Prince of Persia: Big budget art?

When Ubisoft relaunched the Prince of Persia series six years ago with its titular hero reborn as a rugged, strapping prince who had more in common with Shinobi than Ali Baba, you’d probably never have guessed the visage the character has now taken on.

Enter Prince of Persia, 2008’s confusingly self-titled next chapter (and latest reboot) of the series, starring a new prince who is evidently steeped in legend. Although the prince is simply known as just that, he isn’t a nobleman as his predecessor was in 2003's The Sands of Time. Actually, the new prince has little to with the princes of old.

No, the new prince, delivered via the series' development team at Ubisoft Montreal, is everything the old one wasn’t—a dusty, smartass scoundrel who earns a ragged living robbing tombs. He’s part Aragorn, part Indiana Jones and part Captain Mal Reynolds of Firefly fame.

The prince is good at climbing. This is a good thing, 'cause there's a lot of it.
The prince’s new rough-and-tumble look is only part of the equation, however. Although handy with a sword, his combat skills are tempered by the presence of Elika, a devoted princess (and priestess) who wields magic powers against the ‘corrupted,’ demon-like beings who pledged their loyalty to the dark god, Ahriman, who is (sort-of) let loose from his prison at the beginning of the game.

Together, Elika and the prince must cleanse the corrupted lands of…wherever they are, and when not effortlessly swinging and clambering across gorgeous landscapes, they're forced to face off in a series of heavily-cinematic battles with Ahriman’s would-be brood in order to save Elika’s nigh-abandoned kingdom.

Combat has also been modified and tweaked in the new Prince. Far more artistic than technical, there are only two attack types (gauntlet and sword), acrobatics and Elika’s magic. The result are often-climactic, film-like deathmatches that show the prince and his companion in various dazzling acrobatic signatures which highlight the game’s stunningly stylized art direction.


Unlike it's predecessors, combat in Prince of Persia is a one-on-one, cinematic affair.
So, if you’re expecting to find an evil vizier in this Prince of Persia, you won’t.
Call it the Batman Begins of the gaming world—And like Christopher Nolan’s take on the Dark Knight, Ubisoft Montreal’s recreated prince is emblematic of just how much everything old is new again in this game.

It’s actually a near-completely different interpretation of the series, similar in some respects to when Japanese director Ryuhei Kitamura reimagined Hideo Kojima’s PS one classic Metal Gear Solid in the Gamecube’s MGS remake The Twin Snakes (although a bit more drastic).

But unlike The Twin Snakes, which could have been called “Metal Gear Solid: Ridiculous Action Movie,” (a jab I make lovingly—games wouldn’t be the same today without Kojima’s precedent-setting series) Prince of Persia may actually be something else entirely: an “art” game.

Take, for example, Elika. Her presence seems to draw some vague parallels to Sony’s PS2 title ICO, which paired a hero (a little boy with horns) with Yorda, a defenseless princess, on a quest to escape a mysterious castle.

Despite its fantasy setting, ICO feels and plays like an indie film (and rightly so, considering the game has been lauded for its unyielding originality, and many feel it’s responsible for starting the whole ‘games as art’ debate). And while Elika is an actual asset in battle, Prince of Persia doesn’t exactly feel like your run-of-the-mill adventure game, either.

The prince and Elika's travels take them through beautiful, lush environments.
The game actually has more in common with Shadow of the Colossus, Team ICO’s “boss-battle-only” spiritual successor-cum-quasi-prequel to ICO—also added to “art game” canon because of its unique combat structure.

Like Colossus, fighting in the new Prince amounts a series of simply-controlled, one-on-on boss and mini-boss battles that pit the prince and Elika against the guardians (as well as the occasional minion) of each of the game’s distinct, open environments, whose areas become more accessible as you progress.

Also like Team ICO's god-killing masterpiece, Prince of Persia’s open-ended world is vast and beautiful, although you won’t be felling monstrous beasts on horseback. Instead you’ll be spending most of your time traversing across an increasingly vertical world, whether you’re exploring, talking with Elika or healing corrupted lands, in a mix between adventure game exploration and straight-up platforming.

But perhaps the biggest thing about Prince of Persia which is suggestive of “art game” status is that you can’t die. Every time you fall down an endless chasm or are about to feel the rough blade of a corrupted in your chest, Elika’s mysterious light-based powers intervene.

In theory, this isn’t really that much of a departure from most any other game—you make your way through the game, fall down a pit, get attacked by a monster, are shot up by terrorists, whatever—after game over, you either start from a checkpoint or a savepoint.

Without Elika, the prince would be dead. A thousand times over.
It’s understandable why some might throw up red flags over my claim that a Prince of Persia could really be an “art game” to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Team ICO's efforts or those of Killer 7 creator Suda 51. To some degree, I wonder how it could be possible, too.

But hear me out: it's all in the game’s approach. Since the prince can't die, you can’t lose. And if you can't lose, the developers were obviously hoping gamers would find another emphasis on something other than the challenge.

Luckily, there’s myriad parts of the game with which to distract you. Gameplay is smooth, the world sumptuous and absorbing, and its unique mechanics, with a focus less on crossing blades than on running across cliffs and leaping over chasms make for an exciting time.

The prince himself is well developed, swashbuckling, and unlike his predecessors, often laugh out loud funny—particularly during in-game banter sessions you can choose to have with Elika (which makes sense, given that his vocal cords are supplied by none other than Nolan North, who brought Nathan Drake to life with same smart-ass personality in PS3’s Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune).

The game’s script often has the spirit reminiscent of the original Pirates of the Caribbean, complementing the new Prince’s high-end production values, its gorgeous cel-shaded character models and the wonderfully organic world rendered around them. The result is a game brimming with humor and heart.

Clearly, the prince has been through a lot. And he's got a smart mouth, to boot.
Ubisoft Montreal are also clearly a bunch of cinema lovers, which is evident in more than just the combat. Watching Elika cleanse the corruption from filthy, polluted wastelands into brightly lit, lush, colorful landscapes is a major visual treat that show off the game’s technical prowess and artistry, as are some of the game’s epic setpieces. Both bring to mind the kind of unique vision and execution of rousing adventure films.

Would the old prince ever have been able to springboard through the sky between giant globe-like flying machines ripped from the imaginations of Jules Verne and Tim Burton? I don’t think so.

However, as fun as the new Prince is, it isn’t perfect. Some players may find it hard to subscribe to the game's no-death philosophy, and others may be turned off by its “tap a button”-style combat and the general ease given with essential immortality.

Healing corrupted lands is just one of the many unothordox things you'll spend your time doing.
In it’s own way, Prince of Persia does still feel like you’re living out an ancient legend, albeit one that displays a different kind of storytelling than in The Sands of Time. But if art is defined as “thinking outside the box” then Prince of Persia is certainly worthy of such a description.

Like Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World, which Russell Crowe once called “an arthouse movie with a big budget,” the gameplay in Prince of Persia isn’t your typical mainstream industry fare. Hell, the villain isn't even really present, aside from being a much talked about malevolent force.

There are snatches of industry standards, to be sure, but what Ubisoft Montreal has really done is taken the series, stripped it down to its bare essence, and rebuilt it from the inside out with a new, completely different body.

When not dealing with dark gods, the prince enjoys quiet walks in the countryside.
True, without the promise of death, the presence of real tension in the game is questionable, but maybe it’s not the point, either. If more games would take more risks like this, video games could very well develop into the same kind of multifaceted medium that film industry has become.

And if Ubisoft can do it to the new Prince, an unabashedly high profile game which wears its budget on its sleeve, maybe more companies should be able to take such chances. It’s likely that's precisely the message the game is trying to get across, otherwise such drastic changes probably wouldn't have made it beyond the stage of concept art.

It’s rare that art games move that many units, but it doesn’t make them any less important—such may well be the case with this game.

So, will the industry listen? Only time will tell. But even if Prince of Persia isn’t perfect, it too is important. It's bold and brassy, and most notably, tries something different. Do yourself a favor—don’t ignore this one.

Prince of Persia
4.5 out of 5 stars
Ubisoft
PS3, Xbox 360
$39.99

• Princely quips
  
  The prince definitely has a way with words, as is clearly seen in his conversations with Elika and elsewhere in the game. Here's some of our favorites:
  
  P: - "Ugh! I was on my way home. I had more gold than you could--I'd'a had wine! Women! I'd had carpets this thick!"
  
  P: - "Hey, you're cute, but not 'stay and fight a dark god' cute."
  E: - "Would you have helped my father if he had asked you?"
  P: - "He's not that cute, either."
  
  P: - "Anything else you think you should be telling me?"
  E: - "You're an idiot."
  
  P: - "I like your top."
  E: - "I think I have a spare if you'd like it."
  
  E: - "Just be patient. Patience brings rewards."
  P: - "So does walking into a harem covered with chocolate."
  
  P: - "Do you often go falling out of the sky on to men? I mean, you're a good-looking girl and all...obviously pretty high maintenance, but you shouldn't need to go dropping out of the sky on to men."
  
  P: - "Do corruption stains come out?"
  P: - "Gods, monsters, crazy women...what's the difference?"
  P: - "Run, jump, die, repeat. Run, jump, die, repeat. I'm starting to get the hang of this!"
  P: - "She's not my girlfriend, she's my donkey."
  

PS3...3D?

Sony, Sony, Sony. What are we going to do with you? It's not like CES, Las Vegas' annual consumer electronics show, is really that big a deal (it's no E3 or Leipzig, or anything) but it seems like you'd want to bring a something a little more interesting than...3D PS3 games.

Yes, you read that right. At this year's show Sony had tech demos of Gran Turismo 5, Motorstorm and Wipeout HD running in RealD 3D, a new kind of 3D technology. So far, all the impressions I've read of Sony's demonstrations have been pretty positive. And while the idea of a 3D game is cool, this idea seems troublesome to me.

Aside from gamers having to wear 3D glasses in order to experience this technology, this feel like a gimmick to me. Anyone remember Nintendo's Virtual Boy? If that didn't work, (although Nintendo's console was situated so that it was almost impossible to play for more than 10 minutes before it became extremely uncomfortable--Sony's just asking you to wear a pair of dorky glasses like some Persona 4 reject) I'm not sure it would work this time around, either.

Now, Sony stressed that these tech demos were just that--demonstrations of new technology experimentation. That means there are no official plans to make 3D PS3 games. At least, not yet.

The bottom line is, until we can get 3D holograph displays like the ones in Blade Runner, should gaming really move in this direction? It seems like a bit of a misstep. Why don't more developers continue to try thinking outside the box in terms of game innovation? LittleBigPlanet, Mirror's Edge, Braid--last year these games (to name a few) made gamers think in new ways, while delivering on the sort of forward thinking the gaming industry needs--especially if we're really supposed to get "next-gen" games.

Look, the idea of games that "pop", even at the cost of wearing ridiculous 3D glasses, is admittedly kind of cool, but c'mon guys. Until the industry starts taking itself in a more creative direction, can't we focus on making games more progressive instead of just making them a tiny bit flashier?

Thanks to IGN's PS3 site for the story.

Tomb Raider: Underworld is a series pinnacle, if an imperfect one

In the first few minutes of Tomb Raider: Underworld, developer Crystal Dynamics really push the game’s bombast. The building Da Vinci Code-esque title screen music, Lara’s escape from a burning Croft Manor in the first level, the script’s timely cut to a week previous just as Lara is inexplicably getting shot at by her allies—these are all epic hooks to draw you in.

Then Ms. Croft is plunked into the Mediterranean, determined to scuba her way to (what else) an ancient artifact. Compared to her brief jaunt through the flaming wreckage of her home, Lara’s exploration of the Mediterranean and the submerged ruins beneath it feel downright tranquil. Even when she encounters a screen filling Kraken, the beast just seems sleepily annoyed at Lara’s presence, only tentacle-lashing her if she gets too close.

These might seem like points against the game, but they aren’t. Rather than arming Lara to the teeth and making her blast the mythical creature to kingdom come, you’ve got to figure out a way to break a giant stone chandelier-looking structure hanging from the ceiling to crush the Kraken’s head with a brains-over-brawn approach that’s prevalent throughout.

However, with its surprisingly solid story, high production values and some occasional fireworks, Underworld certainly does its best to be the most epic Tomb Raider to date. But with the game’s more natural exploration and beautifully-crafted environmental puzzles taking precedence over gunning down faceless goons and wild critters (as has sometimes been the case in past games), the game is actually a quieter affair, if one that’s no less compelling, than its opening moments might have you believe.

Instead, this is Tomb Raider in its element—if you don’t want to spend all your time exploring dead cities and secret passages, Underworld isn’t the game for you.

Underworld's grapple mechanic is much improved over previous iterations.

In terms of both story and design, the game is also as much about Crystal D’s previous efforts with the series as it is a standalone game. The caveat is that while Underworld is great in its own right, some shoddy technical problems with the game force me to say so with some trepidation, based on the series’ past mistakes and marred track record.

The developer’s first shot with Ms. Croft, 2006’s Tomb Raider: Legend, introduced gameplay far more fluid than the stubbornly rigid originals, essentially giving the series an update for the current generation while allowing Tomb Raider another chance to go toe-to-toe with its competition—something a number of unoriginal sequels that were rushed in time for Christmas had been preventing for years.

Legend was a much-needed breath of fresh air for the series, although it kept some action-game elements and modern locales for Lara to traipse about in addition to her usual crypt-like haunts. Crystal D followed up Legend with 2007’s Tomb Raider: Anniversary, essentially a re-imagining of the original game complete with its isolating, damn-near enemy-less design.

Both games felt and played well, earning the series more acclaim than it had seen since ’97’s Tomb Raider II—it was obvious Crystal D had taken the time to get things right.

Which brings us to Underworld, the team’s first release that takes advantage of both the PS3 and the Xbox 360’s hardware. While technically a continuation of the events in Legend (prepare to be confused if you haven’t played it), Underworld is a mash-up of sorts, taking some of the better elements of the last two games while wrapping up Legend’s story arch, which deals with Lara looking for her believed-to-be-dead mother in the Norse land of the dead.

The environments Lara explores are bigger and more impressive than ever.

The game’s levels are actually the stars of the show. Unlike Indy, Ms. Croft could never get by just on personality (although Lara has shown more depth than ever before since Crystal D took over), but thanks to the team’s talented level designers, she doesn’t have to. Underworld’s various sites of antiquity, from Thailand to Mexico, are impeccably rendered and lighted, wondrous to behold and massive enough that you’ll have to stop and figure out where to go or what to do next.

The game retains linearity, but in these huge, open environments everything feels much more natural. Exploration has always been a cornerstone of the series, and thankfully Crystal D doesn’t shy away from it here. Whether you're negotiating traps, solving wonderfully conceived ancient puzzles or simply trying to get from point A to point B, this is the most organic Tomb Raider yet, and as a result, gameplay is a lot of fun.

Yet for all its sweeping grandiosity, Underworld tears a little more at the seams than either Legend or Anniversary. For every sprawling jungle or temple Lara encounters, there are inconsistencies with the frame rate, and with every brain-busting puzzle there are glitches between animations and invisible barriers around objects which Lara can and often will get stuck on.

Each time the game draws you in with beautiful graphics and awesome, gargantuan setpieces like a cavernous room of giant swinging pendulums in the shape of Norse hammers—and it will happen plenty—these numerous little problems will rob you of some of the experience. I don't like to nitpick, but when the final boss of the game gets stuck in the air until you move to a part of the level that triggers another set of attacks, it kind of takes away from the overall experience.

Poor dead critters.

The game is also a bit short, although new downloadable levels coming out sometime early in 2009 could increase the length to some extent. Sadly, Underworld’s DLC is exclusive to the 360 version of the game at the moment, so unless Sony starts making overtures to Crystal D, it's unlikely PS3 owners will see the full story on their console.

Don’t get me wrong. I love Underworld, for as long as it lasts. But both because of the aforementioned missteps the series has seen in the past, as well as Crystal D’s success in reviving Tomb Raider into a capable series, these little chinks in Underworld’s armor are more than just annoyances—they’re distressing warning signs that future games could be shipped half-done just to make a buck.

Since Underworld is the close of a multi-game story, it seems logical that Crystal D will go back to the drawing board for whatever’s next for Lara, taking their time to put out a new revamped game that breaks the formula they’ve more or less perfected. But for better or worse, Underworld is a reminder of how much fun that formula can be, and is a proper send-off of the series until Lara’s next adventure.

Tomb Raider: Underworld
4 out 5 stars
Eidos
PS3, Xbox 360
$59.99

--

Disagree with this review? Have something to say to the reviewer? Leave a comment below!