can get hundreds/thousands of hairs with only a few polygons.

Re:Hardware limitations

[SirSlud]

Good article which makes it crystal clear how working on consoles in an exercise in making every byte in RAM count. The more flexible your loading system and artistic pipeline, the better your game will look.

I give it...

[Anonymous Coward]

7 thumbs up.

-Homer

But...

[RoadDoggFL]

Ico wasn't a launch title.

Re:But...

[Valdrax]

Neither was Final Fantasy VII for the PS1, but look what it did for the platform. While ICO wasn't a game that made the PS2 like FF7 did the PS1, it was a watershed game that made people look at what the system could do.

Re:But...

[RoadDoggFL]

"Ico's spiritual successor sees the PS2 in its final days in the same way that the original title helped introduce the console to gamers at launch."

That's kinda what I'm talking about.

An impressionists painting

[leather_helmet]

Is how I like to describe it - Yes, it is a great game, though for me, the camera was a too cumbersome - when playing the demo at E3, I had the same gripe and one of the developers assured that it would be 'fixed' for the release - It was cleaned up a bit, but not fixed - regardless of my minor issues with the game, I thoroughly enjoyed the experience of the game, however the original ICO has a higher place in my heart -

Re:An impressionists painting

[Anonymous Coward]

Blame a certain company wanting a large sum of money for licensing of a patent that applies to calculating the view (camera) angles.

Phew!

[jawtheshark]

Glad to hear that I'm not the only one. I bought Ico some time ago and I even read some reviews before buying it. They were all soooo positive. I was really disappointed. Yeah, it's pretty, but the game isn't all that fun.
Ico is gathering dust in my drawer....

Re:Phew!

[ninjakoala]

I sold mine. The only thing I miss is the beautiful cover. That was truly spectacular even though it was a rip-off apparently (saw it compared with an original painting some time later)

Re:Phew!

[hattig]

I've seen original Ico games (with the postcards) go for £40 - £50 on eBay, you might want to sell you copy before the PS2 gets too old!

As for me, I liked Ico for not being overcomplex in terms of gameplay.

Re:Phew!

[ninjakoala]

Don't think it will get any cheaper. If anything the price will go up.

Games from the 8 and 16 bit era are selling for huge amounts if the condition is mint. Even Saturn and Playstation games can fetch ridiculous amounts (go look for Dodonpachi, Panzer Dragoon Saga, Radiant Silvergun to see what I mean).

I bet Ico will become somewhat of a collector's item as well.

Re:Phew!

[jawtheshark]

Weird: I picked it up for 19.99€ in the bargain bin. It must be a re-release, since it doesn't have any postcards with it.

Re:Phew!

[hattig]

As with all these things, it isn't the game itself but the actual release I think. The cardboard sleeve version with the 4 postcards seems to be worth a lot because it was the original release. The postcards are quite cool too. I'll be hanging onto my copy.

Re:Phew!

[vsprintf]

I bought Ico some time ago and I even read some reviews before buying it. They were all soooo positive. I was really disappointed. Yeah, it's pretty, but the game isn't all that fun.

Ico, IMHO, is one of the best games ever made. I thought the demons were not needed (and if you wish, they can be nullified with cheats). Otherwise, it is one of the best PS2 games I've played. If you don't understand that you need Yorda's help, you probably won't get it.

Having almost finished the game

[presidentbeef]

And being a fan of ICO, I have to say this game is amazing. Size is definitely the focal point of the game. There is something exhilarating about climbing onto a gigantic beast and hanging on for dear life as it tries to shake you off.
Having a horse was a great touch, as well. In fact, I love the horse.
There are some nice touches, too, when you are riding across different landscapes and you are kicking up dust or mud or sand.
The whole thing is just amazing. No other game like it.

Re:Having almost finished the game

[Red Flayer]

"Size is definitely the focal point of the game"

Apparently, you've heard from my wife then.

"There is something exhilarating about climbing onto a gigantic beast and hanging on for dear life as it tries to shake you off."

And now you're calling her a gigantic beast?

Bastard.

Re:Having almost finished the game

[Dufftron 9000]

The Legend of Zelda: The Ocarina of Time for the N64 had a horse that did the same thing with the dust trail. I did love the horse bits in that game. There was a mini game where you rode between two sets of targets and shot arrows at targets along the route. I had forgotten about the game until I got the ported version for the gamecube a while back. It was fun the second time as well as the first.

Re:Having almost finished the game

[UttBuggly]

Hmmm....reminds of how to play "Rodeo" with your wife. 1) Mount her from behind. (and with gigantic beasts this IS tough) 2) Shout out some other woman's name. 3) Try to stay on for 8 seconds. Yee haw, rodeo!

Re:Having almost finished the game

[Alzheimers]

Someone mentioned a small detail to me that I'd never really thought about, and explains perfectly the difficulty some people are having while riding Agro.

In SotC, you don't control the horse. You control the *rider*, who then commands the horse. The difference is that the horse has a mind of it's own, and only obeys your commands as far as you direct the rider.

It's the subtle details like this that really separates Shadow from other games. If you didn't stop and think about it, it wouldn't make sense. But it does, in a very abstract, beautiful way.

Re:Having almost finished the game

[sweetspooky]

She's not, is she?

Re:Having almost finished the game

[19thNervousBreakdown]

I haven't played the game, but that's one detail that impressed me. When riding a horse IRL you generally don't need to give much encouragement to keep going straight, but when turning you do need to give a squeeze or the horse will think you're asking it to stop.

Ico

[Anonymous Coward]

I *hated* Ico. The character you were "rescuing" never talked, the tasks needed to be repeated and repeated and done again if you didn't make the random movements needed just right, and did I mention that the princess never talked to you? No story, annoying plot, bleach. I still don't understand why anyone liked it. And now we're being shown a similar game with a sub-top rating? Is it really that slow a Friday?

Let me guess -- you complete the mission, but you look on your love just before you leave Hades, causing her to be wrenched back to the Underworld. In a fit of sorrow, you sing morbid songs until you get torn apart and tossed in the water. The Greeks already did that one a few millenia ago. I guess their patent and copyright ran out.

Additional screenshots...

[Rinnt]

Here and here.

Agreed

[ellcry]

The game is a technical marvel that highlights the graphical refinement (and mastery) developers have achieved on the ps2. It'll be interesting to see how killer-apps like this affect 360 sales this holiday season.

games like this make me wish...

[BewireNomali]

... I owned a PS2 instead of an x-box. i'd love to hear other user sentiments. this seems like an awesome game.

Re:games like this make me wish...

[nintendo_is_a_cereal]

I think games like this are the sort of thing that made me kind of avoid the XBox. Sure the XBox was a technological beast for this era, and it had some fine games, but the number of truely creative and out there games (both american and japanese) was so small it seemed nonexistent. Meanwhile between my PS2 and GCN I've experienced all sorts of marvelous worlds that don't seem present on the XBox. Not that I think this is a fault, MS got the kind of developers they wanted making the kind of games that attract the largest audiences which is perfectly fine.

Re:games like this make me wish...

[Dav3K]

I don't either (or any, if you count the Cube.) But this game makes me think about purchasing a deeply-discounted PS2 just to play it.

Re:games like this make me wish...

[MikeBabcock]

If you get a chance, try out Death by Degrees and God of War ... both have beautiful environments of their own types, as well as excellent gameplay dynamics (imho).

Re:games like this make me wish...

[C0rinthian]

God of War was good enough to bring by PS2 out of retirement.

Re:games like this make me wish...

[MikeBabcock]

If you enjoy plot-oriented platformers, may I also recomment Jak 2 & 3 and Tak as well.

Fun games, deecent graphics (especially Jak).

Another fantastic front page review

[Anonymous Coward]

FFS, can we keep these fucking 8/10 reviews to games only. Ok so we know you have money to piss away on obscure games.

OBPennyArcade

[schon]

http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php?date=2005-10- 21&res=l

Re:OBPennyArcade

[Anonymous Coward]

More Ob:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php?date=2001-09- 28&res=l

Honestly, that's one of my all time favorite PA comics.

Re:OBPennyArcade

[wossName]

And the rest:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php?date=2001-07- 23

http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php?date=2001-12- 24&res=l

ugh... the "art" of videogames

[fightzombies]

I am really sick of game reviewers writing sentences like "Shadow of the Colossus, then, pushes the edge of the art form that is the videogame." about videogames. I wish people would stop looking at art-house style gaming as the only way in which the "art of videogames" can be legitimately applied. Is there really no art to Halo 2? GTA? WoW? Sure those games are commercial, but only calling highly stylized ICO-esque forms of gaming art cheapens the notion of art because it promotes a narrowly construed definition, which has never been what art was about. I just woke up. If you can follow what I just said, give yourself 10 extra credit points.

Re:ugh... the "art" of videogames

[Carbon Copied]

I agree with this guy on the whole "IT LOOKS DIFFERENT SO IT MUST BE ART" attitude that alot of people have but in truth I havn't seen a game that could be classed as true art, but games aren't just about art, it's about PLAYING the game (CS, Quake 3, Zero Hour) or experiencing a different world (HL2, Halo, Baldurs Gate) with plenty of cross over in between. Most art is about evoking emotion or opinion. Not many games do that, sure, you get the "BAN THIS SICK FILTH" over GTA games, but its the equivelant of the shock tactic modern art that just tries to get discussed on its shock factor rather than its artistic content (not that GTA is trying to be art).

Re:ugh... the "art" of videogames

[raygundan]

I thought that it was widely acknowledged that the games you mention have greatly pushed the art of videogames, although there is some contention over whether Halo 2 really does anything new besides bringing the internet-multiplayer FPS to consoles. Nobody would argue that Bungie's history doesn't include some innovative story-driven FPSes, though. GTA ushered in the open-ended environment, and WoW made some strides in making the grindy MMO world more user-friendly.

If you've missed the praise for GTA's contributions, you've been reading a different universe of game reviews than I have. I think you're seeing an insult where there isn't one.

Re:ugh... the "art" of videogames

[EasyT]

You say that we cheapen the notion of art when we promote a narrowly construed definition, but is it not an overly broad definition of art that really cheapens the term? If we're quick to ascribe the term "art" to all video games, who will then care if we point to any particular game and say "that, like all the others, is also art"?

It's like someone pointed to the Mona Lisa and said "What a work of art!" and you retorted "Man, it really irks me when someone singles out that kind of painting as the only sort which the term 'art of painting' can be legitimately applied. Are not [insert mass produced prints] also art?" Sure, you'd be technically correct in a 'what is art?' sense, but really, who cares?

The whole point is that Shadow is a game of exceptional presentation and uncommon visual splendor (especially by PS2 standards). If it's fair to call any PS2 game a work of art, it's Shadow.

Ill-Prepared Review

[Anonymous Coward]

A couple of things jumped out at me , having finished the game through twice now; not sure if the reviewer had played the game through for any purpose but finishing it as fast as possible.

1) You only spur your horse on if you need to achieve very high levels of speed, otherwise just HOLD down X, and Agro will maintain a permenent gallop. There's a couple of sections of travel I doubt you could have completed without realising this.

2) The Collosi don't have one magical weak spot, they have many - and several of them require you to make wounds in multiple points to down the Colossi.

3) Several of the later Collosi are not much bigger than the player themselves. Also "all have a slow and graceful majesty"; y'know except for the little ones that run a hundred miles and hour and tear you apart in a ten twentiths of a second.

4) You have camera control, if the view sucks it's your own fault.

Re:Ill-Prepared Review

[ChaosDiscord]

4) You have camera control, if the view sucks it's your own fault.

No.

Demanding that the player to do camera control is a cop-out. For the majority of players the camera should Just Work. When I'm running around, trying to avoid getting stomped by the colossus, I have better things to do that fiddle with the camera. When I'm trying to line up an arrow shot quickly after running away from the colossus, I need it to Just Work. And cameras should never clip into objects. That's just sloppy.

SotC is still a great game, but the camera work could be better. To be fair, the particular style of gameplay is pretty unique, there isn't much prior art to examine to figure out how to do the camera. Automatic cameras are hard. Lots of games in well explored genres still get bad cameras (Super Mario 64 managed to get the camera almost perfect, why do so many platformers get it wrong?). I have sympathy for SotC's developers.

Re:Ill-Prepared Review

[nakedsushi]

I found out that L1 works wonders when paired up with the bow and arrow. L1 will target the colossus, and after that all you need to do is shoot that arrow.

Re:Ill-Prepared Review

[Max Nugget]

4) You have camera control, if the view sucks it's your own fault.

SOTC has some camera issues that are the fault of the developers, and some camera issues that are simply the result of players not having fully adjusted to the learning curve for the game's controls and camera dynamics.

Firstly this game is such an amazing accomplishment that I cringe at "faulting" the developers for anything. These are REALLY nitpicks AFAIK.

But getting back to the user learning curve, I've noticed that there seems to be a certain biased mentality that gamers have nowadays. See, many games (indeed, many of the "best" games) tend to have a certain learning curve for controlling the main character. It's almost to be expected. And if you're on Level 3 but your mastery of the controls is still around level 1, then it's not really fair to complain and say "the controls suck." It's inherent in the way some people play games, that, once they figure out how to use the controls "well enough," they stop exploring and trying to further master the controls. That's all fine and good, but you can't expect the game to be "fully playable and annoyance-free" at whatever arbitrary point you individually decided to stop improving your understanding of the controls.

Now, having noted that, I think most gamers more or less understand the above premise, and "get" that if you only master the controls 50%, it may have a negative impact on your experience.

So my question is, why are the camera controls not held to the same standard????

"I don't have time to worry about the camera when I'm controlling the main character."

This sounds like a severe, if not absurd, overreaction to a minor nitpick. One of the biggest benefits that came with the advent of 3D gaming was an unlimited range of visual possibilities. You can't expect to have your own persoanl, unique visual tour of a 3D world if you're not willing to control the camera. But, more obviously, the same argument used to apply to FPS games. Prior to Quake, no one really had much interest in controlling the camera separate from the character. It was always fixed relative to the character. Then Quake came along and the benefits of taking explicit control of the camera became obvious (i don't mean for strafing, i mean the ability to freely look around, up/down, etc). Mastering the keyboard/mouse combo was a new "skill" players had to learn, but their gameplay experience suffered greatly if they didn't, and benefitted substantially if they did.

In the world of third-person shooters, the same reasoning should apply. Personally I found that most of the issues I had with the camera were moot by the later stages of the game, as I was more familiar with SOTC's particular camera dynamics. They even let you adjust the camera speed in the options menu.

Re:Ill-Prepared Review

[Anonymous Coward]

to 1). i just finished the game without realizing that, i've been tapping it all the time. i'll keep this in mind next time through though :)

Re:Ill-Prepared Review

[Froobly]

4) You have camera control, if the view sucks it's your own fault.

You had me until here. You have camera control, except for when you don't. The game grabs control away from you for split seconds at a time, causing your controls to become misaligned and making you screw up jumps in midair in the worst cases. If you ever do anything significant, the camera swings around, and sometimes gets stuck behind something. This is mostly beyond your control, although if you're psychic, you can anticipate it and counteract the camera's movement. It's still very hard, and saying you have camera control is very misleading.

Re:Ill-Prepared Review

[Anonymous Slacker]

So far, the insistance of the game to reposition the camera at an awkward moment is my only grip with the game as well.
I am still fairly early on in the game (up to colossus #4), but this is already very evident. Such as when trying to lure the colossus into position, I stop moving for 3 seconds with the camera aligned for best viewing, then it swings the view around behind my character and completely away from the colossus, simply because I stopped touching the controls for too long.

8/10 or 10/10?

[oGMo]

• Reviewer: Zonk
• Score: 8/10

...[much later]...

Shadow is a 10/10 in my book, and easily the best gaming experience the end of the year has to offer.

I think this proves, once and for all, that the editors don't read the articles on slashdot: even the ones they're in the middle of writing. :-)

(This is a joke, I have nothing against slashdot editors. This is actually a fairly decent review, and I'm glad it's not nearly as gushy and ridiculous as, say, IGN's.)

Pretty Accurate

[robbway]

I've finished SotC the first time thru. Yes, you can continue! You can also try hard mode where the Colossi react more quickly and violently. This review is dead-on. As for the flaws, here's my rundown:
1) Game occasionally crashes (depends on which PS2 you're running--I'm using the original model).
2) Levels-of-detail "pops" at close range. Ideally, these should happen where you can't see it.
3) Some textures aren't anti-aliased.
4) Small color palette, mostly browns and greens.

Oddly enough, I don't think the camera is a problem. I think they left the control as it was because you get better and better at using the camera during battles. Of course, it also cut development time to leave it as-is. The "behind" view and zoom are instrumental. There's also Agro-view. If you call Agro and hold the X button, the camera will look directly at him. If you're battling a Colossus where Agro can't go, you will look directly at the Colossus!

Despite the game is really only 16 boss battles, the entire experience is fun, beautiful, and a bit scary. The sense of large-Colossus and small-hero is done well, right down the the inertia of the huge things. The goal of the game is really to discover what the heck killing these colossi is actually accomplishing.

Overall, a great game that would be even better using another video processor. Always save at the closest altar before attacking the Colossus. It will save you time. I can't wait to see a speed run of this game.

Re:Pretty Accurate

[nintendo_is_a_cereal]

Out of curiousity why do you rate the small color palette as a flaw? From my understanding it's a stylistic decision. The color palette was chosen to help give a certain feel to the world. I think for the fairy taleish setting of the game the limited color palette works marvelously.

Re:Pretty Accurate

[Scrameustache]

As for the flaws, here's my rundown:
[...]
4) Small color palette, mostly browns and greens.

That's not a flaw, that's an artistic choice.

Re:Pretty Accurate

[Have Blue]

Got to disagree with point 4- the color pallet is clearly a deliberate aesthetic decision, not the result of a technological limit. It gives the wasteland its character as a place where no human has ever set foot for a tremendously long time, where life is just barely holding on as small animals and straggly grass, and I think it fits the rest of the game very well.

Also, saving at altars isn't really that important- if you fail a colossus fight, you just go back to the moment you first saw it, so you don't really lose that much time.

Re:Pretty Accurate

[Morinaga]

It's called the "linear effect". They are game review staples that may never die. "It was a great game if not a bit too linear and the color pallette was too limited for my liking". I think it's written without really thinking about it. The fact that linear gaming and a limited color scheme might actually be a good thing just doesn't hold to popular critisms. We really haven't move far beyond Quake 2 vs. Half-Life debate jargon perhaps.

mainstream coverage

[Gurgeh15]

I don't think much of the art form debate either. Up here in Canada the Globe and Mail ran a good review today, which just called it a work of art and got on with it... http://www.globetechnology.com/servlet/story/RTGAM .20051104.gtgaming04/BNStory/AtPlay/

How is this off topic?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is just pointing out flaws with the review, using FACTs from the game. It is dead on topic!

Re:Why should we care about a Sony product right n

[Toddarooski]

Because if we could only review games made for consoles that WEREN'T produced by heartless evil corporations, we'd be left with... uh... Word Challenge for the Tapwave Zodiac.

This one?

[Grendel Drago]

Prince of Persia 3D?

Re:This one?

[Blakey Rat]

Yeah. It really, really sucked. It's best to forget it existed and focus on Sands of Time. ;)

OBCtrl+Alt+Del

[Scrameustache]

http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/?t=archives&date= 2005-10-31
: )

Re:OBCtrl+Alt+Del

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought the Funny modifier usually went towards posts that were, well, humorous.

Something Ctrl-Alt-Del has not been in quite a while.

elaborate please!

[leather_helmet]

I think I know which company youre referring to, but im not sure ;)

yeah it's an arty game.. but

[kinglink]

Most game players should avoid this game, it's not radically hard, it's just beautifully done. Don't expect too much random killing, it's more about the journey then the destination, but overall it's a near perfect game, that proves games can be art.

Overall though this is one game that will just floor you with presentation to the point that you'll just ride instead of going to the next colossi. and that's not a bad thing either, there's a good variety in area, and it feels pretty beautiful.

Re:yeah it's an arty game.. but

[nintendo_is_a_cereal]

I disagree. I think anyone who is more than passively interested in games should play this game. This is the kind of game that moves games to the next level of emotional entertainment. So what if there isn't random killing? Plenty of games have been successful without massive violence. Actually rereading your post, most of your points seem to contradict your original statement...

Re:yeah it's an arty game.. but

[xiao_haozi]

I think nintendo is right on here.... I think it takes a truly amazing game to present the gamer with more than random fragging. True to fact that some gamers might not enjoy a game where it is more about the experience and majesty of the realm of the game and rather find themselves stealing cars or hitting monsters with energy guns. I enjoy this as much as the next person. But I find a games such as ico and SotC to be a truly refreshing experience that pulls me away from worlds that are tangible to me and can take me to adventures far away where i can simply enjoy being in these magical places. Simple- yes....but I personally find this to be just what I need.

Re:yeah it's an arty game.. but

[kinglink]

out of most of my friends when I told them about the game the common answers I got was

"What there's only 16 monsters?"

"what it's all bosses"

"what else is there to do?"

"What weapons do you get"

Now a couple of them have got it and like the game but the rest just don't see the majestic part of the game. Something like GTA appeals to a large segment of gamers, there's accomplishment, random dicking around and just basically enjoyable stuff. This game how if your interested in random acts of violence or anything out side the art, or the majesty, will miss the point of the game.

I'd love if this game is considered one of the best game ever, but it will never get that way, it'll be popular, but popular in the same way something like American Beauty is appreciated (even though that movie was meh to me), not the same way that Star Wars is appreciated by fans.

Re:yeah it's an arty game.. but

[killmenow]

out of most of my friends...

I suspect most of your friends are under the age of 18.

Re:yeah it's an arty game.. but

[nintendo_is_a_cereal]

That's too bad, I played the game for a lot of people and most asked similar questions, but when they saw those Colossi they were just floored. And it seemed like everyone instinctively wanted to throw out suggestions on how to approach the fight, or what sorts of things to try. None of them really experienced the story segments, but the gameplay and graphics drew people in.

Art vs. Craft vs. Modern Art

[Valdrax]

I guess the fundamental question is, "What is Art?"

Art, as most people would definite it, must:
1) Show great skill at creating beauty.
2) Inspire a deep emotion and introspection.

Craft is merely having #1 without #2, and most people would critique much of modern art as not being art because it frequently only attempts #2 without attempting #1.

GTA is an example of good Craftsmanship, but not good Art. It doesn't really try to inspire you or challenge you mentally and emotionally. The setting for Halo 2 and WoW might construe Art when you stop and pause just to look around, breathless at how good the worlds look, but Shadow of the Colossus is just on a different level in the way it inspires a sense of wonder at the majesty of the world.

Re:Art vs. Craft vs. Modern Art

[ChaosDiscord]

Art, as most people would definite it, must:
1) Show great skill at creating beauty.
2) Inspire a deep emotion and introspection.

That's a harsh definition. You might get people to agree to it because on the surface it seems reasonable, but in practice it will exclude lots of things people would certainly call art. So if you are just pretty good, not great, you can't create art? Similarlly, if I have, say, a painting that I find exceptionally beautiful and skillfully created, but it fails to inspire deep emotion (I suppose it makes me happy, but that's hardly deep emotion) or any sort of introspection, it's not art.

I think most of us live in a world were Art includes a six year old's crayon drawing on the fridge is art (if not particularlly skilled art), a teenager's angst filled poem on how hard their life is. Our Art includes the Mona Lisa (which is skilled, but pretty dull), Thomas Kinkade (*sigh*), and even those kitten-hanging-from-a-branch posters. Scott McCloud's definition that art is anything not directly related to survival or reproduction is flawed, but seems more on the mark than your proposal.

Re:Art vs. Craft vs. Modern Art

[ChaosDiscord]

GTA is an example of good Craftsmanship, but not good Art. It doesn't really try to inspire you or challenge you mentally and emotionally.

My experience with Grand Theft Auto 3 and Grand Theft Auto: Vice City are too far back, but looking at GTA: San Andreas, I certainly felt challenged mentally and emotionally. Key themes in SA included community, loyalty, and maturity. That the protagonist, CJ, left SA to try and escape the problems is a big deal. His return (the start of the game) is similarlly important. CJ is called to return to his community, to support it. It's a calling that he is uncertain about; he tries to avoid making a decision. Several of his community prove to be betrayers, leading to a spread of drug addiction. As things get CJ, CJ is drawn to an easier life as a big name criminal. But ultimately the game comes full circle. CJ's brother points out that CJ can't run away forever and CJ returns to his home neighborhood to try and set things right. While ultimately the community in question focused on a gang, the gang placed a great deal of importance on their neighbors and their neighborhood.

Was it perfect? No. Did having a built-in dating simulator (with hidden sex simulator) really help with the emotion and introspection? Heck, no. But when CJ observed his friend betraying him, it was an emotionally powerful moment. I certainly considered how fragments our society has become, that community is a no longer held as important. Add in the obvious skill in creating the beauty of the game and you've got a very solid example of art by your definition.

(My apologies for two replies.)

I think you missed the point

[Allaran]

MINOR ICO SPOILER ALERT

Ummm...actually, she did talk to you. She just spoke a language that the character did not understand. This was conveyed by odd symbols instead of the English captions (at least in the English version) that you saw when the boy spoke. That was actually part of the mystery in the game for me. The boy was compelled to help her based only on her situation and reactions, rather than her saying, "Help! Get me out of here!" In fact, I'm quite sure that was a deliberate choice on the part of the makers of the game.

As for story/plot, I admit it was not filled with lots of exposition, but to me, there was quite a bit of story that you inferred from the game play. The moment of separation that you have at the bridge about half way thru was one of the more emotional moments I've experienced in a video game. It was similar to the experience of playing Myst, where the story unfolds subtly during the game, rather than being spoon-fed to you. My guess is that the parent hated Myst as well. Perhaps it's a style the parent doesn't enjoy...I personally don't get a lot out of the twitch-style FPS's. I found the original Doom rather dull, though I enjoyed Half-life because it did have a story that you gleaned from the gameplay.

Re:I think you missed the point

[CMDR Wolf]

"Ummm...actually, she did talk to you. She just spoke a language that the character did not understand. This was conveyed by odd symbols instead of the English captions (at least in the English version) that you saw when the boy spoke. That was actually part of the mystery in the game for me. The boy was compelled to help her based only on her situation and reactions, rather than her saying, "Help! Get me out of here!" In fact, I'm quite sure that was a deliberate choice on the part of the makers of the game."

There were 2 versions of the game, an NTSC and a PAL release. A little known fact by those who played the original NTSC version is that the PAL version was slightly enhanced featuring AI, self preservation and path finding enhancements for Yorda, your female companion. More interestingly, the dialog Yorda speaks, which is subtitled to alien symbols during your first playthrough, is translated into English on the 2nd playthrough.

Gamefaqs should have several FAQs for the game covering the dialog in case anyone is interested.

Re:I think you missed the point

[Deadguy2322]

There are actually THREE versions, the Japanese and European releases being the same, except for the language, the North American version missing a semi-hidden weapon in one area, not having the subtitles for Yorda on a second try and with really shitty cover art, as usual.

Excellent review

[Winterblink]

Right on par with basically what Gamespot says.

I recently picked this one up, and I have to say that even with the odd graphical oddness it's amazingly BEAUTIFUL to play. I brought down one colossus last night, believe it or not it took almost an hour to figure out how to get at the weak part. The thing was literally the size of a skyscraper, smashing a club/sword thing the size of a building down at me.

Nothing will prepare you for battles of this scale. Every fight is truly epic.

All you do is kill Colossi

[Serff]

I just bought this game and defeted 3 Colossi so far and I'm a bit disapointed in the game. All the reviews I read were giving it stunning remarks. But as I play, I'm bored already. All you do is go from the temple place and kill a Colossi, then back to the temple, kill another. All the while it takes you 10 minutes to ride your horse to the next one. Just seems like the game has no other point. They should have put some other enemies in the world for you to mess with on the way...I dunno...maybe I had the wrong idea about what the game was, but that is my take on it from playing it for 3 hours so far...Am I wrong??

Re:All you do is kill Colossi

[xero314]

You are absolutly correct. All you do is travel and kill colossi. That is the premise of the game, and it works. I liked the game, even if it don't really meet my expectation. After the 6th colossi or so I couldn't even tell you why but I was compelled to continue playing. Spend some time just looking around the world. enjoy it. Mindless killing on your way to and from the objective is just a way to make a game seem longer than it really is. SoC is exactly what it says it is and it does it right.

RE: horny youth out to rescue a princess...

[dbdweeb]

Now there's a timeless theme I can identify with. But the question is, "Does she really want to be rescued?" Yes, yes, oh YES!!!

correction

[blueskatz]

Every Colossus is different, though they all share similar qualities. First and foremost is their size.

Not true - while most of them are huge, a few of them are quite small. There are two that are only about the size of a car, and another is about the size of a bus.

A fisking!

[Anonymous Coward]

Being honest is hard.

No, being honest is the easiest thing in the world. You just have to say what you think, which is a skill so innate that most of us are taught not to do it. (I say "most of us are taught" because a depressingly large number of people seem never to have learned.)

Personal opinions and experiences color everything we do, we can't do anything about it.

That's a run-on sentence. I think you meant to use a semicolon in place of that wildly inappropriate comma. But aside from that, it's also a blatant contradiction of the sentence immediately preceding it. Being honest is easy specifically because it's hard to set aside our opinions.

75% of what I'm thinking abot when I write a review is trying to be objective and come at the game from the opinion of "everybody".

Wow. Where do I even begin? First of all, you never, ever begin a sentence with a numeral; always spell out numbers that begin sentences, or rewrite to start the sentence with another word. Second, the percent sign is never used except in tabular presentations; in prose, always spell out "percent." Third, never use idiomatic or hyperbolic expressions containing the word "percent." Phrases like "110 percent" are hyperbolic and should be avoided; phrases like the one you used here imply a degree of precision greater than what you actually intend to denote. You should have said "Most of what I'm thinking about."

Of course, the whole damn sentence should have been rewritten, because it's embarrassingly awkward and ineffective. If you'd written a better sentence, maybe you wouldn't have made the amateurish mistake of putting a terminal punctuation mark outside a closing quote.

Taking into account the technical problems knocks the game down from a 9 to an 8, which was what I was going to give it until I found myself swimming upside down and drowing. :)

This non sequitur comes on so hard it poses a distinct whiplash hazard for the reader; a warning should be attached to the beginning of this paragraph advising pregnant women and people with heart conditions from reading it.

Again we see Zonk's troubles with numerals. Numbers less than ten are never written as numerals; they are always spelled out. Round numbers greater than ten can either be written as numerals or spelled out. ("Ten," "a hundred," "a million.") In this sentence, "nine" and "eight" should have been written rather than being shown as numerals.

The "which was" construction is problematic for inexperienced writers; we see why very clearly in this sentence. The antecedent of the "which was" construction must immediately precede it in the sentence; otherwise the "which was" phrase dangles and the meaning of the sentence is unclear. In this case, Zonk meant to say that he intended to give the game a score of nine until he experienced a frustrating aquatic interlude that inspired him to give the game a lower score. What he actually said is that he was going to give the game a lower score until his disorienting experience provoked a higher one. Because his modifier dangled, the meaning of the sentence was not merely lost, but actually contradicted.

That said, objectivity is not the only goal of a review.

The use of "that said" is another minefield for the inexperienced writer. One uses "that said" to introduce a seeming contradiction. "I buy floor wax at Costco. That said, I disagree with the company's hiring policies." Using "that said" without first making a point leads to reader confusion. Zonk had not established his point before acknowledging that he was about to contradict it. The net result is that the reader is confused at best. At worst, the reader is so frustrated that he simply gives up and stops reading.

If he had organized his first paragraph differently, "that said" could have been used to great effect. For example: "Until I discovered the swimming glitch, I was going to give the game a high score. I had t

Re:A fisking!

[brkello]

You have serious problems. Communication through words can not be perfect. Obeying all your stupid rules does not change this. If you don't agree with something he has to say about the game, that's great. Say how he is wrong. A post like yours is pointless and petty. Who cares if he begins a sentence with a numeral? A tiny percentage of the anal world. You write well...put it to good use rather than just being a pompous ass.

Re:A fisking!

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only did you leave out a necessary hyphen between 'well' and 'constructed'

You don't put a hyphen between adverb and adjective.

the whole purpose of language is to communicate ideas

Zonk's post didn't, for the reasons that the OP described.

One does not become a good reader or writer by adhering blindly to grammar rules

Yes, one does. That's how you get to be a good writer. Once you're a good writer, you can ignore the rules when the situation requires it. Hint: the situation never requires it.

ICO's Ending Theme

[Dante Shamest]

I've never played ICO, but I've become a fan of the game's music. The ending theme, You Were There, is especially soft and sweet. And yes, the person singing it is male. You can check out the lyrics here.

10/10 on the bottom?

[addbo]

I'm confused... the review score is 8/10... but at the end of the whole spiel he gives it a 10/10 saying it's one of the best offerings for the PS2 this year... which is it?

Re:10/10 on the bottom?

[vsprintf]

10/10. Trust me. Well, I haven't played it yet, but I will. ;) (Just kidding, but these are the same people who made Ico, and that's a great recommendation - and I will play it once I get to the store and buy it.)

Enough

[Anonymous Coward]

Enough of the game reviews Zonk, no one cares.

Awesome

[gmurray]

I've only beaten three so far, I just got it last night, but this game is absolutely breathtaking. I gasped aloud when I jumped on the horse the first time and I wasn't controlling the horse but rather nudging it toward where I wanted to go. It was so much more like riding a real horse than standard video game horse control that it took me a moment to recover from the experience. An interesting note is that this game must have some very interesting technical underpinnings. It does a lot of motion blur and level of detail changes to try and puch as complex geometry into the scenes as possible. I think when the motion blur is concerned they are pulling neat tricks like not clearing out the entire screen buffer and just redrawing some of the closer objects more often than the distance objects or something. You can see it most when you whip the camera around quickly. The best part of this game for me though, other than the collosal (literally) enemies, the awesome draw distance, and the excellent concept and play mechanics, is the animation. The animation is just drop dead excellent. Down to the point where your character has to adjust his gait from a running jump to catch his balance on landing. I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn if a lot of this was AI driven, where his animation is guided by the collisions he is making with the environment, gravity's direction (important when you are scaling a collosus), and the state of all his limbs at the time. In other words, when they were putting this all together, they didn't cut all the usual corners, and it REALLY shows.

What's the point of all the killing?????

[cecirdr]

I'm afraid I don't understand all the hoo haa about this game. So...someone that I know is "dead?" and I'm supposed to go kill 16 other beings because she might revive? Why in the world would I go kill 16 beings because one being is dead? ....especially since (according to some reviews I've read) many of the colossi aren't aggressive toward me at all until I attack them. So I'm supposed to wander around and provoke fights with creatures so I can kill them....because *sob* someone I know is dead? Perhaps, after the fact, I'll find out that they colossi were really "bad guys", but I don't know many people who would kill as a preemptive strike. They want proof first that someone is a "bad guy". How many people would head out on a killing mission just because they're told to do so...because someone they know is dead? (yeah..I know...it's just a game) Anyway....the gameplay might be awesome, but what's the rationale for doing any of it in the first place?

Re:What's the point of all the killing?????

[Anonymous Coward]

That would be the plot of the game. To tell you would be to reveal the entire emotional ending sequence. You'll have to play it and decide for yourself.

Re:What's the point of all the killing?????

[cecirdr]

Argh...I hate it when people rave about a game...and I want to want it...but I just can't make myself get into the premise of killing with no motive. I guess I take games too seriously. But I just can't see any logic in killing 16 people (colossi) because you want one person (who's already dead) to live again. 16 lives for 1 life??? I still don't get it.

Re:What's the point of all the killing?????

[Anonymous Coward]

You've obviously never lost someone close to you....

Re:What's the point of all the killing?????

[dbug78]

as is mentioned in several reviews, you're supposed to feel that way. the game is meant to have players questioning their actions and asking themselves who the villain really is.

Re:What's the point of all the killing?????

[cecirdr]

Yes I have...grandfather...shot in the back. Two wrongs don't make a right. I still don't get why people would head out to got kill something that they have no beef with.

Re:What's the point of all the killing?????

[cecirdr]

Why do I want to feel like a villan or a schumck?? I aleady know by my internal moral compass that I'd feel it's wrong to kill something that is not doing me any harm. Much less to kill 16 somethings because I'm so upset that a person I love is dead. So I want her back...but there's no way I'd feel justified in killing 16 creatures that are doing me no harm just because I'm in grief. I still don't get it.

Re:What's the point of all the killing?????

[SirSlud]

Well then I have something for you; real life. But movies, books, and games to a lesser degree challenge you because they make you understand somebody ELSES choices, not yours.

Its called empathy, sheesh.

Ill-Prepared Critique of the Ill-Prepared Review

[Miniluv]

1) It's a review, not the user manual. Yes he was slightly factually incorrect, but so what? 2) Its a review, not a strategy guide. I figured some of the Colossi had more than one weak spot, its a natural direction for the design to go, but it wouldn't contribute much of anything to the review to mention this. 3) You mean half a second? Didn't you learn to reduce all fractions in grade school? 4) I'm willing to bet the camera occasionally moves on its own, or Zonk wouldn'tve had the problems he had. This is a common failing of games, even those which allow camera control, and I'm glad he mentioned it.

I loved Ico, but...

[metamatic]

I was hoping for such great things from this game. I loved Ico, it's one of those games I haven't resold because it's such a work of art.

Unfortunately...I hate boss fights. Hate hate hate. They are the lamest, most overdone cliché in the video game world.

Give me exploration. Give me puzzles. Give me suspense, fear, foreboding, thought-provoking scenarios, convoluted plots, mysteries. Don't give me some humongous robot killing machine and tell me I have to hack at it repeatedly with a small pointy thing. Grr.

Somebody obviously loves boss fights, because it seems like games are heading that way. "Ratchet: Deadlocked" apparently dispenses with the beautiful and interesting environments that made that game series so great, in favor of non-stop arena combat and boss fights. I guess combat is cheaper than having to come up with a world that's complex enough to be interesting.

Re:I loved Ico, but...

[Yoyoson]

Through some level of miscommunication, you have gotten the wrong idea about this game. I just beat it, and I highly recommend it. Nearly everything you are asking for is actually present in this game, to some extent.

Unfortunately...I hate boss fights. Hate hate hate. They are the lamest, most overdone cliché in the video game world.

The "boss fights" are not the boss fights from your run-of-the-mill 3D action platformer. These battles are puzzles. Each colossus can be killed with no more than 5 or 6 stabs with your sword. The challenge is in positioning yourself to deal those deadly blows. I would say that quick, action-game reflexes are necessary in TWO of the sixteen battles. There is at least one place in every battle where you can stay safely out of harm's way while you ponder your next move. If the battle requires you to shoot the colossus in the eye before it blinks or jump into position before he moves, then the game gives you ample time to do so.

Give me exploration.

The land of the colossi is an amalgam of deserts, rainforests, lakes, plains, caves, cliffs, natural rock bridges, dead cities, temples, and dungeons. One of the great things about this game is taking in the sights around as you go off in hunt of the next colossus.

Give me puzzles.

As I said, the battles are more like puzzles than they are like boss fights. I was watching, waiting, and thinking rather than jumping, shooting, or reacting.

Give me suspense, fear, foreboding, thought-provoking scenarios, convoluted plots, mysteries.

The suspense and mystery lie in the secret of the colossi and their purpose. The fear comes from facing your first few colossi. Foreboding comes from watching oily black tentacles shoot out of each defeated colossus and then infest themselves in the main character's body. This happens with every colossus and is not explained until the end. The game is thought-provoking in that it makes you question the ethics of seeking out and killing these colossi, some of which are completely non-aggressive. Admittedly, the plot is fairly simply and non-convoluted; however, this allows the player to focus squarely on the gameplay.

Don't give me some humongous robot killing machine and tell me I have to hack at it repeatedly with a small pointy thing. Grr.

Many of the colossi have fleshy areas that you can stab and damage and that aren't covered with magical pressure points. You can stab these places repeatedly, but eventually the colossus will stop taking damage from it. With this particular design choice, the creators say to the gamer, "Yes, your efforts are not fruitless. You have dealt some damage to the colossus and you have certainly garnered its attention. But I don't want you to think that this is a solution to the puzzle that I've laid out before you." So give it another chance, and perhaps read this review written by "The Fly" over at Gamerswithjobs. He has an interesting take on what makes the game so unique, in comparison to everything else out there right now.

Don't buy this game.

[pumpkin eater]

Let me start by saying I am a HUGE fan of Ico. (It is the ONLY game so far that I flat out REFUSE to sell back to the used game store) So you could imagine my excitement about Shadow of the Colossus. Well, let me tell ya, it only took an hour of play time before I bolted out of my house with the game and traded this dud back at the used game store. The sales guy at the used game store wasn't all that surprised. He told me that many others had returned the game saying that it flat out sucked. This was mere days after it was released.

You know, sometimes you hope that something like Ico was made because someone truly cared and took the time to do the right thing. Well, if Shadow of the Colusses is any indication the team who brought you Ico's either been tainted beyond all hope thanks to all the critical hype or the magic of Ico was just a fluke never to be repeated again, at least not by the well meaning but probably clueless individuals who brought it to you.

So definitely don't listen to the critics who adore this so called gem. It's a cubic zerconia at best, not the diamond they're making it out to be. :p

Re:Don't buy this game.

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks for all the in-depth rationale and well thought out reasons for why the game is so terrible.

True work of art

[Jare]

I make games, I love games, and I've enjoyed many games with beautiful art, intelligent gameplay and/or compelling atmosphere. That said, ICO and now Shadow of the Colossus are in their own league as far as delivering a whole emotional experience. I've saved countless princess in as many games, but ICO was the first to make me FEEL like a hero.

Not that great

[TurboStar]

Sony sent me a demo of this game. The controls are overly complicated and the analog stick are scaled wrong. Movement is realistic but the scenery is lacking the detail needed to feel immersed. I got to the first colossus and spent like 10 minutes running around in circles trying to affect the colossus in every way I could imagine. Finally a little hint popped up that wasn't helpful. Then another hint showed up a few minutes later that made no sense -- probably assuming I took some kind of action on the first hint. I suppose it might be a good game if you got into it but I gave up. After spending the first half hour riding a horse and climbing a cliff without seeing a single enemy and then another half hour scratching me head trying to solve the puzzle of killing the colossus I got bored.

It's possible the demo was bugged. It's also possible I missed a hint, power-up, or something else. Hey, I might even be a moron. Regardless, the developers didn't make my first hour with the game enjoyable so there's not much point in continuing to play it.

Re:Not that great

[Anonymous Coward]

Seconding this. The demo I got of this is absolutely awful.

OBPenisBird

[Anonymous Coward]

  < )
  ( \
   X
8====D

http://smoke.rotten.com/bird/

Buy the strategy guide here!

[Anonymous Coward]

You can buy the strategy guide here: Shadow of the Colossus Official Strategy Guide. And if you use the "secret" A9.com discount, you can save an extra 1.57%!

Mind control.

[Fantastic Lad]

So I'm supposed to wander around and provoke fights with creatures so I can kill them....because *sob* someone I know is dead? Perhaps, after the fact, I'll find out that they colossi were really "bad guys", but I don't know many people who would kill as a preemptive strike. They want proof first that someone is a "bad guy". How many people would head out on a killing mission just because they're told to do so...because someone they know is dead?

I stopped playing video games a long time ago exactly because of such attitudes.

Looking at international policy these days, I see little contradiction between what we're being told to do as a nation, and what we're being fed through our 'entertainment'.

I remember when the most popular video games were abstract adventures about eating dots or jumping over mushrooms. The more I was being asked to adopt a perspective of sociopathy, the less I played until the point where I found I had given up altogether on games.

So long as one's desire to listen to intuition remains stronger than the desire to listen to one's pleasure centers, mind control will fail.

-FL

Re:But... (launch dates if interested)

[Anonymous Coward]

From www.gamefaqs.com:

    "The American's launch date [for the PS2] was on the 26 October 2000"

    "ICO SCEA 09/24/01 US"

Looks like the sort of launch "window" we might be seeing with the XBox 360 :P

Re:But... (launch dates if interested)

[RoadDoggFL]

Seriously. I don't remember the first time I saw the term "launch window" used, but I do remember that it pissed me off.

Oh well, I'm sure they're both great games but I have enough on my plate that I've been neglecting for far too long.

UK Release

[Robmonster]

Any chance of seeing this in the UK without having to import?

Re:UK Release

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup, along with a re-release of ICO.

See here.

Let's not be so harsh on bricks...

[PavementPizza]

the usability of a brick-bricks are quite usable! You pick it up, and you throw it hard.

Re:Let's not be so harsh on bricks...

[KDR_11k]

Yes but can you install Linux on a brick?

This game makes you think

[Scrameustache]

So...someone that I know is "dead?" and I'm supposed to go kill 16 other beings because she might revive? Why in the world would I go kill 16 beings because one being is dead? ....especially since (according to some reviews I've read) many of the colossi aren't aggressive toward me at all until I attack them. So I'm supposed to wander around and provoke fights with creatures so I can kill them....because *sob* someone I know is dead? Perhaps, after the fact, I'll find out that they colossi were really "bad guys", but I don't know many people who would kill as a preemptive strike. They want proof first that someone is a "bad guy". How many people would head out on a killing mission just because they're told to do so...because someone they know is dead? (yeah..I know...it's just a game) Anyway....the gameplay might be awesome, but what's the rationale for doing any of it in the first place?

I'm in the middle of playing it, and I sorta feel bad everytime I kill a collossus.
The cutscenese when they die really make it sad, too... the music, the way it's shown.

And I'm loving it. What other game makes you think about these things? Can't think of one right now...

The motivation is love, BTW, you don't personally care because she's dead when the game start, but your character cares, he cares enough to fight stone giants for her... that says a lot about how motivated he is. Have you ever played Risk and thought about all those lil' soldiers you're killing with those dice throws? Ever played Street Fighter and felt bad about travelling the world, kicking the shit out of people? Ever feel any remorse for shooting all those germans in various FPS? Those soldiers just wanted to defend the fatherland, they didn't ask for some G.I. to come and snipe them in the 'nads! No?

I think that it's incredible that this game makes me feel ambiguous about killing giant monsters... think about it, those temples, those bridges... they are human size, the Collossi didn't build them... where are the people who did? Could you live in a place where giants stomp around? Some of them don't notice you until you climb them, but others try to kill you as soon as you get near them.

Re:This game makes you think

[cecirdr]

Thanks. Your comment makes sense to me. It doesn't make me want to play the game (though I still want to want it), but I understand better. I don't think I used to care much about games like you mentioned. It was just a game..a venue to strategize or experience something different from real life. But I think I must be changing. All of a sudden (in the last year), I'm starting to need motivation...a reason to kill in these games. (Perhaps it's because graphics have gotten so good that you now see emotions on faces??) I play RPGs too...and I'm even getting tired of the killing in those....tons of baddies swarming me all the time. Monsters rushing...bloodthirsty. Somehow it's just not doing it for me any more. It's boring. I recall playing morrowind...and you could choose to be a thief, or a murderer. I recall upping my persusion so I could taunt people into attacking me...so I could legally kill 'em and take their stuff. That got old...fast...and I ended up not feeling too good about myself. Yeah...a GAME...got me bummed and concerened that something might be wrong with me in real life if I was willing to make a decision so easily.

Back to this game though...to me the difference is you're given no real motivation to kill these colossi. I haven't read anywhere that there's any connection between them and the girls death. Apparently your character is in such grief that he'll do *anything* to get her back. Even killing creatures that have no connection to the event...it's like being a mob henchman. In games like MW or NWN you can choose to go evil, but this game doesn't seem to give you a choice. You have to go kill these guys for some other creature to revive the girl, then you *hope* you did the right thing. I'm used to a main story at least *appearing* legit. You may find out later that you were a chump or did something evil. But you made the best decision you could based on the info you had. But in this game, you have no info, yet the main character is willing to kill...lots of creatures.

I guess it boils down to me being in the process of changing and I'm lost right now with the options available for gaming. They're not appealing any more. It bugs me. I'd even answer your question as to whether I could live with giant colossi roaming the planet...yeah...I could. If they're not hurting me or other people...why not? They'd be like a natural wonder....like being in awe. I wouldn't want to get attacked by a great white shark, but I don't go seeking them out to kill them because they *might* kill me. I'm in awe of them.

Ah well...I'll figure this slump out. Something has got to get released eventually that I like....please?

Re:This game makes you think

[Scrameustache]

I could live with giant colossi roaming the planet...yeah...I could. If they're not hurting me or other people...why not? They'd be like a natural wonder....like being in awe. I wouldn't want to get attacked by a great white shark, but I don't go seeking them out to kill them because they *might* kill me. I'm in awe of them.

Agreed.
However, as the game goes on, you start to notice that these colossi are living in the ruins of a human civilisation, that you are the only human around, and that they are VERY agressive towards us squishies (well, maybe they heard your character is on a rampage, dunno yet), so I'm getting to feeling less bad about destroying a wonder, and a bit good about the fact that it was I, the guy with the magic sword and the really good knees, who stumbled on their lair, rather than some chump who'd get trampled in 5 seconds flat.

Barefoot in the snow, uphill both ways...

[Scrameustache]

I remember when the most popular video games were abstract adventures about eating dots or jumping over mushrooms. The more I was being asked to adopt a perspective of sociopathy, the less I played until the point where I found I had given up altogether on games.

Because mindlessly swallowing pills that make you see ghosts, and eating weird mushrooms as you stomp countless turtles to death were such healthier activities than killing giant stone monsters!

Huh?

[cecirdr]

...don't understand the point of the game....now I don't get the comment either. What a confusing day.

Re:The G4-ification of Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

If you hate Slashdot so much and like digg, then why the hell don't you go there and *stay* there you fucking jackass? .

Ratchet's Decline

[yuna49]

My daughter and I stopped playing the Ratchet sequels after the second. It appears that Insomniac decided that the best way to attract players was to have bigger explosions. The original R&C was one of our favorite platformers because it continued the witty story lines that Insomniac began with the three Spiro the Dragon games for the PS1. (The PS2 versions of Spiro by Universal suck rocks in comparison.) I was quite sad to see how the quality of the writing declined in later R&C sequels. For me, the writing and story line in R&C I transformed a shoot-em-up platformer into a truly entertaining experience.

Re:Ratchet's Decline

[metamatic]

#2 was the high point, I thought, particularly for the soundtrack. #3 just wasn't quite as good.

ICO is the best game ever made (Game artist POV)

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

I'm 29. I grew up through the early arcade days of pacman, the home computers ranging from vic 20's, c64s, atari 800xl, atari 130xe, 286s, early macs, apple 2e, atari 2600, neogeo, nes, snes, genesis, sega cd, n64, turbo graphics, ps2, xbox.. you name it.

I've been there and played it all.

I'm now a video game artist, 3d animator, cinematic director, technical director... blah blah...

I've made a life of games so to speek and ICO is by far the best game ever made. I know there are a few people who will disagree but those who do, tend to fall into two catagories:

1 - they didnt like the fighting system.
2 - they were emotionally disconnected for whatever reason, perhaps distracted and not caught up in the moment at the right times during game play. Perhaps they arent as open to experiencing emotions as others. We do after all live in a world that tends to make fun of folks who do open themselves up to art, and the incredible emotional experience it can be.

ICO is THE example of what gaming can. ICO isnt incredible because of it's simple fight system, or graphical engine.

ICO is incredible because the structure of the game is laid out in an unfolding manner, yet subtle in story telling devices, it manages to connect with the player emotionally on a true level of concern, love, caring, sadness, deep loss, happiness and beauty.

Where it starts though is the player. Oh, ICO is certainly brilliant story telling and like all brilliant stories told through out time, they can often be misread.

ICO requires 1 thing to work, and thats YOU. You're soul, you're mind, your willingness to be taken emotionally on a journey. If you're trying to guess what will happen next, and "when will i get the rocket launcher and BFG" you're simply not going to GET ICO.

ICO begins with loneliness. And hopefully you feel it. If you dont feel it from the very beginning, i doubt you will truely enjoy the ending and ICO.

The brilliance of ICO is the emotions you experience as you progress through the story. The story is not simple, it subtle. The story does not belittle our intelligence by laying out plot with cliche bad story telling sentences like "I'm glad Johny killed The great demon because now it has unlocked all that is evil, and i have the power to rule the world, because when you found that whistle item, it gave me the keys to unlock my true power" blah blah. ICO doesnt TELL you how to feel, nor does it TELL you the story in such a manner.

ICO hints at a story... and your brain makes it real.

There are several factors to ICO's emotional connection (i've thought about this quite a bit)

1 - ICO (player) is abandoned by his tribe, sacraficed to the god of the castle or however you read it when you initially see the opening intro. I say "however you read it" because its not quite explained WHY they leave you. Later on in the game it becomes more known but you really never get an explaination. So in the very beginning you read into the cinematic based on your own interpretations which typically will be "they're sacraficing me to the gods" So you're left alone to die by your people, and you're ONLY a little boy. Thats powerful stuff. It's very mature for a game story. Funny because we have car jacking, sex, violence and yet THIS is what i consider to be mature story concept. And THIS is where the emotional state comes into play. This is where YOUR emotional invovlent/state becomes important. HOW do you accept such a notion?? A CHILD being LEFT TO DIE ALONE. CAN YOU PUT YOURSELF IN THE ROLE OF THE CHILD? This is not easy to answer because from an artists point of view such as myself, i'm a trained animator and ACTOR. I can easily put myself into a role. Lots of people can who arent trained actors.... BUT ARE YOU ONE OF THEM? This is where i feel ICO becomes a hit or a miss for many folks. CAN YOU let yourself emotionally grasp the concept of the game, the loniless, the rejection of your people, the sadness of being left to die by even your FAMILY. This is ve

"an arty and beautiful vision of a young man"

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I guess we all know which way Zonk bends.

Re:ICO is the best game ever made (Game artist POV

[cecirdr]

Well, I read your comment. Thanks for taking the time to post it even when the article post was moving off the front page. It's great to know that there are some games out there that really can powerfully move people. I remember buying ICO, and I wanted to play it, but I couldn't. I stink at action/jumping games. I only made it through 1/2 of Zelda windwaker...I literally couldn't manipulate the controller accurately enough or fast enough. I don't know which, but I wasn't willing to spend the time to perfect my actions. I also tend to get to excitable/agitated when I have to perform action sequences and fighting in real time. So it's a guaranteed I won't be getting SOTC either. Ah well....my opinions below this post and my lack of controller skills and the willingness to perfect them...all probably a "girl thing".

Thanks for the update

[cecirdr]

Hmmm, there does seem to be an in game shift. First you feel all bad about what you're doing, then you start to wonder just why these colossi are in the ruins of a human civilization. That is intriguing. I'm going to see if I can eventually find out the game story from beginning to end. I know, I know...it'll ruin it for me. But for some reason, I still feel compelled to have a reason to starting hunting down some creatures. If the endgame gives me that reason, then I can play the game without a nagging conscious.

Something like that worked for PS games

[SuperKendall]

In the compatibility mode for older Playstation games there was an option to activate some features that rendered a number of games better than the original PS - it did not work with all games, but it seemed to work with ones I used it on.

Something similar might happen on the PS3 where it could render the world better. It probably wouldn't prevent the pop-in though, just make the Colossi a little nicer to look at with (as hoped for) a smoother framerate all-around.

I too would LOVE to see SoTC re-worked for the PS3! That is an already beautiful game that would look spectacular on newer hardware.

Great post

[SuperKendall]

I'm not in the game industry at all myself, but I felt exactly the same way you did about Ico. When I finished I too just left the music on for about an hour, just amazed at what had transpired...

The only other game that did anything like that to me was Fade to Black. Not as consistant throughout but the ending moved me almost as much and made me feel just as involved in the story. From a story aspect I also really enjoyed Beyond Good & Evil but it wasn't quite at the same level of attachment as Ico was (possibly due to the very annoying final boss battle).

I really hope you are right about the game industry really trying to emulate story based games, I look forward to great stories told on even better hardware in the next generation.

So see, at least two people read your whole post! I am also really happy you went to the trouble of putting down your thoughts.

Re:Great post

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

Thanks for reading :) It's always my pleasure to contribute to any discussion reguarding ICO. I think it is by far one of the most important videogames ever made because it has opened the eyes of so many, as to what gaming can be if we just gave a dam enough to work hard at it.