It's been nearly two years since God of War III was first announced at E3 2008 and ever since then, Playstation-friendly media have been jumping on the hype train proclaiming it to be the saviour of Playstation 3 so now it's finally here, I naturally had to give it a go and see what all the fuss is about.
I have never been a big fan of games for thickos where success is generally rewarded not by skill, but by how fast the player can smash the buttons on a controller - therefore, this was my first experience of the God of War franchise. My first impressions were relatively bad. Once I had got past the awful Santa Monica Studios logo, I was greeted with a very pretentious opening intro movie which presumably was a vein attempt to fill me in on the story so far; An attempt so poor, I'd have learnt more about the story if they instead showed a tin of Heinz baked beans to the accompaniment of the San Francisco farting orchestra.
After starting a new game, I was presented with more baffling movies and then slung into the middle of a (admittedly, rather epic) battle. As if anyone really cares, he game then decided to throw up a helpful tutorial telling me what each button did. This would have been fantastic had it not detailed about 20 different moves in the midst of my first battle where I am actually trying to concentrate on not dying.
It didn't take too long to master the controls though; as you can imagine, all it takes is a few random bashes here and there and you're pretty much good. Even my first 'boss' battle allowed me to get away with such tactics with little more than a few scratches, although that might be due to the fact the game does most of the hard work for you when it comes to said boss battles; after dealing a little bit of damage to larger enemies, you get the ability to press one button which then activates the famous quick time events - all of which are easily won by either pressing circle a lot or some combination of other buttons and let me make this very clear - the timing the game allows for the player is so generous, a two year old could do it. This whole part of the game seems ridiculous to me - Why make a hack and slash game where you don't have to hack or slash any of the hard enemies? I understand that it's a staple of the series but sometimes you need to change things in order to improve it.
Whilst on the subject of the controls, one thing that became clear right from the start was the fact that the player has no control whatsoever over the camera. For me, this is inexcusable for a game in 2010. I might not have had so much of a problem with it if the developers had given you a good angle to begin with but at least half the time, I found myself fighting things I couldn't see or making jumps of faith. I suspect that the main reason for this decision though lies in the fact the developers only wanted you to see from one angle because they couldn't be bothered to make a whole level properly.
This brings me nicely onto the controversial topic of God of War III's graphics. Many people had been hoping that this game would show off the Playstation 3's capabilities but sadly it's not the case. At first glance, it looks fluid enough, but when compared to the graphical kings of the generation so far like Metro 2033 and Alan Wake, you start to see a pretty big gap emerging. Kratos himself could have done with some more work, as the 20,000 polygons used to create him are clearly not enough. To put that into perspective, compare that to a good that looks reasonably alright like Uncharted 2 where the count is nearly 100% more. Backgrounds look pretty good, but that's mainly because you can't rotate the camera to look at anything else, and considering how much blood there is in the game, it looks distinctly average, at best.
The back of the box details the 'huge levels' on show, and whilst they could claim that to a degree, it doesn't really count when you have to load every 10% of it into memory once you get to a certain part of it. Soundwise, the game is filled with generic tribal drums and the usual stuff you'd expect. It's not too bad, but certainly doesn't set any new ground. The voice acting is pretty forgettable too.
I eventually got to a stage where I ripped some guys head off and used it as a torch. I'm told its about halfway through which is amazing as I only played it for three hours. Unfortunately, I had to stop there because by that point, the game was getting so dull and repetitive I actually found more enjoyment from staring out my window and my neighbour cutting his grass. I didn't enjoy God of War III but you might if you work in a job that's already given you repetitive strain injury and you've got nothing better to do than waste your time once you've finished the outstanding Splinter Cell demo. Otherwise, wait until Ninety Nine Nights 2.
The Opening Levels that hooked gamers from the outset.
Cultured Vultures: Let’s delve into Kratos’ long and rampageous history and find out which games are worth the hype and which are better left buried under the weight of Kratos’s might.
Both requels over 2 and 3? Clowns. Those are two of the most boring games I've ever played.
GoW 3 was amazing, but I personally hated just one thing. (This is on me alone, because I was dumb, lol.) I hated that you couldn't skip cutscenes on repeat playthroughs. I had to go back through the game a third time because I missed one trophy accidentally on my way to the platinum... The cutscenes were great the first go round, even the second... But the third was pretty agonizing.
Haven't played Ragnarok, but I still think GoW 4 is a wonderful game in its own right. Not sure how I would stack them up against each other honestly.
I don't consider the reboot part of the original series. The original series were high-skill games with combos and rewards for mixing things up.
lol square, square and triangle is the only combo you needed. I have played all of them on the hardest difficulties...
Maybe I’m just old school but I just couldn’t get into the last two. Maybe it’s the slower action and more story telling but the original trilogy was by far my favorite.
Me either, at all. It's just yap yap yap. They try to be a RPG's instead of being action games like they used to be.
My favorite was part 2 and I think Ragnarok is better that 2018.
There is no worst. Except for Ascension, only cause I didn't play it lol. They are all masterpieces. 1,2,3, 2018 and Ragnarok. 1 of, if not the greatest video game franchise...besides MetalGear.
Oh wow, I actually forgot that Ascension even existed... I never played it either.
If you didnt play it, how could you call it the worst? Its not as bad as the media portrayed it. Honestly the worst are those flash games. they arent even considered true GoW games but in name only. At least Ascension is a real GoW game.
Not saying it's a terrible game. Just mean it's at the bottom of my list. I played a little bit of it. Jus to me, compared to the other main games, it's last.
Can't agree, older games do so much more than the last two. More weapons, magic abilities, enemies are more varied, level design is also more aesthetically pleasing, and agree with those who say that they shouldn't have removed jumping. Was a time I'd agree, but those old games are so so much better, that they really should've looked into bringing into the reboot/sequels.
If a game is good then a game is good. Doesn't matter what came before or what comes after.
Of course it matters. If not for what what came before there wouldn't be an after. And if something is great before then you strive to make it just as good if not better, after. I personally don't think there's a fair way to judge the new with the old because the newer games are still essentially a reboot, and went a way different direction. But I still believe the old games did it better. I'm probably bias though since I've been going back to old games and have been finding that they lack all the annoying aspects that devs have shoehorned into new games to fluff out game time.
@Inverno
Im not talking about the passage of time here. Im talking about individual pieces of software. If a game is good then it is good. Thats not a controversial statement. You can compare good with good...sure. But you still end up with good. Now if there is a bad game in the mix and you compare you do end up with some differentials between them...makes sense to compare and see where it went wrong.
But theyre different genres and styles which were individually executed very well.
And no. The new games are not a reboot. Theyre a new direction but simply a continuation.
Tomb raider was a reboot.
The new games are definitely a reboot, and a continuation, it can be both which it is. And a good game might be good, but my point is that if there are things done better before it then there's plenty of room for critiquing and trying to make whatever comes after better rather than just good.
God of War 3 Remaster has sold 4 million copies since its inception, making the franchise PlayStation's most profitable gamer merch brand.
Haha I still remember my brother playing the opening scene on ps3!!!
Yeh he had to put the controller down his heart was beating too fast trying to get past first 10 minutes. He said "it's too much". Best thing I've ever seen in gaming. Haha
A great game from an era before things went politically correct and gaming turned serious/'mature'.
It certainly wasn't concerned about upsetting or offending anyone and was more fun because of it.
The boss battles and set pieces still top most games released today.
Yes. The graphics were just ridiculous compared to most other games on the market at the time.
Ascension SP had some things better than GOW3, and also some things worst than GOW3. But in general it was a really good game, for me it also deserves a REMASTER. The problem per se with the game is that most people were satisfied on how GOWIII ended, so Kratos got his revenge, so in order to rise the interest in the game how have to make it MORE EPIC is that the game did not had the epicness of fighting huge bosses (I guess due to technical difficulties,the game had actually a lot more colors (because the world is not dying like in GOWIII) so it is graphically more demanding that is my guess), but it compensated with having in general a more complex combat system, and an amazing soundtrack. but in general the game needed to be more epic than GOWIII somehow, and that did not happened, after GOWIII people had expectations through the roof. They should have waited and release it for PS4 so the vision of the game is not compromised.
My list of good and bad compared to GOWIII
GOOD: THE COMBAT
The combat was more elaborated, which allows you to be more immersed in the fights. Also every enemy was more resistant, even those that you could usually kill in 2-3 attacks in previous games. THE LAST BOSS is so damn epic!!!, but there is only one moment like this in the whole game.
GOOD: LESS QTEs
I love the fact that "cicle" in the new enemies (killing animations) are not QTEs, in Ascension they are mini-games on their own, depending on the enemy, making it more engaging. You had to dodge and hit when the window was open in order to eventually do the killing blow.
GOOD: The Soundtrack
it has the orginal trilogy musics, but with a new perspective since the game had a new composer. The ST was amazing also the new music written specifically for this game were badass
GOOD: The puzzles actually require you to think.
BAD: There are bad camera angles during the game, like zooming way too out of vista, and then swarming you with "light units" that like I said before had better AI and did not die of 2 attacks. those parts a few, but are a mess.
BAD: EMPTY ARENAS
Other thing that really annoyed me is that when you fight a sub-boss/heavy unit in a big arena; that ARENA WAS EMPTY, it was just you and against the medusa, or against the manticore. They should have zoom in into the action to avoid noticing the void scenario. I guess emptiness was because of the game having a lot more colors (because the world is not dying like in GOWIII) so it is graphically more demanding. My guess is that it was not possible technically, since in most of those cases you had huge vistas or intricate scenarios that needed to be rendered. The fact that the cerberus is smaller in this game disappointed me.
BAD: Only one BADASS EPIC moment, the others moments of the game were great but, they needed to set the bar even higher than GOWIII and they failed miserably.
BAD: The graphics did not improved much. I was GOWIII with more colors, and that's it.
So 4 good things against 4 bad ones. The problem is those 2 last BAD aspects are actually why the game was received so poorly. Everyone expects the next game to have a really BIG improvement in all aspects in contrast to the previous one, and that was not the case in ascension. And also GOW is the definition of EPIC, and that was not there neither. The jump on every aspect from GOWI to GOWII was huge being on the same console, and the jump from GOWII to GOWIII was humongous (obviously because a more powerful console). While the jump from GOWIII to Ascension is too little, and people expected more.
On it's own is a good game; but is not sufficient when GOWIII was released before it.
I know this is unpopular opinion, but I prefer these over the new ones. I’m not saying the new ones are bad or anything, but they sort of get boring to me, whereas the older games were like non-stop roller coaster rides.
I love the new ones but I understand what you mean. The older ones had more action and was more arcady like.
Ragnarok was not BIG at all… GoW1 had larger set pieces, and it was on ps2.
GoW 2018 had big moments in its own way…. Ragnarok abandoned these aspects though
Your comparing the God of War 3 to xbox version of metro 2033, and saying it looks worse? You do realize that Metro 2033 pretty much disappointed on every graphical aspect (for the 306 version, the PC version looks good, but I'm assuming your not counting the PC version, and even if you were Crysis mods still destroy Metro 2033 on PC).
Also how is Alan Wake the graphical king of this generation, it's not even released yet. Besides, your idea of graphics is obviously distorted if you think that Uncharted 2's graphics are only reasonably good when it's actually up there with Heavy Rain.
Also the Splinter Cell demo was boring. They made it ridiculously easy and the AI is horrible. Don't even get me started on the dialogue. The new cover system is good and all but they had better fix up the other problems with it.
Next time you write a review, take off your fanboy goggles dude.
GTFO
Your reviews should be banned. Pure ridiculous fanboyism. Absolutely worthless wall of text.
This so called review stinks of bias from the very first sentance.
I'd be surprised if this meat-head even knows anyone with a PS3 as he would likely only attract his own kind.
Lol Ninety Nine Nights 2.
Dynasty warriors is more enjoyable the Ninety Nine Nights.