Ratchet Goes Commando, Outdoes Jak?

Thanks to 1UP for its review of Ratchet & Clank: Going Commando for PlayStation 2, as the reviewer argues: "The original Ratchet & Clank was, for my money, the best platform game of this hardware generation when it came out", and goes on to rate the Insomniac-developed sequel just as highly. IGN PS2 is also impressed, and discusses the showdown with Ratchet's technology-sharing PS2 rival, Naughty Dog's Jak II, commenting: "If I had to pick just one platformer this year - and that's a tough call, considering the incredible game that Jak II is - it would be this one." Finally, GameSpot rates the title as "a great game", although caution that "...at times it feels like more of a mission pack than an entirely new game."

Re:Moron.

[Anonymous Coward]

Riiight, that must be why the market is currently flooded with FPSs, and why only about 3 or 4 companies worldwide develop platformers.

Moron.

Technology Sharing

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it's only fair to Naughty Dog to point out that R&C assimilated their engine, and there was no technology transfer in the other direction. One might imagine that getting the best PS2 engine, for free (in development terms), one could create a better game than the company who also had to develop the engine.

Re:Technology Sharing

[hawkbug]

Really? Naughty Dog sold their engine to the creators of R&C? I had not heard that before, but the games look amazingly similar.

Frustrating.

[lowmagnet]

I Liked J&D up to a point. After that point I tolerated it. The point is this: Any place where the game ceases to be a platformer, and starts its flight/chicken/shooting range simulator mode.

The same thing happened in Sly Cooper. They have sections that play out as mandatory mini-games.

I bought a platformer. As such, the aforementioned games are great in their primary genres. They begin to suck, IMO, once they go outside the bounds of their primary development and shift play styles.

I have no problem with games where they keep the same play style and switch characters, as long as the characters use the same controls. This is extremely important, especially when I spend a great deal of time at the outset figuring the controls to a game out.

Re:Frustrating.

[Thedalek]

There's nothing wrong with short mandatory mini-games. Prolonged mini-gameness should always be optional (except in the case of things like the constantly inexplicable Bishi Bashi Special, which is nothing but mini games). And variety is not inherently bad. Only when it's not done well.

I believe that mini-games are, on the whole, a good thing, in the same sense that chocolate chunks in brownies are a good thing. They may not contribute much in the flavor, but they do introduce novel textures. On the s

Re:Frustrating.

[lowmagnet]

Jak and Daxter had some really annoying flying sections which relied on 'learn this whole new set of controls'.

While forgivable in GTAIII, it's the equivalent of adding boats in Vice City: They were nearly impossible to steer, and they sapped all the fun out of my gameplay.

The fish catching game in J&D had nothing to do with the game, was not a platform-based section, and as such was not something I was willing to tolerate in the game.

I like games like Lament of Innocence and Onimusha because they ke

Re:Frustrating.

[Thedalek]

I'm going to assume that the flying sections you're referring to are in Ratchet and Clank, not Jak and Daxter. Jak and Daxter had no flying sections. Annoying hoverbike sections, but no flying.

Sure, the control scheme is different for controlling a vehicle. That's the way it is in GTA III (although it wasn't in GTA and GTA II), and that's the way it pretty universally is in all games that have vehicles. Ask yourself this, though: Did the flying sections' controls make sense for a flying game?

Personall

Re:Frustrating.

[lowmagnet]

Hoverbikes fly, do they not? Flut Flut flies, does it not? I was referring to J&D, not R&C.

I don't care if they controls make sense for a flying game, because what I bought was a platformer.

I haven't played R&C, aside from a demo level. But I wouldn't put a shooting alley in Gran Tursimo, and I'd thank developers to make fine-tuned platformers, not platformers + mini-games.

IGN

[h0mer]

This is one of those reviews on IGN that I have problems with, and think that it's horribly overrated. After seeing that graph of the major game websites' ratings last week, this doesn't surprise me.

It just seems that a sequel, released a year after the first one, without a fresh concept like Jak II, should not get a 9.5.

I'm gonna keep my eye out for R&C2 banners on IGN for the next couple months.

Jak 2 was disappointing...

[Masem]

When comparing the first Jak and the first R&C, both games are very tight, but Jak has just a bit of a edge for some extra polish and a touch more on the humorous side.

However, while the concept of putting GTA-like missions into a platformer is very unique and could possibly charge up that genre for future games, Jak 2 lost a lot in the sequel when comparing game play. Humor is there, for sure, but there's not as much puzzles in terms of how to make certain jumps or get around certain enemy hoards, and while mini-games exist, they're not as varied as what was in Jak 1. The game quickly becomes all about the weapons, as opposed to melee combat, and even there, there's no difficult challenge when in the field when armed. It took me about 18hrs to finish it, but I've heard others were 10hrs or less. And unlike Jak 1, getting the elusive (every secret/object/etc) 100% completion doesn't feel like one will get much for it.

R&C 2, based on the demo, looks like more of the same, but upping/changing the weapons and improving the game engine (there's a level that is a small, 500m-ish diameter asteroid sphere that you can walk around and see the horizon change that fast). So saying that it can just be a mission pack/add-on may be truthful, but sometimes, it's best not to mess with the gameplay of a title when you release a sequel. With Jak 2 being a disappointment despite the hype, I don't expect R&C 2 to let me done even if it is just R&C with new toys. The original was a nicely polished game (save for one underwater against-the-clock level that I know has frusterated players left and right) and if the sequel is simply more of the same, all the better.

Now if they would only get out a sequel to Sly Cooper, keeping again the same formula but upping the gameplay amount, then we'll be all set...

I expect to get my copy of R&C 2 tonight to confirm everything.

Maximo

[dsyu]

I'm probably alone in this, but as for 3D platformers on the PS2, I enjoyed Maximo more than the original R&C, Sly Cooper or Jak. All of them were well done and enjoyable, but I guess I liked Maximo's fairly "pure platformer" approach, and the character was semi-familiar.

However, I have to agree with another poster that Mario64 was one of the best 3D platformers of all time.

Re:Maximo

[August_zero]

Maximo, ahhh what an underappretiated gem that game was/is. Just because it was a little on the tough side, and it discouraged you from saving every 30 seconds by forcing you to pay for it, people get all whiney.

Both Ratchet and Clank games though are damn fine.