Perfect Dark Zero (Xbox 360)

[Linkdude]

Perfect Dark Zero, is in fact, a prequel to the first game. I never played Perfect Dark for the N64, because, I think it would be too expensive for me to buy. First off, you play as Joanna Dark again as she needs to stop these corporations from taking over the world. Blah blah blah, the story sucks, we know.

The graphics in the game look like a Playstation 2, Gamecube, or Xbox game. This is NOT next-gen to me. Even the cutscenes look horrible, as there is no difference between a HDTV and a standard TV in terms of graphics. On a positive note, PDZ's guns look really good, as Rare must have hired some superb weapon designer.

The sound in the game is up to par. The weapons fire and sound nicely with some really good music to kick back with. The music is just flawless, since it's one of the best soundtracks of 2005 with some dance music inside a club to some pretty rocking music around the last level. PDZ's voiceovers are just bogus, since the dialogue is crap. Some lines sound good, some others don't. When I hear the voices in the game, I might want to puke.

The length of the game is very short, around 11 or 12 hours. I think I beat it in less than those, around 8 or 9 hours (Because I have lots of time). On the other difficulties besides Agent is very tough, that's because of WTF-AI. The AI is just plain crap, since they say things like "She shot me!" and "Oh, you're good!" We know that, why don't those guards just shut up?

Overall, PDZ is not recommendable to the fans of the first one by a lot, but it needed improvement, because this one stinks bad. Grade: D+

[bluemonkey1]

Since you didn't play the first one you can't say whether it is recommendable to fans of it.  I did play the first one and I would recommend it.

 

"The graphics in the game look like a Playstation 2, Gamecube, or Xbox game." <-- This is utter garbage.  You must seriously be blind, I recommend you get your eyes checked, I am not actually joking here.  I'll post a bit on this later if I have time.

 

I have completed the game on Secret Agent and am currently comlpeting it on Perfect Agent.  The AI is not cheap.  Playing it through on just Agent gives you no real idea of the levels.  I didn't even realise till the other day there was a helipad on the Nightclub level that made IDing that first enforcer much easier (on Perfect you have to ID all three).  The game has 14 levels, hardly short for an FPS.  Even on the ridiculously easy Agent setting it is nearly as long as Halo 1 and 2 put together.  Not to mention the infinite replayability against bots.

[sega saturn x]

[QUOTE] I think it would be too expensive for me to buy.[/QUOTE]

Perfect dark is worthless I've seen the game sell for 5 dollars sealed.  Everything else was spot on though in your review.

[bluemonkey1]

Perfect Dark is widely recognised as one of the finest N64 games made.

 

SSX you don't even own a 360, you may have been exposed to a little bit of the game but I doubt you have played through the whole campaign single player on a harder difficulty setting.

[Linkdude]

If Rare makes a Perfect Dark 2, they better take a lot of time to make it and improve it over this game. If you're a fan of Perfect Dark, then rent PDZ. I'd only rent it for the multiplayer, since it's a little better than what I expected.

[sega saturn x]

[QUOTE=bluemonkey]

Perfect Dark is widely recognised as one of the finest N64 games made.

 

SSX you don't even own a 360, you may have been exposed to a little bit of the game but I doubt you have played through the whole campaign single player on a harder difficulty setting.

[/QUOTE]

I wasn't talking about the quality of the first game which I thought was obvious I was saying it's cheap.  And about the second part I really don't care so don't bother.

[Atarifever1]

[QUOTE=bluemonkey]

I doubt you have played through the whole campaign single player on a harder difficulty setting.[/QUOTE]
I agree we shouldn't judge things we haven't played, but this criteria is a little harsh.  If you have to finish a game to judge, I would not be able to give my opinion of most games.  Also, if you totally hate a game because it's so bad, how could you possibly stand to finish it?

[bluemonkey1]

I believe that to review a game a person must see everything it has to offer.  So with a first person shooter that person should play every level.  Otherwise you might slag off the game for saying say the level structure is generic only to find that the rest of the levels you hadn't played were completely original.

[VideoGameCritic]

[QUOTE=bluemonkey]

I believe that to review a game a person must see everything it has to offer.  So with a first person shooter that person should play every level.  Otherwise you might slag off the game for saying say the level structure is generic only to find that the rest of the levels you hadn't played were completely original.

[/QUOTE]

That's a naive statement, especially considering the expansive adventure games of today where you could never see every single thing the game has to offer.  In the current competitive gaming climate, a game should be immediately appealing with minimal ramp-up time.  If I have to suffer through the first few stages of a game, I'm NOT going to stick with it until the bitter end, regardless of how spectacular the boss in level 19 might be.  Life is too short!  No player should feel obligated to muck through mediocre early stages, and if they do, the game suffers from poor design and should be judged as so.

Personally I try to get at least 50% through a game before posting a review.  If I like the game I'll keep going, but if I don't, then I don't feel obligated to continue.  Most of the time my initial assessment (after about an hour of gameplay) doesn't change, so I think your point is the exception to the rule.

[Atarifever1]

[QUOTE=bluemonkey]

I believe that to review a game a person must see everything it has to offer.  So with a first person shooter that person should play every level.  Otherwise you might slag off the game for saying say the level structure is generic only to find that the rest of the levels you hadn't played were completely original.

[/QUOTE]
So you'd, say, have to play, and beat, every song in Donkey Konga just to be allowed to say you don't like it?  That's sounds tedious and boring for people who don't like it.  Also, if I wanted to say I don't like Oblivion, I'd have to log a couple hundred hours at least to say I don't like it (as there's so much to do).  That doesn't make any sense at all.
If a game bores me too much, I'm sure I can judge it based on the fact tha it was too boring to get into.  That would be a criticisim you know, that something is too drawn out.  If I have to sit through hours of tedium to get to the good stuff, guess what: the game sucks.  Imagine if movies were 30 hours long and bored you for the first 8.  I'm sure you'd be all over watching them anyway, because it isn't like you'd be doing anything for those 8 hours anyway.