I picked it up and played through the second chapter. It's a fun game, though it seems like the main strategy is to use the jump slash move over and over. Graphically, it looks decent, though the lighting is rather basic and the game could have used some AA. In any event, it's a fun action game and well worth playing.
Anyone played Ninja Gaiden Sigma?
- Thread starter ban25
- Start date
There are many other moves to work out...jump slash IS NOT the main strategy - though it may be yours. Turn it onto hard and you will die a painful and reoccuring death if your main strategy remains the same
inefficient
Veteran
Well first 2 chapters are fairly easy. Brown Ninja's from the first chapter can't even break your guard. You can just hold down block and be invincible. White Ninja's and the Samurai in chapter 2 are barely better.
But that quickly changes. Soon your opponents start using throws on you, or they start throwing stuff at you or shoot at you. You will be begging for mercy soon enough!
But that quickly changes. Soon your opponents start using throws on you, or they start throwing stuff at you or shoot at you. You will be begging for mercy soon enough!
It's part of my monster PS3 pre-order list but it hasn't arrived yet. The demo was pretty sweet though and I liked the box version.
Cant' wait for the rest though; I've ordered:
Ninja Gaiden Sigma
Haze
Heavenly Sword
Dark Sector
The Darkness
Warhawk
Killzone 2
Lair
Going to have a busy few months gaming!
Cant' wait for the rest though; I've ordered:
Ninja Gaiden Sigma
Haze
Heavenly Sword
Dark Sector
The Darkness
Warhawk
Killzone 2
Lair
Going to have a busy few months gaming!
Eurogamer reviewed it rather harshly (though probably fairly?)
http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=79093
http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=79093
Funny...everything they pick on was a problem with the original game (expcept graphics)....yet it grated them this time. I wonder, being on the PS3....it couldn't be very good could it.
Gradthrawn
Veteran
I think that's exactly their point. Those problems were fine last gen, but for a supposed next-gen remake, they're not as forgivable.
It grated them this time, because as they say themselves, it is now 2007, not 2004, and we've been spoilt rotten with better games (God of War, for instance). Basically what they are saying is Gaiden was great for 2004, but not so hot now in 2007.
It's getting hard for me to take these guys seriously. They give some good games mediocre reviews and some mediocre games good reviews. They seem to just want to go against the grain.
Why do people who get paid to play games assume everyone has played the previous versions? How many did NG sell on the Xbox, 1 million copies? How many of those people own a Ps3 now, 10,000? They have no problem with other last gen remakes (Burnout Revenge, Flatout, etc.) and give them 8+, but somehow NGS gets held to a higher standard?
Here is an idea, have someone who didn't play the Xbox version review it, that's a bit more fair than someone who is burnt out and nitpicking.
Why do people who get paid to play games assume everyone has played the previous versions? How many did NG sell on the Xbox, 1 million copies? How many of those people own a Ps3 now, 10,000? They have no problem with other last gen remakes (Burnout Revenge, Flatout, etc.) and give them 8+, but somehow NGS gets held to a higher standard?
Here is an idea, have someone who didn't play the Xbox version review it, that's a bit more fair than someone who is burnt out and nitpicking.
I'm sorry, but gameplay has not evolved since the Ps2 days (that's true in general IMO) . Nothing about this genre has changed in the last few years. DMC4 and Heavenly Sword are not out yet, so how did this get to be less of a game by getting a facelift and some extra content? It went from a 9 to a 7 and at the same time is the best of the three.
Has gameplay for the Burnout series evolved since the PS2 days? Burnout Revenge was a graphics facelift to a last gen game, I guess driving fast and crashing never gets old
Maybe they should have two scores, 8/10 if you have never played it and 6/10 if you have- not some useless average.
I see what you're saying, and I get that from reading the majority of the review, but it's the part regarding "shell out full whack for the game all over again" which implies that people have bought the game and played it before and that this isn't a new experience for them, which is not necessarily the case. A subtle difference.
Old game + few new features ? Yes. Pay for it all over again? Not necessarily. It could be new to a lot of folks.
That's a general issue with all gaming sites. Why did GT4 get rated lower than GT3, or RTA rated lower than CON, or EyeToy Play 3 get rated lower than EyeToy Play 1, when all the sequels were better games overall? Because a franchise is always measured by it's predecessors. It's probably safe to say most people interested in a sequel were also interested and thus played it's predecessor, so I guess it's on average better to compare it to prequels than as a standalone game. However, I agree games should also get scores for a new experience without having played prior games.
inefficient
Veteran
I never played the Xbox version
To me the parts that seemed "last gen" were:
1) The transitions when opening a door and moving from one room or area to another. Obviously they broke the levels up like that to account for the original xbox's limitations. So when you see in the PS3 game it seem a bit last gen.
2) The in game camera. It didn't really bother me much and generally it was pretty well behaved. But with new games these days we have higher expectations for what a camera system should work like.
3) Loading screens. There is a loading screen when opening item chests! Why? Never played the original but I am betting it was like that in the original so they just kept it. There is occasionally 2 second loading screens when moving into a new area, which very last gen.
On the upside other aspects of the game like the core fighting mechanic is so far far and away better than any other game in it's genre that it more than makes up for a few flaws.
I actually tried playing a little God of War 2 after finishing NG and that game seemed so dumb and just mindless repetitive button mashing.
To me the parts that seemed "last gen" were:
1) The transitions when opening a door and moving from one room or area to another. Obviously they broke the levels up like that to account for the original xbox's limitations. So when you see in the PS3 game it seem a bit last gen.
2) The in game camera. It didn't really bother me much and generally it was pretty well behaved. But with new games these days we have higher expectations for what a camera system should work like.
3) Loading screens. There is a loading screen when opening item chests! Why? Never played the original but I am betting it was like that in the original so they just kept it. There is occasionally 2 second loading screens when moving into a new area, which very last gen.
On the upside other aspects of the game like the core fighting mechanic is so far far and away better than any other game in it's genre that it more than makes up for a few flaws.
I actually tried playing a little God of War 2 after finishing NG and that game seemed so dumb and just mindless repetitive button mashing.
http://www.gamestats.com/objects/856/856529//articles.html
The game has a press average of 8.8.
Not bad
Seems like a great game even for those that havent played it.
I dont think the fact that the game is a remake will be less enjoyed by those that never played it. Its of great value.
It should actually be of less value to those that already played it.
Besides the majority of games available on next gen consoles arent that different from older games yet many of them have good scores.
Why do these deserve better scores and are of higher value only because they have a different title and hide under a different skin?
When I play Forza, GT, CoD, DOA or the likes on a PS3 or a 360 I am actually playing what I was playing before again and again and again
The game has a press average of 8.8.
Not bad
Seems like a great game even for those that havent played it.
I dont think the fact that the game is a remake will be less enjoyed by those that never played it. Its of great value.
It should actually be of less value to those that already played it.
Besides the majority of games available on next gen consoles arent that different from older games yet many of them have good scores.
Why do these deserve better scores and are of higher value only because they have a different title and hide under a different skin?
When I play Forza, GT, CoD, DOA or the likes on a PS3 or a 360 I am actually playing what I was playing before again and again and again
I picked up my copy yesterday evening and played until the wee hours, getting up into chapter 6 before I was too tired to go on. I never owned the previous versions, but played quite a bit of them at various friends' houses over the years, and from that experience I have to say I'm a bit disappointed that it is hardly a real remake, but more of a dolled up port. It's shamelessly not even dolled up in many parts as well, the worst offender being some CGI cuteness that I'm pretty sure were just straight rips of the 480p video from the Xbox version. Regardless, I was always too caught up with other games at the time to make room the Xbox version but I also I was missing out, so I'm pleased with my purchase and I'm pretty sure I'll be playing this PS3 version though more than a few times.
I was hopeing the instal option would fix the anyoning mid level loading, but at least on my 20gb drive it pauses to load quite a bit. I suppose I should have tried without installing first since the 20gb drive is rather slow.
As for the big metalplated fatman, he goes down like jello of you use smoke bombs on him before attacking and just jump back out of the way before he recovers.
As for the big metalplated fatman, he goes down like jello of you use smoke bombs on him before attacking and just jump back out of the way before he recovers.
Similar threads
