|
 Let's Play Prince of Persia Prince of Persia is the 2008 incarnation in a storied series of games about a guy who can jump really well. It's very different from the other entires in the series, but it maintains the focus on platforming. The most important thing to note, right away, is that the game is not in any way related to the famous PS2 trilogy that was its predecessor. The game we're playing here has a new world, new characters, and new mechanics. It deals with themes of temptation, corruption, greed, morality, idealism, destiny, duty, and sand. Lots of sand, narratively or otherwise. I really don't want to spoil too much, but I deeply love this game, its characters, its mythology, and its art. I hope you find as much to love as I did. The commentary and let's play are going to be information focused, to give you as much insight into the game mechanics and world as possible.                               Thank you for watching! Extras: Original E3 Trailer Ubidays Trailer Game Conference Trailer Development Diary Making of Prince of Persia GamesAreSupernice fucked around with this message at 03:52 on Jan 19, 2016 |
#
¿
Dec 31, 2015 08:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 20, 2024 00:15 |
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:Oh thank god I don't have to finish my 2008 LP any more Didn't mean to step in on your territory, but I was thinking the style of our LPs was different enough to warrant a second thread. Fat Samurai posted:I didn't play this one at release because every review was whining about it being a bad game for babies, unworthy of the PoP tag. Played it a couple of years later and decided reviewers had absolutely no idea of what they were talking about. It is one of my favorite games of last gen, in spite of a complete lack of difficulty. There's a lot more there to appreciate. anilEhilated posted:I wouldn't mind it being easy if it wasn't so boring to play. I understand that sentiment. I still found something greatly enjoyable in the simplistic platforming and combat.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
whowhatwhere posted:In that your style involves actually updating? I meant more that his LP seemed to be primarily focused on entertainment, while mine is centered around keeping the viewers invested in the atmosphere and world. They're both good approaches, I just felt the game deserved an LP like this. Man, I am really excited to show off this game's narrative.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
Our first steps into a lost culture.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
SovietPotatoe posted:I like how this game's method of descending large vertical distances is basically nails on a chalkboard. Let me know how the audio is in the newest video, and I'll change the audio balancing up if it's still off. Thank you, it's important to be able to hear the music and characters.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
Tax Refund posted:If you don't mind, GamesAreSupernice, I'll give a little background on the real-world cultural stuff that the game is drawing from. (Note: I haven't made it a particular study, so if someone knows more than me and sees something I got wrong, please correct me). Thank you for the infopost! It is always nice to see other people interested in such things.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2015 21:34
|
|
|
Blind Sally posted:There's no such thing as "LP Territory". If anyone told you otherwise, then they're nuts. Have fun, LP, and good luck with PoP2008. Oh, no one told me such a thing, I just really hate the idea of being rude.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
The science of magic.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
Major_JF posted:Have you ever gotten the "be gentle with her" achievement? I have, why?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
Major_JF posted:Mostly that the 2 LPs of this game that I have seen have claimed that that achievement is impossible. I'm playing the PS3 version, so maybe that has something to do with it?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2016 02:04
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:I never said it was impossible (though if there is video evidence of this, I vehemently deny saying it), I said the game is geared towards you not getting it just by doing a normal playthrough. You're encouraged to take stupid risks and experiment just because you have that level of freedom thanks to Elika. There's other factors at play too like the semi-automated platforming sections that encourage accidental mistiming of actions, or the game's somewhat arbitrary "fall to death animation" trigger distances, and the game's dodgy collision detection parameters, all of which contribute to some otherwise unforced errors. I understand that the semi-automated platforming causes some errors when one tries to take the normal level of control, because that happened to me a lot, but I'd argue the hit detection is balanced in favor of the player, if anything. It was made to be rather lenient.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2016 07:28
|
|
|
I love this particular location.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
Nidoking posted:I wouldn't call the combat "satisfying" because there's so little variety to it, and it's pretty much just hitting whatever buttons until the enemy's health drops enough. There's little reason to move around, use specific types of attacks, or really do anything but wait for an opening and slash a few times. Even if you bother to learn the long combos, the fights all take longer than I have the patience for, and the closest the game comes to adding any sort of challenge is making you use a specific attack based on what color the enemy turns, which tends to be more of an annoyance than anything else because by the end of the game, they're changing colors in the middle of your combos, so it's even more futile to try anything but a few slashes at a time. You've got four Corrupted and one generic enemy, and the game encourages you to avoid fighting the generic enemies whenever possible. There's no reward at all for the combat except for plot progression. It may be because of the "Prince of Persia" title inviting comparisons to the Sands of Time trilogy, which had much more dynamic combat including multiple enemies of many types, but the combat in this game feels terrible to me and almost always makes me want to skip it. I don't disagree with your criticisms, but I also don't think they take away what I consider to be the highlight of the game. You're learning about who The Prince and Elika are, and you're learning about the game world. The non-linearity doesn't really hamper that. Also they do reference previous chats occasionally. The combat and platforming are both very, very simplistic, and although I've played games with far more involved battle systems, I think the style and feedback are enjoyable. A lot of the gameplay systems are geared toward more casual players, and I think they did a good job balancing them with people who wanted good design.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
64bitrobot posted:Just started watching and I have to admit this game looks pretty fun. I'm gonna go read the rest of the thread now and watch the other videos. I'm very glad to hear that! I would recommend playing the game yourself, but if that's not an option, I hope to do it justice.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Carbon dioxide posted:I haven't played the game, and it looks to me like it's not the best game out there, but it's a fun way to spend some time, running on walls, jumping around. The gameplay really isn't spectacular, but I think that's alright, it's serviceable enough.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Should be a cleaner picture, clearer audio, and higher framerate than any previous recordings.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2016 01:08
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2016 07:51
|
|
|
No Gravitas posted:This game sure gets pretty at times. The art direction is my favorite part by far.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
Major_JF posted:Every time I see the Wings of Ormazd power used I can't help but think of These. This made me want to check out the 2d version of PoP2008.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2016 05:13
|
|
|
ManlyGrunting posted:I gotta say, having seen this game again it really does nail the feel of a playable fairy tale. I still have a fond spot for this game, not sure why the gaming community was so hard on it at release (gamers as a horde are idiots, news at eleven). I think it was because of the change in gameplay style (focused on lenient and more casual movement) and the removal of the previous Prince. It was advertised as a different game though, so I don't understand the outrage.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2016 06:28
|
|
|
GuyUpNorth posted:Very concept of "death" - no matter how irrelevant it was in Sands of Time trilogy when you could rewind to safe point within limit - being removed seriously turned me off from the idea. There's no failing, and thus no success when you finally beat that one section full of traps within time limit. I don't think failure is always important. Creating a big challenge was really not high on the list of priorities for PoP2008, and that's fine.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
Blind Sally posted:I mean, sure, it's fine, but it doesn't really make for great discussion. I agree.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
Mraagvpeine posted:I finished watching The Reservoir and wow Prince, way to be an rear end in a top hat. I think the amount of times he asks Elika if she's okay cancels that out.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
Jim Flatline posted:The issue with this game is that it isn't really a platformer in the classic sense, it's a series of quicktime events where the prompts are environmental markers. I think you could say that about any platformer with Prince of Persia's jumping mechanics (not this one, the PS2 games as well, and other games that utilize its control scheme). The difference is the timing in the environmental markers. The timing in 2008 is very lenient, but I don't think that's a bad thing. It was just made with a different set of priorities.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 10:42
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
Omobono posted:While this is not a bad game, I feel it's worse than the sands of time trilogy; here's my reasons for that: I can understand feeling it's worse from a game design perspective, I just feel it's got its own strengths.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
I feel like the flaws you mentioned with the architectural design are present in the final game of the Sands of Time trilogy, which is arguably the best game of the bunch. Nevermind that the Ahura have the same excuse of their civilization being left to severe decay. But, aside from that (which can be considered a legitimate flaw, I think), everything else you mentioned seemingly comes down to "it was made with different game design principles than Sands of Time". Did Sands of Time have more traditional progression and difficulty? Yes. But that is because it was meant to be linear, and it had a very different focus from 2008. I understand preferring the PS2 trilogy. There's nothing at all wrong with desiring its design over 2008's, but when you're analyzing a work, it helps to keep in mind what the work was attempting to accomplish.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
Carbon dioxide posted:I would like to note that I almost unbookmarked this thread because of the high pace of the updates, and my limited free time, until I noticed that most videos are relatively short. Will do. I apologize for the frequent updates (had no idea I would be saying that), but I've got a lot to cover and so little time to cover it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
Jim Flatline posted:No, it's completely different. In 2008 you press the ring button when you reach a ring, for example, that requires zero thought in how you're going to traverse the environment. The majority of the game is this sort of QTE press-button-at-the-right-time gameplay. I don't think having dedicated buttons for specific functions is enough to differentiate the two on a conceptual level. In the Sands of Time trilogy, you still press a certain button when you reach a certain environmental mark. If that sounds like a vague blanket statement, that's the point. All games are essentially timed button presses, and with the PoP games (both this one and the Sands of Time trilogy), the button presses require less movement and agency than other games in their genre. That isn't a bad thing.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 23:33
|
|
|
I can see his point, about the linearity of the platforming (even if the overall structure isn't linear). But, even supposing it could be described as an FMV game, I still wouldn't call that a bad thing. Regardless of what the gameplay can be classified as, or how it compares to the Sands of Time trilogy, it seems pretty appropriate for what they intended to make.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
Nidoking posted:This is, I think, the point where we agree to disagree. I think many of us, myself included, tend to take an egocentric view of things like games and take it as read that what we enjoy more is better. Jak & Daxter went from a platformer to a sandbox/open-world mission-based platformer to, of all things, a racing game. It wasn't a bad racing game, but for people who don't like racing games, it wasn't likely to be a very enjoyable game. Final Fantasy went from RPGs to MMORPGs and what amount to slightly interactive movies, and the general consensus among fans of the series is that the games have been going downhill as a result. This game is more or less a different genre of game while retaining the same title, and while it loses everything I enjoyed about the earlier games in the series, obviously there will be people who like it more than its predecessors. I still don't understand why companies can't just come up with new names for completely different games, especially when there's absolutely no story correlation at all, but they'd rather sell one game to a bunch of angry people than save that goodwill for future endeavors. I really doubt anyone would have looked at this game and said "This is too much like Sands of Time. Why didn't they just call it Prince of Persia?" I bought it expecting something that I didn't get, and I don't think many of the people who wanted this game were attracted by the title of a series they obviously didn't like that much, but that's marketing for you. They made a decent game for some people, then sold it to a different group of people. I suppose I never understood that sentiment. Sands of Time is much different from the original PoP, for example, and this PoP wasn't advertised or shown as a continuation of the sands of time trilogy. I would get it if they tried to trick people, but they didn't. All the information was there and you knew it wasn't the same game.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
Jim Flatline posted:Sands Of Time is overrated, Warrior Within is the best of the trilogy but people seem to dislike it for the wrong reasons. I would rather play 2008 again rather than Sands Of Time again. I enjoy Sands of Time for creating the concept, but as for level-design, I think Warrior Within outclasses it. Two Thrones is my favorite narratively.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
GuyUpNorth posted:Warrior Within is really, really dark and I understand why people don't like that aspect at least. Surprisingly for Ubisoft, they managed to balance it by Two Thrones. They reference the "darker" aspects of Warrior Within in Two Thrones, and manage to turn it into a piece of The Prince's journey, so even if it wasn't self-aware at first, it was in the end.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
I like these levels a lot
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 20, 2024 00:15 |
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2016 20:14
|
|