My thoughts on the Sands of Time trilogy

[qubit]

Though I realize that I cannot change the Critic's view on Sands of Time, I would like to throw in my own two cents on the entire trilogy.

I think Sands of Time was overrated, but only slightly.  It is not one of the best games ever made, but it's not that bad either.  Had the combat system been a little more robust and involving, it easily would have been an outstanding game.  Even if I was in the Critic's position - playing a game with no fun but sky-high production values - I would have rated it a C+ - or, at worst, a C- - simply for its technical prowess.

Warrior Within could have been an outstanding if the Prince didn't turn emo.  B-.

Two Thrones was a perfect combination of the two games, bogged down by the Dark Prince's stupid gameplay.  B.

[Atarifever1]

I`d never give a game above an F if it were no fun. Technical prowess means nothing to me. I think Combat is an A game, and would give most GTA clones, no matter how shiny, an F.

[EdwardM]

I don't know why  everyone is hating on the Sands of time.    The game is near perfect in every way.   The story, contols, visuals, level design and combat are all awesome.  I don't know what people are saying about it being boring, The game was fantastic and I stuck with it and beat it in one sitting.  I don't know how anybody can get bored with the game with its creative puzzles and levels. The game is not a C, D, or F game.  Not even close.  This is an A game in every way and I don't see how anybody can hate it.  I'm having trouble finding anything wrong with it, it is by far the best in its class.   Its strange how I seem to be the only person here who likes it.

[m0zart1]

I was so bored with Sands of Time.  I kept waiting for it to get better, and I knew it had to because the reviews were so good, but I never reached that point before I gave up on it.

There's a part where the critic says (I think, if it's the same review) that he kept thinking he was in the same place he had just been.  I felt the exact same way.

[qubit]

[QUOTE=m0zart]
There's a part where the critic says (I think, if it's the same review) that he kept thinking he was in the same place he had just been.  I felt the exact same way.
[/QUOTE]

The repetitive textures show that ancient Persian architects did not have the time or resources to make completely different designs for every single room.  Ancient buildings are (generally) boring and repetitive, and thus, so are games set in ancient times with ancient buildings.

The two things I didn't like technically about Sands were a) the hair textures (it was pretty funny when hair would sometimes clip through the Prince's forehead) and b) the water effects, specifically in Warrior Within (why does the water move like a single sheet of fabric?)

[m0zart1]

[QUOTE=qubit]The repetitive textures show that ancient Persian architects did not have the time or resources to make completely different designs for every single room.  Ancient buildings are (generally) boring and repetitive, and thus, so are games set in ancient times with ancient buildings.[/QUOTE]

Sure, but this is a game, and it has to be interesting and fun to play.  It can't be confusing just because historically such buildings might have been repetitive.

I've played plenty of games that are set in these older buildings that weren't anywhere near as boring or repetitive, and had far more elements targetted specifically to gameplay.

[qubit]

[QUOTE=m0zart][QUOTE=qubit]The repetitive textures show that ancient Persian architects did not have the time or resources to make completely different designs for every single room.  Ancient buildings are (generally) boring and repetitive, and thus, so are games set in ancient times with ancient buildings.[/QUOTE]

Sure, but this is a game, and it has to be interesting and fun to play.  It can't be confusing just because historically such buildings might have been repetitive.

I've played plenty of games that are set in these older buildings that weren't anywhere near as boring or repetitive, and had far more elements targetted specifically to gameplay.
[/QUOTE]

!!ATTN: SARCASM!!

[m0zart1]

[QUOTE=qubit]

!!ATTN: SARCASM!!

[/QUOTE]

Well my goodness, how was I suppose to know that?  I couldn't sense any sarcasm in that, and it sounded like a perfectly reasonable response -- just one I didn't particularly agree with.

[Michael D]

[QUOTE=qubit]Though I realize that I cannot change the Critic's view on Sands of Time, I would like to throw in my own two cents on the entire trilogy.
[/QUOTE]

Really? Just ask him to review Warrior Within.  I know he'll come around when he sees just how much that game desacrates the accomplishments of Sands of Time. 

Now that all three are out, I'd like to see reviews of them, and perhaps a re-review of Sands of Time.  Who knows? He may come over to light on it.

[JustLikeHeaven1]

I finally bought Sands of Time a few months ago to see what all the fuss was about.  I popped it in and I instantly thought it was like a next gen Tomb Raider.  Sadly its not like the orginal and its more akin to one of the many many bad Tomb Raider sequels.

Seriously, what were reviewers smoking when they played Sands of Time?  It was the most average game I have ever played.  It didn't do any single thing well.  Yet it did pretty much everything adequately.  I only played Sands of Time for a few hours, but I couldn't stand much more of it.  I highly doubt I will try Warrior Within or Two Thrones.