To be honest, I didn't expect much when I went to see the movie. From what I heard here and there, however there are many glowing reviews of the movie online. However, I didn't expect what came out of the movie - as such the following impression could as well be due to missed expectations (which I believed to have kept low) and not to a movie that missed it's mark.
I've read, and enjoyed, all of the Harry Potter books - the first being my favorite. Each book sets out a puzzle. May it be finding out who the evil teacher is, discovering who a given person is, finding a specific person, etc. And once the puzzle is solved -- at the last minute of course -- does the story come to an end, usually through some battle. As well, the puzzle has plenty of tracks to send the three protagonists off course, and the school-year keeps them occupied.
Upon watching the movie, something didn't feel right. The characters were there, however there was this 'puzzle' component that was missing. Of course there was a search for who the `Half Blood Prince' was, and what Malfoy was doing, and the final memory from Slughorn. There were no false roads - everything was straight-forward and clear.
I understand this movie is supposed to serve as a bridge to the other two, albeit it feels like they simplified it for the sake of making the last two better. Every major component is there, but not fleshed out. There are puzzles, but no false paths that can be deciphered until the next movie.
The movie finished off as a bridge to the next, whereas the book went out with a bang aided by a battle at Hogwarts castle between students+teachers versus death eaters with Malfoy and Dumbledore discussing amidst the chaos while Harry is stuck underneath his invisibility cloak immobilized by Dumbledore; this one had Dumbledore die and death eaters proudly running off and only killing Dumbledore. Maybe my favorite scene in the book - absent in the movie.
The other scene in the book that I can clearly recall - was that of Moaning Myrtle screaming "murder" after Harry hits Draco with the spell 'sectumsempra'. In the book - there is consequence for Harry - and Snape clearly goes for the book. In the movie, in practically the next scene Harry resolves to get rid of the book - and he just walks away from a bloodied Draco letting Snape tend to Draco's wounds.
In the end, it wasn't a bad movie, neither was it as good as it's predecessors in my opinion. My opinion has nothing to do with the quality of the movie's visuals or audio (which are superb - I wouldn't expect anything less from a big budget movie) but the chosen content. This seems to be because two scenes that I associated as memorable from the book were missing from the movie.
Showing posts with label Review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Review. Show all posts
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Review of SimCity for iPod
SimCity, one of my favorite games. Like Sonic the Hedgehog used to be my favorite game in the old days of the Sega Genesis. Also, like Sonic, it's quality and fun factor has been steadily going downhill.
First, my assumptions about this game: SimCity 2000 didn't require much in terms of computing power, and was a good game. I'll use that as a baseline comparison - not SimCity 3000 even though it's the engine that the game is built upon...
Initial impressions you'll be blown away. The in-game UI works great for laying down zones, dropping down buildings, and generally managing your city. Like this game was built for a great first impression.
Now, I want to put on an overlay to see what's going on behind the scenes. There is a noticeable loading time to get to the screen to select an overlay, and getting back to the game. SimCity 2000 easily wins here with it's speed. Why are overlays important? it's the only way to know how the city is doing. When playing SimCity 4, I normally always play with an overlay that tells me important information, such as pollution levels, desirability, traffic, etc. Only if I didn't always switch between them.
Next is traffic. A city isn't alive unless you see the ants walking around. And it gives a quick way to get traffic data without pulling up an overlay. If you zoom in close enough, SimCity for iPod will show traffic. Point goes to SimCity for iPod. Traffic looks nicer than blue dashes.
Following item is budget. Anyone who has played SimCity knows that it's not the initial cost that matters but the recurring monthly cost. The initial cost is usually quite cheap in the long-run. SimCity iPod refuses to display the recurring cost until you place an item and get billed for it. Instant win for SimCity 2000 that didn't fear adding in a bit of "complicated" detail.
Graphical presentation. No way SimCity 2000 could compete with the beauty of the version for iPod. It looks like a pristine ghost-town. SimCity with it's limited color palette had it's charm. With better hardware, SimCity for iPod wins. Especially with the continuous zoom feature, something that not even SimCity 4 had. Unfortunately, zooming is a bit difficult as it must be done at a specific angle.
Terraforming. SimCity for iPod is not supposed to support this, but it does. You can terraform with bridges. I was going to leave this out, but insta-win for SimCity 2000.
What's the point I'm trying to make here? There's more than initial presentation that's important, nor initial ease-of-use. The developers seem to have forgotten that people want living cities (in the first release on the app store at least) - which is what makes SimCity 4 amazing - it feels alive. Like humans walking along the side-walk, etc. The engine doesn't need to be perfect - it's what it presents that's important. Not to say that the visuals aren't important, but selecting the right ones are.
First, my assumptions about this game: SimCity 2000 didn't require much in terms of computing power, and was a good game. I'll use that as a baseline comparison - not SimCity 3000 even though it's the engine that the game is built upon...
Initial impressions you'll be blown away. The in-game UI works great for laying down zones, dropping down buildings, and generally managing your city. Like this game was built for a great first impression.
Now, I want to put on an overlay to see what's going on behind the scenes. There is a noticeable loading time to get to the screen to select an overlay, and getting back to the game. SimCity 2000 easily wins here with it's speed. Why are overlays important? it's the only way to know how the city is doing. When playing SimCity 4, I normally always play with an overlay that tells me important information, such as pollution levels, desirability, traffic, etc. Only if I didn't always switch between them.
Next is traffic. A city isn't alive unless you see the ants walking around. And it gives a quick way to get traffic data without pulling up an overlay. If you zoom in close enough, SimCity for iPod will show traffic. Point goes to SimCity for iPod. Traffic looks nicer than blue dashes.
Following item is budget. Anyone who has played SimCity knows that it's not the initial cost that matters but the recurring monthly cost. The initial cost is usually quite cheap in the long-run. SimCity iPod refuses to display the recurring cost until you place an item and get billed for it. Instant win for SimCity 2000 that didn't fear adding in a bit of "complicated" detail.
Graphical presentation. No way SimCity 2000 could compete with the beauty of the version for iPod. It looks like a pristine ghost-town. SimCity with it's limited color palette had it's charm. With better hardware, SimCity for iPod wins. Especially with the continuous zoom feature, something that not even SimCity 4 had. Unfortunately, zooming is a bit difficult as it must be done at a specific angle.
Terraforming. SimCity for iPod is not supposed to support this, but it does. You can terraform with bridges. I was going to leave this out, but insta-win for SimCity 2000.
What's the point I'm trying to make here? There's more than initial presentation that's important, nor initial ease-of-use. The developers seem to have forgotten that people want living cities (in the first release on the app store at least) - which is what makes SimCity 4 amazing - it feels alive. Like humans walking along the side-walk, etc. The engine doesn't need to be perfect - it's what it presents that's important. Not to say that the visuals aren't important, but selecting the right ones are.
Monday, April 28, 2008
Mario Kart Wii
I was skeptical. Reading review after review, either from 1up, IGN, GameSpot (who trusts them?), EGM, and any other site that was captured by the Google web crawler. Every person seemed to be really beating down on the game. It felt like -- this is yet another addition to the Mario Kart series. You know what to expect.
After having played the game for a while (finishing the 50cc, now working on the 100cc), that this is Mario Kart as I'd expect it. You have read all the bad from other sites - and I can state that they are correct in their analysis. At times you win by luck, items are rigged so that the racers remain close together, there is one AI that is destined to be your main competitor chosen at the beginning of each race...
But this is nothing new. All people who know the franchise must be aware of this. It was like that in the GBA version, and it was like that in the N64 version.
Before continuing, Mario Kart is a kart driving game, but it's also an action based kart driving game. If I have a power-up, I want someone to target it with. This puts the blue-shell and star in perspective. If you're behind, you'll want some action or else the race will be boring - and these power-ups rarely, if ever, pull you to the top 3. They just bring you towards where all the activity is. If you want a racing game purely involving skill - look elsewhere unless you only want to deal with the multiplayer/vs mode. I'm defending their decision, yes, but do agree that some of the complaints of reviewers were well founded.
The choice of maps from previous games seems questionable. None of them I was truly fond of (my favorite still being Yoshi's maze on the N64 version). The new courses though are great. Wario's Gold Mine is amazing, so is blasting across the highway in the star cup. This game deserves at least to be rented to play all the courses (on 50cc mode, you'll see them in about a day max, half a day or less if you're good).
Speaking of the N64 version, I played that a day before, so it's fresh in my mind. First, blue shells are much more commonplace in Mario Kart Wii. If this is a good thing, we'll know in the long run. It is annoying, thus forcing you to stay behind until the last minute... which I never do - thus always getting hit by the shell.
The wheel actually plays very well. I thought I'd go back to my classic controller, but have been hooked on it. (use the Wii Wheel for a few laughs...)
But there's one glaring failure of the game. The manual. For example, why do I get random boosts in speed for no reason I can tell in game (not from drifting, just regular driving)? What's the difference between heavy-weights and light-weight classes? This gets into how karts are coupled to drivers, and other nuances of the game. For gamers, this doesn't matter - it's for the Mario Kart uninitiated that I worry about...
After having played the game for a while (finishing the 50cc, now working on the 100cc), that this is Mario Kart as I'd expect it. You have read all the bad from other sites - and I can state that they are correct in their analysis. At times you win by luck, items are rigged so that the racers remain close together, there is one AI that is destined to be your main competitor chosen at the beginning of each race...
But this is nothing new. All people who know the franchise must be aware of this. It was like that in the GBA version, and it was like that in the N64 version.
Before continuing, Mario Kart is a kart driving game, but it's also an action based kart driving game. If I have a power-up, I want someone to target it with. This puts the blue-shell and star in perspective. If you're behind, you'll want some action or else the race will be boring - and these power-ups rarely, if ever, pull you to the top 3. They just bring you towards where all the activity is. If you want a racing game purely involving skill - look elsewhere unless you only want to deal with the multiplayer/vs mode. I'm defending their decision, yes, but do agree that some of the complaints of reviewers were well founded.
The choice of maps from previous games seems questionable. None of them I was truly fond of (my favorite still being Yoshi's maze on the N64 version). The new courses though are great. Wario's Gold Mine is amazing, so is blasting across the highway in the star cup. This game deserves at least to be rented to play all the courses (on 50cc mode, you'll see them in about a day max, half a day or less if you're good).
Speaking of the N64 version, I played that a day before, so it's fresh in my mind. First, blue shells are much more commonplace in Mario Kart Wii. If this is a good thing, we'll know in the long run. It is annoying, thus forcing you to stay behind until the last minute... which I never do - thus always getting hit by the shell.
The wheel actually plays very well. I thought I'd go back to my classic controller, but have been hooked on it. (use the Wii Wheel for a few laughs...)
But there's one glaring failure of the game. The manual. For example, why do I get random boosts in speed for no reason I can tell in game (not from drifting, just regular driving)? What's the difference between heavy-weights and light-weight classes? This gets into how karts are coupled to drivers, and other nuances of the game. For gamers, this doesn't matter - it's for the Mario Kart uninitiated that I worry about...
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Review of Advance Wars: Days of Ruin
Apart from scaring the person at the counter in the electronics department at the local grocer as I bought the game the day it came out; I've been quite pleased with the latest installment in the series.
Compared to Advance Wars DS and Advance Wars 2, this game seems even easier. I have managed to get through the first dozen levels with mostly S-ranks all over the place. The AI doesn't seem to defend their home base making capturing it a much more trivial affair (my favorite strategy involves a dozen War Tanks surrounding the enemy base while it's being captured). For example, the first level with boats, the AI moved all of its forces to attack my tank leaving its base free (about 3 moves away) - long enough to load up a lander (moving with 3 decoy ships that couldn't attack - they were destroyed, the lander survived) and they had enough time to dock and capture the enemy's HQ. In a subsequent level, the HQ was defended by missiles (the things only useful against air units) - again, with a lander (boats carrying units) it was trivial to bring two tanks to hold off the attack and a motorcycle to take care of the HQ.
The audio is good, but the music for certain COs feels like noise - but it doesn't feel out of place either. Actually, put on headphones, it sounds less like noise.
The graphics are much better - except for the wooden areas which look more like grass. But given this game's strength is not graphics (Final Fantasy Tactics Advance 2 looks much better); I don't really care as much.
The battles scenes are nice, but feel slower. For example, in DS they would be zoomed in or out then attack. In Days of Ruin, opposing forces appear on a different screen - the first attacks, while the second waits for the bombs to arrive.
The story within the campaign is good, and easy to get into. The amount of text to read to follow the story can seem tedious, so if you lose hit start to skip all the text. (something I've noticed with Intelligent System's games as I've been recently playing Fire Emblem for Wii - where they go to a point of mocking that fact in Paper Mario).
Downloading maps and uploading them was very easy. Too easy some could say. I have yet to see if playing against random opponents compares to playing against the AI (this is primarily a game I play on the bus)
The gameplay is standard Advance Wars fare. Some units found a new name, and some now can do more. Also, CO powers a not to be found in the first 17 or so levels in the campaign - meaning you can't rely on a CO power to save the day - which is a good thing in my opinion. The motorcycle units are extremely useful and remove the need for the transport/mech combination used to initially capture properties.
In the end, I'm really enjoying this game - except for the fact that I haven't sumbled onto an overly difficult level yet (still have hopes that one will slow me down).
Compared to Advance Wars DS and Advance Wars 2, this game seems even easier. I have managed to get through the first dozen levels with mostly S-ranks all over the place. The AI doesn't seem to defend their home base making capturing it a much more trivial affair (my favorite strategy involves a dozen War Tanks surrounding the enemy base while it's being captured). For example, the first level with boats, the AI moved all of its forces to attack my tank leaving its base free (about 3 moves away) - long enough to load up a lander (moving with 3 decoy ships that couldn't attack - they were destroyed, the lander survived) and they had enough time to dock and capture the enemy's HQ. In a subsequent level, the HQ was defended by missiles (the things only useful against air units) - again, with a lander (boats carrying units) it was trivial to bring two tanks to hold off the attack and a motorcycle to take care of the HQ.
The audio is good, but the music for certain COs feels like noise - but it doesn't feel out of place either. Actually, put on headphones, it sounds less like noise.
The graphics are much better - except for the wooden areas which look more like grass. But given this game's strength is not graphics (Final Fantasy Tactics Advance 2 looks much better); I don't really care as much.
The battles scenes are nice, but feel slower. For example, in DS they would be zoomed in or out then attack. In Days of Ruin, opposing forces appear on a different screen - the first attacks, while the second waits for the bombs to arrive.
The story within the campaign is good, and easy to get into. The amount of text to read to follow the story can seem tedious, so if you lose hit start to skip all the text. (something I've noticed with Intelligent System's games as I've been recently playing Fire Emblem for Wii - where they go to a point of mocking that fact in Paper Mario).
Downloading maps and uploading them was very easy. Too easy some could say. I have yet to see if playing against random opponents compares to playing against the AI (this is primarily a game I play on the bus)
The gameplay is standard Advance Wars fare. Some units found a new name, and some now can do more. Also, CO powers a not to be found in the first 17 or so levels in the campaign - meaning you can't rely on a CO power to save the day - which is a good thing in my opinion. The motorcycle units are extremely useful and remove the need for the transport/mech combination used to initially capture properties.
In the end, I'm really enjoying this game - except for the fact that I haven't sumbled onto an overly difficult level yet (still have hopes that one will slow me down).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)