Maybe because the PSP version had awful controls as well. At least in the demo it was. Every time I tried to go in a new direction, Jak was gliding around. There was also a minor delay in jumps.
Phoenix being intro'd as a main character isn't that sudden. Even if his first appearance is just a tiny little scene, he does kind of work his way in there and I didn't find it sudden at all. There, I think he's wrong. Otherwise, I think he's pretty much got it right. As a Jak fan, I obviously want to play this game through just to see what goes down (Phoenix is A+ enough to carry me through, and I like the setting in general), but I don't think I'll replay it.
Basically, anyone new to the fandom shouldn't start with this game. If they get really into it, yeah, give it a shot, but in general it's like the awkward cousin to this canon and should be regarded only if the plot interests you.
Yeah, it seemed kinda like claiming that Gol couldn't possibly be important because he's only in one cutscene before the final dungeon in TPL. (Three cutscenes total, and in one you can't even see him.) But...it's obvious from his introduction that he's important. It really, really is. The same could be said about Erol, given that he disappears for, like, ALL OF ACTS I AND II or whatever in Jak II. Which is why it irked me so badly. Anyone really familiar with the series would get that.
They also wouldn't have given it a 7.5, I don't think, but I'm elitist in that respect.
Phoenix's role is a bit different from Gol or Erol's, but I won't spoil you ;)
I'm actually having fun. It's not a great game, but with me being familiar with the series it's kind of fun to watch what a different company does with it, even if they aren't doing the best job. The gameplay (and camera angles dear GOD) can be frustrating, the story only just got marginally interesting at 45%-ish, and Jak's characterization is, well, horrible (and really really hilarious), but I'm still interested to see what comes next.
Oh, I've got all the spoilers on Phoenix already, to a point. I was just picking important characters with too little screentime. (Torn could apply too, I guess, at least in Jak 3.) It still seemed like a stupid thing for the guy to say when this series is notorious for giving very little screentime to the supporting characters.
I've heard that parts of it are fun--especially the flying portions--but the cameras and wonky controls really ruin a lot of the experience. I'm not gonna complain about the plot until I get there myself. I'm honestly still excited about this, whether is chews rubber monkey lungs or not. XD
I'm only commenting on this entry itself because I'm partway through the game and don't want to spoil myself with the review, so I might eat my words later once I've actually seen it, but:
"[...] It's just not an enthralling tale. Now, does it need to be? No, I don't remember the original Jak having much going on in terms of the story and I was confused as all hell by the ending to Jak II."
...WHAT GAMES WAS THIS GUY PLAYING?!The versions not backed up and and fleshed out by all the fanon, probably. The guy probably takes the games at face value and doesn't spend his time in places like this comm where we spend all our time between games dissecting everything about them we can. I can understand being heavily confused by the Jak II ending; time travel wtf-ery has a tendency to hurt the brain just like Daxter described. And essentially, if you want to take it down to bare-bones plot, TPL's plot was "travel north to find a guy who can save your friend, except that said guy turns out to actually be the enemy oh noes cue boss battle.
( ... )
It's just not an enthralling tale. Now, does it need to be? No, I don't remember the original Jak having much going on in terms of the story and I was confused as all hell by the ending to Jak II.
Were we even playing the same games? ._.
I can understand that some gamers honestly don't care much for storyline - they just want some fun minigames, perhaps a side quest here and there, and a storyline to have everything seem coherent. I get that. But I think it's fair to say that for the most part, the Jak games rely pretty heavily on storyline. I'm used to overanalysing the Hell out of these games, but I think it's fair to say that his interpretation of this game vs. ours is vastly different :|
Comments 16
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Basically, anyone new to the fandom shouldn't start with this game. If they get really into it, yeah, give it a shot, but in general it's like the awkward cousin to this canon and should be regarded only if the plot interests you.
And I'm taking that icon.
Reply
They also wouldn't have given it a 7.5, I don't think, but I'm elitist in that respect.
And you can have it. :>
Reply
I'm actually having fun. It's not a great game, but with me being familiar with the series it's kind of fun to watch what a different company does with it, even if they aren't doing the best job. The gameplay (and camera angles dear GOD) can be frustrating, the story only just got marginally interesting at 45%-ish, and Jak's characterization is, well, horrible (and really really hilarious), but I'm still interested to see what comes next.
Reply
I've heard that parts of it are fun--especially the flying portions--but the cameras and wonky controls really ruin a lot of the experience. I'm not gonna complain about the plot until I get there myself. I'm honestly still excited about this, whether is chews rubber monkey lungs or not. XD
Reply
"[...] It's just not an enthralling tale. Now, does it need to be? No, I don't remember the original Jak having much going on in terms of the story and I was confused as all hell by the ending to Jak II."
...WHAT GAMES WAS THIS GUY PLAYING?!The versions not backed up and and fleshed out by all the fanon, probably. The guy probably takes the games at face value and doesn't spend his time in places like this comm where we spend all our time between games dissecting everything about them we can. I can understand being heavily confused by the Jak II ending; time travel wtf-ery has a tendency to hurt the brain just like Daxter described. And essentially, if you want to take it down to bare-bones plot, TPL's plot was "travel north to find a guy who can save your friend, except that said guy turns out to actually be the enemy oh noes cue boss battle. ( ... )
Reply
Were we even playing the same games? ._.
I can understand that some gamers honestly don't care much for storyline - they just want some fun minigames, perhaps a side quest here and there, and a storyline to have everything seem coherent. I get that. But I think it's fair to say that for the most part, the Jak games rely pretty heavily on storyline. I'm used to overanalysing the Hell out of these games, but I think it's fair to say that his interpretation of this game vs. ours is vastly different :|
Reply
Leave a comment