The original trilogy drew much of its power from the sheer lunatic momentum of the storyline - the sense that Kratos could (and occasionally did) die at any moment. For me, it’s up there with Return of the King and Toy Story 3.) And nothing I saw in the single-player campaign led me to really believe that prequelizing this franchise was a good idea. The Not-So-Good: I happen to think that God of War III is one of the very, very genuinely great conclusions to a trilogy. (No longer does every execution come down to “Hit Square! Now X! Now circle, circle, circle!”) The combat system has plenty of intriguing new wrinkles, including the ability to switch between weapons mid-attack. First and foremost, they’ve removed the quick time events in favor of a more organic control system. But from what I saw, Ascension looks like a worthy new game, and in the single-player version at least, the developers have made several smart decisions. And I’m suspicious when classically single-player games suddenly feel the need to grab that sweet, sweet multiplayer cash. I don’t like prequels, especially prequels that seem specifically designed to extend the life of a franchise that had a perfectly fine conclusion. The Good: As a huge fan of the God of War trilogy, I approached Ascension with overflowing skepticism. Quick, guess which one of those monsters doesn’t come from Homer’s The Odyssey! What We Played/Saw: We saw a snippet of the single-player storyline, in which Kratos sets down on the island of Delos and fights various creatures, including an Elephantaur (think a Minotaur, but more elephanty) and the sea monster Charybdis.
0 kommentar(er)
