Prince Of Persia

[John Beaulieu]

PoP isn't about the fighting though - its a puzzle/platformer with combat elements .... who cares if they are deemed simplistic by some people - others will find the combat to be both intuitive and tactical, using different combo's to get past different groups of enemies.

personally i find the game to a be a puzzler of extreme excellence - each room is its individual puzzle, rather than working out that pressing switch A opens Door B you need to puzzle out the room as an whole (which is why Ubisoft kindly gave the landscape button so that you can view the room as an whole rather than as a collection of individual pieces) ... some rooms they throw enemies at you, some they throw enemies plus ledges plus traps etc etc --- the way to treat each room is to view it as one individual puzzle rather than view it as a 'room' made up of lots of little puzzles

camps

[NiceButDim]

who cares if they are deemed simplistic by some people.

Having spent ?40 on it, I do. It seems to kinda defeat the point of having a forum to discuss games if we simply say "who cares" when somebody has a negative opinion.

Anyway, I'm generally in broad agreement, I really liked the rest of the game, and I thought the puzzles where really intuitive and never frustrating.

[John Beaulieu]

why moan about a game for what it isn't rather than praising the game for what it is - PoP is not a combat orientated game - the franchise has never been combat orientated and people who have read reviews/this thread in the forum etc will have taken note of this simple fact ...... (and not spent 40 quid on a game which isn't what they seem to be looking for)

on initial play through the combat can be deemed to be simplistic (as some people have posted in this thread) it becomes more tactical as your skill set improves throughout the game - once you have 'mastered' the combat then you can seamlessly combo between various enemies, using dagger attacks to freeze enemies, wall-jumps to further the combo etc - but the emphasis of PoP is not as a hack&slash beat em up (in the golden axe mold), its a puzzler/platformer with combat elements included in the solving of said puzzles .... have other platformers been slagged off for having simplistic combat or have gamers realised that the combat isn't the end product but a means to get there (for example ... Mario's combat is a simple head stomp, did this detract from the overall experience or did it simply come across as 'how it should be' and the end product was to finish each puzzle (stage) )

so to finish off my point - why should anyone care that others deem the combat to be simplistic? i know that when i play through the game that i find the combat to be as freeflowing and tactically minded as any i have found in this genre and if others feel differently than to my mind thats their loss ..... but the combat is not what i play this game for, its just another aspect of the puzzle solving of each room, its 'beefing' up the storyline rather than being 'the be all and end all' of it and its rounding off a game which has developed into one of the premier games of its genre

camps

[NiceButDim]

why moan about a game for what it isn't rather than praising the game for what it is - PoP is not a combat orientated game - the franchise has never been combat orientated and people who have read reviews/this thread in the forum etc will have taken note of this simple fact ...... (and not spent 40 quid on a game which isn't what they seem to be looking for)

Because the combat bits are annoying and break up the rather splendid puzzle bits inbetween. Alas the game didn't give me the option of skipping the combat bits (if it had then yes, your point would be valid). Its entirely reasonable to pick up on a negative feature of the game.

on initial play through the combat can be deemed to be simplistic (as some people have posted in this thread) it becomes more tactical as your skill set improves throughout the game - once you have 'mastered' the combat then you can seamlessly combo between various enemies

But for all intents and purposes I did master the combat. I finshed the latter stages of the game (from 71% onwards) without dying in battle once despite using repetitive and frankly boring tactics. Yes I could have tried to be more stylish, but lets face it, the game would have been considerably better if it had forced me to be more stylish, if the AI didn't succumb so easily to simplistic and repetitive tactics.

so to finish off my point - why should anyone care that others deem the combat to be simplistic?

Because the combat isn't optional. Its not an added on feature, its an annoying component that detracts from the rest of the game. The puzzle sections are excellent, the tedious combat sections that separate them are not.

but the combat is not what i play this game for, its just another aspect of the puzzle solving of each room, its 'beefing' up the storyline rather than being 'the be all and end all' of it and its rounding off a game which has developed into one of the premier games of its genre

And I didn't play the game for the combat sections, yet I was still forced to. It wasn't optional, it was an integral part of the game thats worthy of criticism.

People who are thinking of buying the game should know that whilst the puzzle sections are excellent, the combat sections are repetitive and boring.

[Papercut]

I'm glad someone is arguing this.

so to finish off my point - why should anyone care that others deem the combat to be simplistic?

camps - what on earth are you saying?

That a good game is beyond any criticism?

That those in disagreement with yourself are ignorable?

That debate with differing viewpoints is pointless?

pfft.

[JibberX]

I think camps has had an attack of the megalomania there. You've got the Game, and then you've got nothing else, as a package without the combat, or atleast it made better, thats "better", then maybe it'd be a better game...

[John Beaulieu]

what i am saying is that I don't find the combat to be simplistic - if you do then thats your perogative but since i don't then i don't care that you do (still with me so far?)

If you find the combat to be simplistic/repetitive bladdy bladdy then thats upto you.... I am not going to say whether i think your right or wrong since its your personal decision to make such judgements --- I don't care that you think differently to me on this point since its not affecting my enjoyment of the game in any way, shape or form.

its not just this game - people feel differently about hundreds of games than i do, this doesn't mean that i am wrong about every single game or that they are all wrong ... it doesn't detract from mine or their enjoyment of said games ... for example my mate enjoys spending hours playing pc games and i don't, now should i care that we have differing tastes on this matter or should i just get on with things and accept that not everyone thinks the same way i do? i choose to do the latter....

another example - i prefer playing VF4 evo whilst one of my mates prefers Soul Calibur 2 (which i think is a simplistic button bashing affair) ... now i don't care that he prefers the (inferior) game, since its decision to do so - it doesn't detract from my enjoyment of VF4 evo or detract from his enjoyment of Soul Calibur 2

if i thought that everyone who's opinion differs from mine is ignorable then i wouldn't have responded to the past 2 posts in this topic -- but if i was to say that i actually care that someone thinks the combat in PoP SOT is simplistic whilst i feel differently then i would be lying ... your opinion of said game doesn't detract from my enjoyment and my opinion shouldn't detract from yours

to round off yet another point (or is it the same point i rounded off in my last post) i am going to quote someone from another forum (Squirtle on Rllmuk forums to be precise)

the sheer joy of bounding over somebody while slashing them in the back, then bouncing off the wall and knocking someone over, stealing their sand and the other one you killed, cartwheeling back against the wall and using the double jump off the wall to leap behind someone and taking them out, stabbing someone with the dagger and watching them float away in slo-mo before block attacking an incoming attacker, leaping to split the slo-mo enemy in two before draining the last attackers on the floor of their sand cannot be understated.

Simplistic .... i think not

camps

[NiceButDim]

what i am saying is that I don't find the combat to be simplistic - if you do then thats your perogative but since i don't then i don't care that you do (still with me so far?)

then why use the phrase "who cares?"? Why not just say that you don't care, instead of implying that every man and his dog shares your opinion and doesn't care?

I fully accept the right of every individual to enjoy a game as they please. I fully accept that some people might not mind the fact that they're not forced to play in a sophisticated manner. What I mind is when people tell me I've no right to make that criticism.

[NiceButDim]

double post.

[Concept]

EDIT:

[John Beaulieu]

I think camps has had an attack of the megalomania there. You've got the Game, and then you've got nothing else, as a package without the combat, or atleast it made better, thats "better", then maybe it'd be a better game...

how do you know that improving the combat (the little it needs improving from my view) would make a better game? how do you know it wouldn't move the emphasis of the game from a puzzle/platformer to a combat orientated hack and slasher with platform elements ..... removing the combat altogether would result in a lifeless affair of travelling around the locales .... what the combat does (to my mind) is throw into the puzzle an active element, your not just working out how to get from Point A to Point B but also working out how to defeat the (spawning) enemies in-between.

sorry to Papercut for missing out one of his points ... debate with differing viewpoints is not pointless, it lets us all look at a game from different angles, maybe picking up something that we missed out ourselves, understanding aspects better etc ... but that still doesn't mean that i care that the next man found simplistic the combat which i found enthralling for 10 hours of gameplay

[Crispin]

The combat pissed me off. Respawning enemies. Enemies that teleport to just where you're running to in order to obtain a drink of water or just a breather. In the end, the player resorts to using the thing to draw attackers away from Farah. Reducing the enemy teleportation thing to a gimmick to be exploited. Takes too long to use the dagger to collect sand. The fairly regular occurrences of atrocious camera. The ability to be overwhelmed by just one attack, and then everyone pounding you on the floor so you can't get up. The special power bar (used for slow-mo) takes too long to fill. Not being able to use a cartwheel against certain enemies, who can also block your attacks. And you can't block against their horizontal attacks that hit your feet. Not knowing how many enemies you have left. Sometimes entering combat with little health. Combat leaving you with so low health that the following trap section is insanely difficult. Respawning minor enemies to irritate you when you just want to jump from one ledge to another. Repetitive manner of killing flying beasts. Scarabs are clearly there simply as a time waster. Many other irritations as well.

Platforming is fun. Combat is not.

[John Beaulieu]

What I mind is when people tell me I've no right to make that criticism.

who has said you have no right to make any criticism? Criticise any game to your hearts content ... the same as i will do. the thing is though - i don't expect or demand that people who read my posts actually cares when my viewpoint differs from theirs, they might debate the point and we try to change each others view but 90% of the time when its a game thats been done and dusted than that viewpoint will be set in stone

gonna quote myself here from the offending (megalomanical) paragraph

who cares if they are deemed simplistic by some people - others will find the combat to be both intuitive and tactical, using different combo's to get past different groups of enemies.

the 'who cares' was a throwaway remark ... it wasn't intended to offend anyone by making out that their opinion is wrong or that they have no right to make any criticism which differs from mine and for the rest of it.......... read my above posts

camps

[Papercut]

what i am saying is that I don't find the combat to be simplistic - if you do then thats your perogative but since i don't then i don't care that you do (still with me so far?)

then why use the phrase "who cares?"? Why not just say that you don't care, instead of implying that every man and his dog shares your opinion and doesn't care?

Nail on the head.

[Crispin]

The combat pissed me off. Respawning enemies. Enemies that teleport to just where you're running to in order to obtain a drink of water or just a breather. In the end, the player resorts to using the thing to draw attackers away from Farah. Reducing the enemy teleportation thing to a gimmick to be exploited. Takes too long to use the dagger to collect sand. The fairly regular occurrences of atrocious camera. The ability to be overwhelmed by just one attack, and then everyone pounding you on the floor so you can't get up. The special power bar (used for slow-mo) takes too long to fill. Not being able to use a cartwheel against certain enemies, who can also block your attacks. And you can't block against their horizontal attacks that hit your feet. Not knowing how many enemies you have left. Sometimes entering combat with little health. Combat leaving you with so low health that the following trap section is insanely difficult. Respawning minor enemies to irritate you when you just want to jump from one ledge to another. Repetitive manner of killing flying beasts. Scarabs are clearly there simply as a time waster. Many other irritations as well.

Platforming is fun. Combat is not.