Jump to content

Sly vs Ratchet vs Jak Series- Nostalgia as a Factor?


Recommended Posts

I wouldn't put them in a order which is best, they all have their own style of platforming and action, I love them all and it would be racist to put them in a quality order. 

Its like if you have children and you put them in order who is the best.

Edited by D4N11--
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jak and Daxter was great.

Jak 2 was a step in the wrong direction and so much lost potential.

Jak 3 tries to fix up Jak 2, but introduced new issues.

Jak X was garbage with serious memory card glitches.

 

Something can be a step in the wrong direction and still end up great or amazing. It's like intentionally trying to change or alter something for the worst, but you actually make it better than it would have ended up. This (your) perspective is too personal though, generally, so there is really nothing of value or anything too objective that I can say here.

 

Jak 3 did not try, it succeeded at fixing and tweaking most, if not all, of the issues wrong with Jak II. It did bring new issues such as not too good handling controls with half of the new Dune Buggies, Keira's role not being as strong as it was in the past games, but there really isn't anything else major of new issues that the game brung and is irrelevant to trying to fix the issues of the last game (it did fix them).

 

Jak X and garbage in the same line is invalid. Most of the popular and biased comments I see disliking and hating Jak X is the people who claim and say because the game isn't a platformer, it's automatically garbage or sucks (I've actually seen multiple people say it like this and I can tell from the way certain people list points that this was their mindset), since Jak games are known for platforming but Jak X is not one. It's one thing and fine for this game to be disliked in general and fan's least favorite in the series, but for anyone to say the game is "bad" or "garbage" is just completely false. It clearly does not have the aspects of a bad game- no bad or broken gameplay, no too hard or too easy missions, no forgettable or bad soundtrack, no non fun gameplay, no mostly feeling of boredum during the play of game, no crappy graphics, etc.

Here's why the game does not suck. Like Naughty Dog and like Jak's series, each installment fixes the issues of the installments before it (learning from their mistakes). One of the major changes happens to be with one of the major general aspects in video games, game-play. The game is about racing, and you race with Dune Buggies. This sounds familiar because they first introduced the DBs in Jak 3; however, in Jak X they greatly improved upon the racing mechanics (from Jak 3) with mostly smoother driving, handling, drifting, and it just felt great and felt real. Jak X fixed those issues that the related game-play portion of Jak 3 had. That's just one. The relationship between 2 certain characters were restored and settled. Keira actually had some character development herself (in a spinoff) and her role was sufficient/good, like the way it should be and was in the first two games. Jak had further character development.. in a damn spinoff game ("wtf?"). For a spinoff, it not only had a (existent) story but it had a great, dangerous, and thrilling story too (a spinoff?), something all the Jak games have done. Did I mention this game is P.U.R.E fun and A.D.D.I.C.T.I.N.G and has ridiculous replay-value? Additionally, the concept of this game goes with Jak's character, his universe, and his prodigious racing skills (which were long hinted since the first game, especially with his racing goggles.. yes they are racing goggles). The game also had solid MP, clans, voice chat, multiple as hell game-modes (offline and online). It goes without saying this is a Jak game (note I did not say true Jak platformer game) at it's truest. 

 

 

Like.. for anyone to call this game bad or garbage is stupid or narrowminded. I can't apologize, because there is so much hidden potential and amazing things about this game that people cannot see OR appreciate. The only flaw to this game was the save memory glitch... but this didn't even affect everyone AND ND released and shipped new copies of Jak X with the problem gone (since patches didn't exist at the time) in response to the complaints.

 

This game had it all and was a true Jak game, just without the platforming. That's SERIOUSLY what it was - A true Jak game (having all the aspects of the past games: beautiful art, great designed levels especially in Jak X, eco still being the main concept of gameplay, the characters returned and were all themselves with their same personalities, the amazing soundtrack, the badass and cool as hell opening cinematic, the story, the story telling, the atmosphere, look... I can go on for a long time.....) without platforming - a true Jak game with racing as its genre. This fit Jak's character and his series, as racing was prominent and existent every since the first game. It only became more involved after the first game with the NYFE and Zoomer races in Jak II and than the Dune Buggies and Leaper (Lizard) races in Jak 3.

 

I just can't take these kind of opinions on Jak X, nor can I take them seriously. It makes no sense, and it certainly deserved better ratings. 8.0 just at the very least.

 

 

 

 

I'd buy it if it was cheaper  :P

 

 

You can't be serious... it's cheap enough. If you ever do actually decide to get it though, get the PS Vita version (assuming you have one, if not then PS2 version).

Edited by Mar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something can be a step in the wrong direction and still end up great or amazing. It's like intentionally trying to change or alter something for the worst, but you actually make it better than it would have ended up. This (your) perspective is too personal though, generally, so there is really nothing of value or anything too objective that I can say here.

 

Jak 3 did not try, it succeeded at fixing and tweaking most, if not all, of the issues wrong with Jak II. It did bring new issues such as not too good handling controls with half of the new Dune Buggies, Keira's role not being as strong as it was in the past games, but there really isn't anything else major of new issues that the game brung and is irrelevant to trying to fix the issues of the last game (it did fix them).

 

Jak X and garbage in the same line is invalid. Most of the popular and biased comments I see disliking and hating Jak X is the people who claim and say because the game isn't a platformer, it's automatically garbage or sucks (I've actually seen multiple people say it like this and I can tell from the way certain people list points that this was their mindset), since Jak games are known for platforming but Jak X is not one. It's one thing and fine for this game to be disliked in general and fan's least favorite in the series, but for anyone to say the game is "bad" or "garbage" is just completely false. It clearly does not have the aspects of a bad game- no bad or broken gameplay, no too hard or too easy missions, no forgettable or bad soundtrack, no non fun gameplay, no mostly feeling of boredum during the play of game, no crappy graphics, etc.

Here's why the game does not suck. Like Naughty Dog and like Jak's series, each installment fixes the issues of the installments before it (learning from their mistakes). One of the major changes happens to be with one of the major general aspects in video games, game-play. The game is about racing, and you race with Dune Buggies. This sounds familiar because they first introduced the DBs in Jak 3; however, in Jak X they greatly improved upon the racing mechanics (from Jak 3) with mostly smoother driving, handling, drifting, and it just felt great and felt real. Jak X fixed those issues that the related game-play portion of Jak 3 had. That's just one. The relationship between 2 certain characters were restored and settled. Keira actually had some character development herself (in a spinoff) and her role was sufficient/good, like the way it should be and was in the first two games. Jak had further character development.. in a damn spinoff game ("wtf?"). For a spinoff, it not only had a (existent) story but it had a great, dangerous, and thrilling story too (a spinoff?), something all the Jak games have done. Did I mention this game is P.U.R.E fun and A.D.D.I.C.T.I.N.G and has ridiculous replay-value? Additionally, the concept of this game goes with Jak's character, his universe, and his prodigious racing skills (which were long hinted since the first game, especially with his racing goggles.. yes they are racing goggles). The game also had solid MP, clans, voice chat, multiple as hell game-modes (offline and online). It goes without saying this is a Jak game (note I did not say true Jak platformer game) at it's truest. 

 

 

Like.. for anyone to call this game bad or garbage is stupid or narrowminded. I can't apologize, because there is so much hidden potential and amazing things about this game that people cannot see OR appreciate. The only flaw to this game was the save memory glitch... but this didn't even affect everyone AND ND released and shipped new copies of Jak X with the problem gone (since patches didn't exist at the time) in response to the complaints.

 

This game had it all and was a true Jak game, just without the platforming. That's SERIOUSLY what it was - A true Jak game (having all the aspects of the past games: beautiful art, great designed levels especially in Jak X, eco still being the main concept of gameplay, the characters returned and were all themselves with their same personalities, the amazing soundtrack, the badass and cool as hell opening cinematic, the story, the story telling, the atmosphere, look... I can go on for a long time.....) without platforming - a true Jak game with racing as its genre. This fit Jak's character and his series, as racing was prominent and existent every since the first game. It only became more involved after the first game with the NYFE and Zoomer races in Jak II and than the Dune Buggies and Leaper (Lizard) races in Jak 3.

 

I just can't take these kind of opinions on Jak X, nor can I take them seriously. It makes no sense, and it certainly deserved better ratings. 8.0 just at the very least.

 

 

 

 
 

 

You can't be serious... it's cheap enough. If you ever do actually decide to get it though, get the PS Vita version (assuming you have one, if not then PS2 version).

 

They do try to fix up issues in Jak 2 with Jak 3, I didn't say if they succeeded in doing so or not. I do however think they did fix up in many issues, but still a lot of lost potential in the world and they could still have taken more stuff that was great about Jak 1. It also focuses on the gun stuff a lot instead of platforming, and I think the execution of the gun system stuff really wasn't all that good. Yes, the kart stuff in Jak 3 was garbage. I'm not one of those who complain about the games being hard, I didn't think they were hard.

 

Haha, you really love your Jak X, eh? I did beat the game and everything, and it did actually ruin one of my memory cards, which I wouldn't have been able to fix unless I had access to third party tools. Yes, I'm into platforming, but that had little to do with my opinion of the game. I love Crash Team Racing, think it's the best kart game ever. Played it for hundreds of hours. This means that they could have made a good kart game, and I could have enjoyed it. I didn't enjoy it. The controls were garbage. I didn't feel like I had all that much control over the character, very annoying. Didn't like the tracks either. I can't say I liked anything about the game except for it looking good. I don't care if it was a Jak game or not, it was bad.

 

I'd rate Jak X 4-5/10, which in the case of being made by Naughty Dog is garbage.

Edited by MMDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They do try to fix up issues in Jak 2 with Jak 3, I didn't say if they succeeded in doing so or not. I do however think they did fix up in many issues, but still a lot of lost potential in the world and they could still have taken more stuff that was great about Jak 1. It also focuses on the gun stuff a lot instead of platforming, and I think the execution of the gun system stuff really wasn't all that good. Yes, the kart stuff in Jak 3 was garbage. I'm not one of those who complain about the games being hard, I didn't think they were hard.

 

Haha, you really love your Jak X, eh? I did beat the game and everything, and it did actually ruin one of my memory cards, which I wouldn't have been able to fix unless I had access to third party tools. Yes, I'm into platforming, but that had little to do with my opinion of the game. I love Crash Team Racing, think it's the best kart game ever. Played it for hundreds of hours. This means that they could have made a good kart game, and I could have enjoyed it. I didn't enjoy it. The controls were garbage. I didn't feel like I had all that much control over the character, very annoying. Didn't like the tracks either. I can't say I liked anything about the game except for it looking good. I don't care if it was a Jak game or not, it was bad.

 

I'd rate Jak X 4-5/10, which in the case of being made by Naughty Dog is garbage.

 

Like I said previously ago, Jak 3 is more inspired and closer to the first game than Jak II. ND fixed issues that Jak II had in Jak 3 and ND incorporated more similar game-play (Leaper Lizard = Flut Flut and which the LL was necessary for one of the missions, just like the FF was several times in the first game, using the Jet-board and green eco to destroy dark eco plants, just like the first game where you use the zoomer and green eco to destroy the dark eco plants, the return of and more usage of eco vents, more body related eco powers, etc), more platforming which is most prominent in the mission where you first make it to the Monk's Temple. There's a ridiculous amount of platforming that takes place there, etc) more colorful environments (Southern Haven Forest), more "land" like (Great Volcano) and "weather" (Wasteland with bad weather storm effects, and the return of rain, although sadly no return of snowy or icy based areas like the one from the first game) based areas, and more.

 

The game(s) focused on platforming good to. The games are mostly openworld after the first game, so you can't expect platforming as much as the first game. The first game is more action/adventure, which makes it more linear and thus easier and more platformed based. Even the Uncharted series platforming aspect rivals the Jak series, because it's action/adventure and more linear. If openworld was a genre that's what his (Jak's) games would have became after the first. Besides that, the platforming is fine in the series and was improved in Jak 3 (slightly). You complain about too much gun play, but did you complain about too much eco play in the first game? The guns are eco just being used via a (different) device instead of through his body and hands, aside from his power up transformation form, which is overlooked. So you're mad that eco is utilized more by the main character? You're being biased because of the output and cosmetic of the true main gameplay element. If Jak was using those guns as powers instead, you wouldn't be complaining, just like no-one complains about the gameplay in JaD:TLF where Jak uses eco more from his hands than his gun-staff. You also fail to understand the setting and world Jak lives in now. The new world (literally; new world is what it's called) is very dangerous and Jak has to defend himself somehow. I mean this is common sense. There's enough platforming in Jak II to with the entire series always requiring you to jump someway and somehow in most if not all levels. Some platforming got corrupted because of the new genre addition but it's not that big of a deal.

 

Well, this is more subjective but the execution of the gun system is not bad. They represent and use the different eco powers fine. That's concept though. With actual mechanics, what.. are you mad that you can't aim with the guns? Doesn't not being able to aim, make it less of a shooter type game? ND were smart to actually do this, so the game didn't feel like a part shooter hybrid. I mean there is the Wastelander combo you can do with the guns, you can spin around (you know, Jak doing his signature melee spinkick while shooting the gun at the sametime) in the air, you can platform and shoot. So there's variety to.

Personally, I like the change they made in TLF. Jak is getting older and thus is becoming more suitable for a staff, which is what was given to him in TLF. It still shot out stuff and you still couldn't aim, but it doesn't change the fact that it wasn't that much different from shooting a gun (in general) and the morph gun itself from Jak II and 3. Its most cosmetics (hands/body vs gun vs staff) like I said before.

 

*Dune Buggies, and no they were not crap in Jak 3. Jak's universe does not use the kitty karts, they use dune buggies like what you see in Crysis, Battlefield, and other game series. Its not crap there (well in Crysis 3 it felt a little clunky), so why is it crap in Jak 3 and Jak X especially? Because Jak is a platformer series, car type of vehicles do not work? The only issue with execution and gameplay that the racing segment of Jak 3 did bad at, was half or about half of the vehicles having bad handling - that is it. Jak X, like I said before, did an AMAZING job at refining AND expanding the mechanics and concept of the dune buggies. Evan Wells even stated it in the video.

 

This isn't about loving Jak X. This is about a good game being falsely and poorly labeled as bad and even more extreme, garbage, because of distaste, biased, ignorance, and preferences. If the game had you racing in karts and was less action based, you'd probably like it, which is a sad perspective tbh. If the mechanics were the same from Jak 3, then your claim on garbage would be a bit relevant, but since the core mechanics of the main part of the game were enhanced and good to use, there is no problem there, which brings me back to... the game has good gameplay, good controls, good graphics, and a damn good story-line (in a spinoff), so the game is not garbage no matter what you think or don't know.

 

You can state your dislikes for the game, but false and misleading claims such as "bad controls" and "didn't have "much control in the characters", which just allowed me to see that you obviously was not good at the game and bash it because it required skill (a higher level of skill to play at) that usually does not exist or does not as heavily matter in kart racers, need to stop as they simply are not true. Back in the PS2 games, I played this game a lot and none of these kind of complaints came in my head once. I knew there was a learning curve, and it did not take me long to become better at the game and be rewarded for it, with an enjoyable experience. When I have gone back to play Jak 3 several times over, over the years, I just knew for a fact that Jak X had good control and that some buggies in Jak 3 are what would be classified as bad controls and not having too much control over the *vehicle (even if both of these fields relate to 1 sole aspect - handling). So with Jak 3 as my witness to, you are clearly wrong and do not know the difference between bad control and not being good or skillful at a game.

 

Like I said, you can dislike every sequel after the first game, but I don't like to see false and petty complaints. (Your complaint on the execution of the gun mechanics is a fine general complaint though, which I pretty much already mentioned.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) Jak 3 > Jak 2 > Jak the Precursor legacy  

 

I may be in the minority but i love the way Jak and Daxter evolved. I thought they got better every release. Jak X cant be counted in this as it is not part of the trilogy but was still enjoyable & i haven't played the lost frontier or Daxter for that matter.

 

2) Ratchet & clank 2: Locked and Loaded > Ratchet and clank > Ratchet and clank 3: Up your Arsenal

 

For me i found R&C 2 was the best, having better boss battles and improved weapon upgrading. I found 3 started heading in the wrong direction but still a great game.

 

3) Sly

 

I have to put this one last as i am yet to play the sly games. But i did happen to play a demo years ago which i loved and am hunting down a copy. Its a rare game to find physical as well as jak.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said previously ago, Jak 3 is more inspired and closer to the first game than Jak II. ND fixed issues that Jak II had in Jak 3 and ND incorporated more similar game-play (Leaper Lizard = Flut Flut and which the LL was necessary for one of the missions, just like the FF was several times in the first game, using the Jet-board and green eco to destroy dark eco plants, just like the first game where you use the zoomer and green eco to destroy the dark eco plants, the return of and more usage of eco vents, more body related eco powers, etc), more platforming which is most prominent in the mission where you first make it to the Monk's Temple. There's a ridiculous amount of platforming that takes place there, etc) more colorful environments (Southern Haven Forest), more "land" like (Great Volcano) and "weather" (Wasteland with bad weather storm effects, and the return of rain, although sadly no return of snowy or icy based areas like the one from the first game) based areas, and more.

 

Unfortunately they missed some of the better things about the first game. They missed some of the adventure genre things. They still didn't use the environment well. Most side-quests were just these statues, not people. Still running around in empty cities where all you do is bump into stuff that makes the cops come after you etc. The cop stuff was better in the third game than the second. They tried to be like GTA III, but didn't do what GTA III did, which is populate the world with stuff to do. Jak II had missable collectibles. I can't remember if Jak III had that too, but I do think it didn't have as detailed menu for collectibles as the first game.

 

The game(s) focused on platforming good to. The games are mostly openworld after the first game, so you can't expect platforming as much as the first game. The first game is more action/adventure, which makes it more linear and thus easier and more platformed based. Even the Uncharted series platforming aspect rivals the Jak series, because it's action/adventure and more linear. If openworld was a genre that's what his (Jak's) games would have became after the first. Besides that, the platforming is fine in the series and was improved in Jak 3 (slightly). You complain about too much gun play, but did you complain about too much eco play in the first game? The guns are eco just being used via a (different) device instead of through his body and hands, aside from his power up transformation form, which is overlooked. So you're mad that eco is utilized more by the main character? You're being biased because of the output and cosmetic of the true main gameplay element. If Jak was using those guns as powers instead, you wouldn't be complaining, just like no-one complains about the gameplay in JaD:TLF where Jak uses eco more from his hands than his gun-staff. You also fail to understand the setting and world Jak lives in now. The new world (literally; new world is what it's called) is very dangerous and Jak has to defend himself somehow. I mean this is common sense. There's enough platforming in Jak II to with the entire series always requiring you to jump someway and somehow in most if not all levels. Some platforming got corrupted because of the new genre addition but it's not that big of a deal.

 

Close to no platforming in the game, but yes better than in Jak II. I think there are only some few small sections in the game before they push the gun shit on you again. Uncharted's platforming doesn't rival the first Jak game, nowhere near it. I didn't play the Jak games for the awful shooting mechanics and the "dune buggies". 

 

 

Well, this is more subjective but the execution of the gun system is not bad. They represent and use the different eco powers fine. That's concept though. With actual mechanics, what.. are you mad that you can't aim with the guns? Doesn't not being able to aim, make it less of a shooter type game? ND were smart to actually do this, so the game didn't feel like a part shooter hybrid. I mean there is the Wastelander combo you can do with the guns, you can spin around (you know, Jak doing his signature melee spinkick while shooting the gun at the sametime) in the air, you can platform and shoot. So there's variety to.

Personally, I like the change they made in TLF. Jak is getting older and thus is becoming more suitable for a staff, which is what was given to him in TLF. It still shot out stuff and you still couldn't aim, but it doesn't change the fact that it wasn't that much different from shooting a gun (in general) and the morph gun itself from Jak II and 3. Its most cosmetics (hands/body vs gun vs staff) like I said before.

 

The gun system was awful because of the terrible aiming system. The health system was pretty pointless to a certain degree too. I think they should never have included it. Maybe added some powers that did something similar, but not having that be the main focus.

 

So the problems for me with it is:

1. I think the execution was bad.

2. I didn't want it.

3. It became the main focus.

4. It took away what I liked in the games.

 

 

*Dune Buggies, and no they were not crap in Jak 3. Jak's universe does not use the kitty karts, they use dune buggies like what you see in Crysis, Battlefield, and other game series. Its not crap there (well in Crysis 3 it felt a little clunky), so why is it crap in Jak 3 and Jak X especially? Because Jak is a platformer series, car type of vehicles do not work? The only issue with execution and gameplay that the racing segment of Jak 3 did bad at, was half or about half of the vehicles having bad handling - that is it. Jak X, like I said before, did an AMAZING job at refining AND expanding the mechanics and concept of the dune buggies. Evan Wells even stated it in the video.

 

I don't care what you call them and if they are similar to some other game I care even less about. They were awful to control. Just not having a good time with 'em. You have to drive back and forth so many times, and even do some battles with them. I could have done without them just fine.

 

This isn't about loving Jak X. This is about a good game being falsely and poorly labeled as bad and even more extreme, garbage, because of distaste, biased, ignorance, and preferences. If the game had you racing in karts and was less action based, you'd probably like it, which is a sad perspective tbh. If the mechanics were the same from Jak 3, then your claim on garbage would be a bit relevant, but since the core mechanics of the main part of the game were enhanced and good to use, there is no problem there, which brings me back to... the game has good gameplay, good controls, good graphics, and a damn good story-line (in a spinoff), so the game is not garbage no matter what you think or don't know.

 

Eh, yes it is about if I like Jak X. When you review a game, you give your personal view on the game, not someone else's. Awful gameplay, too fast with too poor controls, hard to navigate. Power ups sucked. Just not having a good time with the games. The only good thing with the game were the graphics. It's pretty amazing how they went from making probably the best kart game ever to that junk, which just to add insult to injury came with a memory card bug.

 

You can state your dislikes for the game, but false and misleading claims such as "bad controls" and "didn't have "much control in the characters", which just allowed me to see that you obviously was not good at the game and bash it because it required skill (a higher level of skill to play at) that usually does not exist or does not as heavily matter in kart racers, need to stop as they simply are not true. Back in the PS2 games, I played this game a lot and none of these kind of complaints came in my head once. I knew there was a learning curve, and it did not take me long to become better at the game and be rewarded for it, with an enjoyable experience. When I have gone back to play Jak 3 several times over, over the years, I just knew for a fact that Jak X had good control and that some buggies in Jak 3 are what would be classified as bad controls and not having too much control over the *vehicle (even if both of these fields relate to 1 sole aspect - handling). So with Jak 3 as my witness to, you are clearly wrong and do not know the difference between bad control and not being good or skillful at a game.

 

 

Again, it had nothing to do with me being bad at the game. I did everything in the game. It just wasn't good, because I didn't have a good time. It had awful controls and went too fast. The power ups were shit too.

 

Like I said, you can dislike every sequel after the first game, but I don't like to see false and petty complaints. (Your complaint on the execution of the gun mechanics is a fine general complaint though, which I pretty much already mentioned.)

 

 

False and petty complaints? That's your opinion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tough between Ratchet vs. Jak. Last time I played Jak 1 I really liked it. However the last time I played Ratchet I was slighly dissappointed because I rememberd it being awesome when i was a kid, but now it felt boring.  I wasnt happy how they used colors in the first game. It looks so bland to me and I easilly get headaches if the colors are grey/brown/shit. While the game has color in some areas it still hurts my eyes to play the first Ratchet. I cant explain.

 

As for Sly, I thought the first one was playable, but I didnt like it that much. Sly has always had the most annoying characters. It wasnt until Thieves in Time when I really started to hate Sly. Such a boring game I cant believe it. They have alot of variety in the mini games, but this game just kills me. For some reason I just aint interested. I didnt play Sly 2 & 3, but to be honest I have zero interest since I hate the series so much now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the PS2 I played Jak 1-3 and Ratchet 1-3, but never the Sly games. I also really enjoyed the Daxter game. I always wanted to play Lost Frontier, but I never found any copies where I live. As for Jak X, I knew it was just racing and the racing wasn't exactly my favorite part of Jak 3 so I never got it. I personally would order them.

1. Jak and Daxter:
-The first game was cool and for me had a very Crash Bandicoot feel to it. The gameplay felt fresh and fun. I enjoy collecting things in games so the fact the whole game is a collectathon was not a deal breaker for me, it only made it more fun.
-The second game has always been my favourite. The concept was really cool, the gameplay was more refined, the atmosphere felt good, there wasn't really anything I didn't like about the game. It had some really great characters, more memorable than the first game.
-The third game was probably my least favourite. I did enjoy it, the platforming was great, the story was good, it's just the races that were a dealbreaker for me. I don't know why, the hover vehicles in the second game didn't bother me as much.
-Daxter, it was nice the have a backstory for my favourite Jak game, even though the whole plot-line was a complete detour. It's probably one of my favourite PSP games.

2: Ratcher and Clank:
-The first game was fun. I never liked Ratchet's "surfer dood" personality, but overal a great game.
-The second game. It felt to me like they dropped Ratchet's "surfer dude" personality so no problems there. The gladiator arena's were the star attraction for me. The gameplay felt much more refined. Better than the first.
-The third game is my favorite of the first 3. Maybe it's the level design, or the characters, I don't know, it just felt better overall.

3. Sly: (first played on PS3)
-The first game was cool. Nice simple levels. It seemed exactly like Crash Bandicoot 2 and 3 the way the levels were set up. The hub world, each level had these certain objectives like collecting and time trials. I liked it.
-The second game I did not like that much, I don't want to play as Murry and Bently, I want to be sly. They changed the whole level set-up and frankly I wasn't a fan of them.
-The third game... well it was more fun than the second game, but it had a lot of the same problems as the second game did for me. I think it was designed a lot better, but yeah. These series definitely don't match up to Jak or Ratchet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never did say which ones I liked the best. :P After having played them on PS2 and replayed them on PS3, the games I liked the most were:

Ratchet and Clank 1 & 2

Jak and Daxter (1)

Sly 2

 

I really didn't like:

Jak 2 & 3 and X

Ratchet & Clank 3

Sly 3

Edited by MMDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, although Sly was well done and mostly enjoyable, Ratchet & Clank is head and shoulders better. Horrible control issues of the first game aside, it's one of the best and most enduring series in gaming (as long as you don't include All 4 One).

I haven't played Jak at all, so I can't comment on that. Just been soured too much by old game designs (see comment above about Ratchet 1) and hearing that Jak is more of the same, plus the fact that Vita would be my platform of choice for a game like that and I've heard nothing but bad things about the Vita ports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and hearing that Jak is more of the same, plus the fact that Vita would be my platform of choice for a game like that and I've heard nothing but bad things about the Vita ports.

I know the PS3 God of War Collection got a remote play patch. Maybe check if the Jak collection allows it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know the PS3 God of War Collection got a remote play patch. Maybe check if the Jak collection allows it.

Thanks for the suggestion, but 90% of my Vita time is away from my house, so that wouldn't really help. When I'm home and gaming, I'm on PS3/4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately they missed some of the better things about the first game. They missed some of the adventure genre things. They still didn't use the environment well. Most side-quests were just these statues, not people. Still running around in empty cities where all you do is bump into stuff that makes the cops come after you etc. The cop stuff was better in the third game than the second. They tried to be like GTA III, but didn't do what GTA III did, which is populate the world with stuff to do. Jak II had missable collectibles. I can't remember if Jak III had that too, but I do think it didn't have as detailed menu for collectibles as the first game.

 
Don't know how to break up comments like that, so i'm just going to do it like this. Well first off, Jak 3 only did have 1 year of development, so there was only so much they could do. The adventure genre and aspect got better in each sequel so I don't know what you're talking about. What difference is side quest coming from people than objects or statues? I mean seriously.. c'mon now. It's no different than fetching a Power Cell for a town's person in Sandover Village in the first game or giving the Precursor Oracles Power Cells in the first game. Again, cosmetics.
Not all cities were entirely empty, but again most of these issues are because there's actually a plot in the game and because it had 1 year of development. How many current and now gen games also have cities and towns that mostly have nothing to do in them? Just Cause 2, inFAMOUS, FF13, and more. It's mostly RPG open world games like Fallout and Borderlands that give you other things to do in the open world. So where is this complaint for inFAMOUS and Just Cause? I said petty complaints and biased for a reason, but you do have some fine complaints. 
 
The "cop stuff" was actually better in the 2nd game. It was almost bad in the 3rd game, but given plot relevance I'd actually say it was fine instead of below average. Seeing as how you claimed it was better in the third game (since it was pretty vague, visually and difficultly wise) it seems you don't like challenges or hard games (which supports the case for Jak X). Jak II and Jak 3 had more to do in cities than you remember and claim - Jetboard skate arena (Jak II), NYFE races (Jak II), a mission that was infinite that let you either race a replacement Erol through Haven City (Jak II) and another that let you race through Haven City's Port area (Jak 3), you could revisit certain places and play with the mech suit in Jak II, you could revisit the gun course with all 4 of the different courses (Jak II, Jak 3), you could trigger weather effects in the quick-menu for the Wasteland and rain in Haven City, while the Jet board arena was gone in Jak 3, there was compensation for this with another infinite mission allowing you to do tricks to beat your high core or just fool around in the city, in the wasteland there was 4-5 infinite missions: one racing related (2 tracks), one related to (multiple) tricks categories in dune buggies, one related to destroying Marauders freely (deathmatch).. I can't remember everything in every game, but my point stands. Please tell me what there was to do in the world of the first game (the sequels outclassed it in this area, but that doesn't matter for some reason, and neither does the sequels having a better interactive world).
 
It's funny how misunderstood and underrated Jak's games or sequels in this case are, aren't they? And it's funny how vague memory and the lack of exploring the world can create these poor complaints on the Jak sequels, isn't it? I didn't even list everything either. However, some missed opportunities I do want to express that ND had, was putting an infinite mission in Spargus for Leaper Lizard racing (self explanatory sense Jak II did it with the NYFE races), and something else that I sadly forgot. I wouldn't say for the wasteland not to be less bland, because again ND only had 1 year of development with the game. At least they got some infinite and regular missions in the wasteland, a plot-stronghold for the Marauders, Marauders constantly and consistently chasing you and trying to kill you in the wasteland, the sandstorm weather effects, one of the Metalhead's HQs (which can also be revisited at any point in the game), some mostly pointless (outside missions) mini side islands, the toggling effect of having your Jetboard at its fastest speed (which is insanely fun and allows you to do new trick combinations you can't do anywhere else), a infinite mini game (found near the Oasis), racing, the Monk's Temple, and whatever else I missed.
 
Missable collectibles is a general thing that happens still in most games today, so this complaint is close to pointless. To clarify on the mcs though, only one level (of the many Jak II has) has missable collectibles and that was the last level.
 
Funny thing about Jak II and Jak 3 is that in the high-score screen, for the mini games that gave you the orbs, it'd tell you how much of you collected, so you just had to do the simple 1 digit math to figure out how much more you needed from the mission/game. Now in terms of areas with orbs to collect in the world, yes that was absent in Jak II and Jak 3, but then again so it was in ND's later games and most general other games after the time-period. The real issue is that there was no system for it entirely after the first game - meaning not on main menu either. That's the true flaw, not that it didn't exist on the fast menu, unlike the first game, but being absent as a whole. At least appreciate that you could find out how many collectibles you had total at any point during the game itself AND know how much you was missing (for the over-world orbs). So you had part of a point there. Oh, and Jak 3 has no missable collectibles.
 

 

Close to no platforming in the game, but yes better than in Jak II. I think there are only some few small sections in the game before they push the gun shit on you again. Uncharted's platforming doesn't rival the first Jak game, nowhere near it. I didn't play the Jak games for the awful shooting mechanics and the "dune buggies". 

 

The first line before the comma is an incredible exaggeration. Looks like you need to replay through the games again, because there was, at least, sufficient platforming. Haven City the main hub area, apparently seems to be the mindset of the false claim of little to insufficient platforming. That part of the city had no platforming yes (I mean why would it?), but when you entered other areas and levels such as Haven Forest, the Pumping Station, the Sewers, etc there was obviously some good bit of platforming going on. And just so we're clear, the first game had plenty of running related and flat areas to where no jumping was needed also.
 
The gun wasn't needed as much as you claim to be, but there were times where enemies would be in the area or up close and thus you'd need to react with your gameplay tools. Exactly how active and  frequent was the use of eco in the first game? Where's that complaint at?
 
It does actually, which is why I said it. I won't repeat the same point, so i'll just elaborate a bit on why. Uncharted has you constantly climbing things (and jumping enough to other things), a lot, thus for being an aspect of platforming, it rivals Jak's platforming, especially since Jak is more open-world now, right? (Or did I do that wrong?)
 

 

The gun system was awful because of the terrible aiming system. The health system was pretty pointless to a certain degree too. I think they should never have included it. Maybe added some powers that did something similar, but not having that be the main focus.

 

So the problems for me with it is:

1. I think the execution was bad.

2. I didn't want it.

3. It became the main focus.

4. It took away what I liked in the games.

 

Hmm. Well first off, I disagree heavily with "awful." If it was awful, a word too strong in this case, that would be more prominent and make the experience mostly hated than moderate or people being neutral with, as well as be mostly mentioned in reviews (which it is not). Of the 4 guns (in Jak II), only 2 can even be debated to be troublesome to whatever rational degree the person argues, thus also why it wasn't "awful." The shotgun's range and purpose (of a shotgun) made it futile for the need of aiming, and the electric purple gun ( I actually know the legit names of all these guns, but im not naming them to avoid confusion) that was inspired by an RPG had auto tracking. The pre-aim or just aim (before firing) was simple enough to where little kids below the age of 8 can get rewarded for landing the shot more times than missing, thus leaving the only 2 that can be debated upon being "bad."

 

Now this is where things get personal and im going to use this to my advantage. First off, there's a reason why the gun course is in the game. It's not there for show and games (to play with), it legit makes your accuracy and precision better. This is what helped me essentially master using the 2 guns. I don't see it as bad mechanics or "awful", especially since my accuracy is usually spot on. If this potential is possible, it evidently means the mechanics are not bad as they are exaggerated and claimed to be by people. For some reason with Jak's games, a lot of things are largely misunderstood for some reason. So it's a matter of either having the skill to use these guns or not. I also prefer it this way because it makes Jak's games feel less like a shooter like Call of Duty or even Borderland since it mixes its RPG/Open-world genre with shooting.

 

 

2. This is extremely biased for several reasons.

3. Well, it's not like Jak didn't still use eco powers itself. It's not like that was all Jak was able to do. It was still eco being used via the guns, so until you understand that, there's not much else to say here. The main focus was always eco, and this has remained the focus in every single Jak installment game, including Jak X.

4. The yellow gun is essentially a smaller version of the eco fireball in the first game with an also slightly nerfed tracking system. The Red gun pretty much acts as an extended frontal range version of red eco from the first game.

 
If these are your complaints (also including what was said earlier above about collectibles showing for the area or whatever), Jak and Daxter: The Lost Frontier should (easily) become your second favorite Jak game.
 

 

I don't care what you call them and if they are similar to some other game I care even less about. They were awful to control. Just not having a good time with 'em. You have to drive back and forth so many times, and even do some battles with them. I could have done without them just fine.

 
Like I said, only some (in Jak 3) had bad control and it was solely the aspect of handling that made these buggies have bad control. The fucking funny thing is, it's the unlockable buggies that had the bad handling. The buggy (Sand Shark) you're forced to ride most of the time throughout the story and game had the best balance of all the buggies and the other ones you drive for plot sake (Tough Puppy, Giga Stomper, Dune Hooper) were also the fine ones. Your own limited and lack of skills is why you had the experiences you did. However, it needs to be said that the terrain is also factor in non enjoyable experience. If you hit a rock or something the wrong way, you will swirl, flip, and whatever else. Not saying the terrain was bad, but that may have more relevance than you think in your screw ups and im willing to bet on that for your case.
 
I will not say this again, but this system was greatly re balanced by ND in the official racing game. You'd really think they'd release that game with bad controls? And you'd really think I'd praise and love the game if it did have bad controls and all these other awful aspects? The driving mechanics were amazingly better in Jak X and its existence is the consistent proof that ND always learns from their mistakes and makes it better in the next game (if the related aspect or mechanic returns).
 

 

Eh, yes it is about if I like Jak X. When you review a game, you give your personal view on the game, not someone else's. Awful gameplay, too fast with too poor controls, hard to navigate. Power ups sucked. Just not having a good time with the games. The only good thing with the game were the graphics. It's pretty amazing how they went from making probably the best kart game ever to that junk, which just to add insult to injury came with a memory card bug.

 
Well, all of your claimed "opinions" in that line are false. Opinions can only go so far. What you described of the game is just false, no ifs or buts about it. Gameplay has variety and presence (meh couldn't think of a better word), it's not awful. Game is not too fast at all, and it has breaks and drifting. If Jak X is too fast for you, god-forbid you play real speed racer like racing games (obviously too use and comfortable with karters), which some of the ones I played have had bad drifting, legit too fast segments, and absurd turns. Poor controls, no, especially with it being refined and enhanced. Power ups.. not precisely sure what you mean here but whatever I can think is related to this, also false. You obviously sucked at the game, as I had nowhere near this type of experience along with others I know who enjoyed the game.
 
You have this preference and obsession with kart racers, thus you disliked a racer that wasn't one. It's already obvious you don't like realistic like or car like racers. You like them mostly easy and casual kart racers like Mario Kart and Crash Team racing. CTR is easy and simple. A dune buggie racing game gives you a little challenge and requires a fair and higher skill output, then you complain about it and call it a bad game because you suck at it? I remember sucking at Jak X when it came out, but overtime I got better at it, thus the mechanics and aspects of the game are fine.

 

Again, it had nothing to do with me being bad at the game. I did everything in the game. It just wasn't good, because I didn't have a good time. It had awful controls and went too fast. The power ups were shit too.

 
Already said what I had to.

 

False and petty complaints? That's your opinion.

 

Actually it depends on what's being said and how it's sad, so it's not always and opinion. If you claim a game has bad controls when it doesn't, despite being an opinion, it's wrong. Ignorant and delusional opinions have their limits.

 

(That's a lot of text, damn.)

Edited by Mar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(That's a lot of text, damn.)

 

:P

 

The side-quests from the statues sucked, and I mean the actual quests. Many were pure random if you could even possibly make it or not.

 

They made a huge world and then don't populate it, that's bad. It's just a waste of space and just annoying. A hinder if you like with no enjoyment. It's not good to compare it to FFXIII for example, because that's a game that could have been so much better and is heavily criticize because of things like this. With that said, who cares? It's terribly executed in Jak 2 and Jak 3.

 

The cop stuff made the city much much worse. The city was just something you ran through to get to the next quest on the map. Well, because of the cops you usually ended up at the quest slower if you tried to roll jump or steal some aircraft etc to get to it sooner. Again, the city worked as a hinder, not a challenging one, because you could just walk, but to slow you down, be annoying and have absolutely no enjoyment or reason to exist.

 

You can mention like one location or two in the games were there was any platforming, which I already said, but damn, there wasn't much of it.

 

You say some things are not opinion, and then you react to me using opinion based words like awful. Jak X was awful, and such a slap in the face to the fans who experienced Crash Team Racing.

 

I don't really care to respond to everything. I've made my case very clear before other places, you can google for that if you want details. In fact, many of those places I've defended Jak 2 for not being bad for being hard etc, they're bad for entirely different reasons. Jak 2 was a massive bummer for me, Jak 3 wasn't a whole lot better and Jak X was garbage. Jak and Daxter was really great though. Yeah, this was my opinion the first time I played them, and was only reinforced when I replayed them.

Edited by MMDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

:P

 

The side-quests from the statues sucked, and I mean the actual quests. Many were pure random if you could even possibly make it or not.

 

They made a huge world and then don't populate it, that's bad. It's just a waste of space and just annoying. A hinder if you like with no enjoyment. It's not good to compare it to FFXIII for example, because that's a game that could have been so much better and is heavily criticize because of things like this. With that said, who cares? It's terribly executed in Jak 2 and Jak 3.

 

The cop stuff made the city much much worse. The city was just something you ran through to get to the next quest on the map. Well, because of the cops you usually ended up at the quest slower if you tried to roll jump or steal some aircraft etc to get to it sooner. Again, the city worked as a hinder, not a challenging one, because you could just walk, but to slow you down, be annoying and have absolutely no enjoyment or reason to exist.

 

You can mention like one location or two in the games were there was any platforming, which I already said, but damn, there wasn't much of it.

 

You say some things are not opinion, and then you react to me using opinion based words like awful. Jak X was awful, and such a slap in the face to the fans who experienced Crash Team Racing.

 

I don't really care to respond to everything. I've made my case very clear before other places, you can google for that if you want details. In fact, many of those places I've defended Jak 2 for not being bad for being hard etc, they're bad for entirely different reasons. Jak 2 was a massive bummer for me, Jak 3 wasn't a whole lot better and Jak X was garbage. Jak and Daxter was really great though. Yeah, this was my opinion the first time I played them, and was only reinforced when I replayed them.

 

I was talking about what I typed btw. :blah:

 

They were fun and had variety, so they clearly did not suck. You know how many PS3 (next gen after PS2) games I can bring up that had incredibly tedious, non fun, boring, repetitive, and little to no variety in their side quest missions? You do also remember Jak II and Jak 3 are PS2 games and old games, dating back to 2003 and 2004 respectively? The challenges also required skill, which is a positive gaming aspect, not negative. Some missions relied on using your memory and familiarity with the area, and some others had you testing your control with different vehicles pretty much to go through rings, alongside other type of missions.

 

You're exaggerating quite a bit. The world was pretty well designed, and again they are old PS2 games. Like I said before, where is this complaint for other praised open-world games like inFAMOUS? It's easy to find flaws in any game and argue over it making the game or in this case world, bad. If the game has other aspect that make up for it, like inFAMOUS, it's fine. Or, if the world is sufficiently or decently populated, which at least fits Jak's world, it's fine.

No, it is not terribly executed in Jak II and Jak 3, you just have not explored enough and looked into areas more. I'm probably going to have to say this is one of the areas Jak II did better than Jak 3 in, so regardless, at least one of the games I know for sure had a nice populated world (even though it wasn't bad in Jak 3, and it's plot is why the world seems  "not of many" things). It's blatantly obvious in Jak II, while moreso (but not that much) vague in Jak 3.. so you're wrong. I guess so my argument doesn't look weak or false, I'll have to provide some examples. Im only going to provide some. Jak II- A great amount of citizens located in every part of Haven City: The slums, the industrial section, the port, the bazaar district, and some other sections I forget the name of as of this moment. Additionally, there are not only vehicles everywhere, but there are parked ones as well. Staying on this subject, there are also people driving in their zoomers in every part of the city. There are active cops in ever section of Haven City. Then going into the isolated but also attached levels where the platforming is present, you have creatures and enemies present there upon every visit to the place. This includes ALL levels like the sewers, abandoned areas where people are not, and etc. So again, you're wrong.

 

Worst? Everything you don't like about the game personally I've noticed you labeled as a flaw or bad part of the game. You just can't do this, it's not rational. The cops ka the Krimzon Guards made the traveling more difficult and getting to certain destinations more difficult when alerted (which is generally fine, as that's one of the damn points of cops; their job). Going off personal experience, im going to claim you're wrong here as well. While im not going to use the term, "easy", I have been able to travel mostly fine while guards were on my ass. It seems like you're not aware how useful the changing hover zone system is. It's because of this system why the cops are mostly not as big of an issue as you're claiming to be. The other half of the reason why it's not as big of a deal as you're making it out to be is because they are not that sensitive to being alerted. As long as you hit a person not too close to a guard, the guards won't be alerted, meaning the guards are consistently on your ass in this game as if they were designed brokenly or way too hard. Lastly I will use the games of GTA and Just Cause 2 police systems. WHERE IS YOUR COMPLAINT HERE? GTA even has the hardest of the cop's system, I think (if not, then JC2). Just Cause 2 has the ability for cops to essentially get stronger in various ways via a level system: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, and the higher it goes, the harder it gets.. to the point where helicopters, RPGs, multiple helicopters, and other things really really annoying.. so let's not complain about a game with a not as difficult cop system.

 

Oh wait before I move on, I noticed some misleading false claims in your sentence. You do not alert the guard when you roll jump and you do not alert the guards when you steal an aircraft (zoomer), at least not when you're a few feet away or more from a guard. There's only one situation when stealing an airborne vehicle will always get the guards alerted and that's when you steal their actual vehicles while their riding in it, as you can steal a parked one and never be chased (unless you shoot from it). Your argument isn't making sense. Your complaining about the way an openworld game works. It's not Jak's games you dislike, it's openworld/sandbox games pretty much. I mean like seriously, that's the point of cops in general, and openworld games are suppose to be a big openworld game that you will be moving through back and fourth constantly throughout the course of the game, as well as the sidequest being similar throughout the many that exist overall. (I already know you're going to say what openworld games you like, but a lot of our points are flawed and invalid with Jak's games.)

 

 

Dude seriously, you're wrong. Your memory is extremely bad. There was a good bit of platforming. May'be you had to use the gun more than platforming, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN there wasn't enough platforrming or too little of it. There was definitely enough platforming in both the games. I originally claimed that every area Jak traveled to involved platforming, so I did not only name one location. I have a lot of levels memorized in my head, so I know this and what im talking about. Edit: I have been multitasking while typing this and randomly came across this recently posted comment on a website that leaked more images of the cancelled Jak 4 (the convenience though) - I really do hate when they turn fun, interesting, light and humorous games into some dark, nitty gritty game. That's why I found Jak 2 to be the weakest of the series, and I loved how they went back to roots with the humor and platforming in the third game. It does seem to be implied that Jak II had no or awful platforming by this guy, but ignoring that, he acknowledges that Jak 3 had good platforming (even though Jak II did to, which the FIRST mission you do involves you platforming up a building that's collapsing).

 

It's not as simple as "words are opinionated", it depends on the situation. Considering what the word "awful" means and then lining it up with Jak X, this is factually impossible, especially considering the overall rating for this game disagrees with you. This actual logic can be flawed at times, rarely, but with majority of votes and ratings having Jak X above decent, the game is like I said, factually impossible to be awful. Im generally and personally speaking. You don't realize that what you dislike = awful. That is false and irrational. If you dislike a game and did not enjoy it, that does not always make the game awful. Either it just wasn't for you and/or you suck(ed) at it.

 

I've seen pretty much equal hate,dislike, and love for Jak II, so I disagree and that is wrong. Jak II only has several issues (like every game does). Aside from those, the game is great. Many of the flaws are exaggerated heavily and consistently. Like there's the issue with the camera, but it only happens on less than 4 levels (does not last for the whole level either, barely last a minute) and it's mostly brief. There's the difficultly with the traffic in this game, but changing hover-zones allows you to bypass most of that, something you cant do in any other openworld city game with traffic (you have to go through all of that), and with enough skill (which I have mastered several years ago) traffic while doing missions or just reaching another destination is pretty much irrelevant. It's like dumbasses are not aware of and do not abuse or take advantage of this changing hover-zones system. Changing hoverzones with heavy traffic present is the equivalent to getting passed multiple big groups of enemies in a stealth game by turning invisible. You can bypass usual impossible odds by simply turning invisible, like in the Crysis series. It's the same shit in Jak II with the hzs. I defend this series for a reason. A lot of people are ignorant, did not acquire certain skills, sucked, and many other things.

 

The first game is overrated as hell, and in multiple areas. It wasn't THAT superior in platforming, it seriously was not. It's literally, mostly a more kind, or less dangerous, world than the world of the sequels (even though Jak was actually starring at Keira's ass multiple times, places like Rock Village felt dark and lonely, and the plot of the game was centered around evil guys using a dark substance to fill the world of it and destroy everything), that's pretty much it! In the first game you run plenty and do not platform at times. Like this really pisses me off. The platforming is practically balanced the same in all 3 games. I already stated that it's not until you get into the actual levels that platforming exist. After all, did the first game's main hub have platforming?

 

Btw, not sure if you noticed or not but im a very technical person. Awful is a term worst than bad, so if I especially see the term "awful" applied to something in Jak's games that's not actually awful, I will say something about it. Awful/terrible =/= bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all on when you played the games. When you played these games as a kid it has a different effect on you than someone who never played these games. I grew-up playing Sly Cooper and It's one of my favorite series out of this category (KH being my number 1 to rule them all) and also Jak And Daxter but I never got to play Jak 2 until I was 15 and Jak 3 when i was 19 on the remastered. But Jak And Daxter The Precursor Legacy and Sly Cooper (all three games) I've played as a kid. So it differs on how old you play these games cause they all have that nostalgia you really can't take away from the memories rather than the graphics and mechanics. But I did play Ratchet And Clank last year for the first time......"please don't smack me I know, I know." But that series really grew on me and I kinda wish I had played the series as a kid. But sadly I didn't but that's okay! It just brings out the more kid in me that's all! 

 

But just remember guys you can say these games were awful and non-interesting. This was still when games were getting more realistic at the time and because of these games, look where we are now :-) Games that were new to the ps2 at the time were like the stones in the river that helped ps3 and ps4 games cross that river. You can't expect to ace a mid-term unless you learn what your tested on. These games were the learning blocks and they may seem clunky and "awful" but to me they're worth playing. And they're only on playstation. Can't get any better than that. haha.

Edited by ChampionPrince
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

They were fun and had variety, so they clearly did not suck. You know how many PS3 (next gen after PS2) games I can bring up that had incredibly tedious, non fun, boring, repetitive, and little to no variety in their side quest missions? You do also remember Jak II and Jak 3 are PS2 games and old games, dating back to 2003 and 2004 respectively? The challenges also required skill, which is a positive gaming aspect, not negative. Some missions relied on using your memory and familiarity with the area, and some others had you testing your control with different vehicles pretty much to go through rings, alongside other type of missions.

 

No. They didn't vary. They were mostly see this egg, get to it fast. Which was okay, I liked them, but that's where the liking ends. You had some kill x enemies, which is a clearly copied from GTA, but it's basically asking me to do one of the things I disliked to do in the game. You had those race around the city, which many of them were pure luck based if you could even make it. You could do perfect and still hit an incoming vehicle, which would ruin your run. No you couldn't avoid them, because they either covered the actual ring you were going to go through, and you didn't have time to push them away safely or wait on them to move, or when they blocked a tight path etc. Pure luck + skills. I hate it. I mean, I hate it when I do very well and then something purely random completely screws me over without me even having a possibility to make it. Very frustrating. I didn't find them hard, but they took some attempts due to these random events making it impossible to finish.

 

Unless I'm missing something, that's three things, and I explained to you why they sucked.

 

I can't believe I have to repeat myself, but you seem to think I'm one of those who thought the games were hard. I didn't. For me they were like 2-3/10. Didn't need any guide or anything for this.

 

As for other mini-games. The gun range just showed off how terrible the aiming system were. This is the one thing I didn't do in the game, get gold at that stuff, I instead did the glitch. The races had AI that drove all too well, not very hard, but it pretty much required you to either do some shortcut or some cheap tricks etc. Again, I just felt this showed how bad the flying vehicles were. That was in Jak 2, but in Jak 3 you had those terrible dune karts, and they almost just as bad. Oh, and the terrible skateboarding (don't think for a second I had a hard time getting gold on this, did 'em all with huge margins in 1 or 2 tries). There was also this mini-game inside that hut with Daxter or something, can't remember. I think it was decent.
 

 

The world was pretty well designed, and again they are old PS2 games.

 

I don't care how old the game is, that isn't an excuse for how poorly a game is designed.

 

 

 Like I said before, where is this complaint for other praised open-world games like inFAMOUS?

 

So what? Didn't I already respond to this? Just because one game do something bad, that doesn't excuse some other game doing the same thing.

 

 

It's easy to find flaws in any game and argue over it making the game or in this case world, bad. If the game has other aspect that make up for it, like inFAMOUS, it's fine. Or, if the world is sufficiently or decently populated, which at least fits Jak's world, it's fine.

 

It's not fine to do something bad no matter how they make up for it in some other way. I don't care if it fits the environment either. Naughty Dog clearly set out to make their own little "city game", like GTA. This was one of their main goals with the game. It just didn't turn out very well. It may all have been well intended, but the end-product wasn't all that enjoyable. It's not wrong to make a little city like in GTA, it's what you do with it and how entertaining it is to the player. With how little you could interact with the city, I'd hardly call it a sandbox game, and most interactions were plain annoying.

 

 

No, it is not terribly executed in Jak II and Jak 3, you just have not explored enough and looked into areas more.

 

On what kind of basis do you make this claim? I've played through the games several times 100%. I've spent my time exploring the city.

 

 

I'm probably going to have to say this is one of the areas Jak II did better than Jak 3 in, so regardless, at least one of the games I know for sure had a nice populated world (even though it wasn't bad in Jak 3, and it's plot is why the world seems  "not of many" things). It's blatantly obvious in Jak II, while moreso (but not that much) vague in Jak 3.. so you're wrong. I guess so my argument doesn't look weak or false, I'll have to provide some examples. Im only going to provide some. Jak II- A great amount of citizens located in every part of Haven City: The slums, the industrial section, the port, the bazaar district, and some other sections I forget the name of as of this moment. Additionally, there are not only vehicles everywhere, but there are parked ones as well. Staying on this subject, there are also people driving in their zoomers in every part of the city. There are active cops in ever section of Haven City. Then going into the isolated but also attached levels where the platforming is present, you have creatures and enemies present there upon every visit to the place. This includes ALL levels like the sewers, abandoned areas where people are not, and etc. So again, you're wrong.

 

 

You're describing what such a world would be like, which I've not said anything about, and then saying I'm wrong about it.... wtf???
 
I've talked about the gameplay experience of this world.
 

The world had people going around, and flying vehicles etc, but it was just a pointless part of the game. I didn't have a good experience getting from one quest to the next. It was always a fight of either going slowly and boring myself to death, or try to get there quick and risk getting into fights with police and die that way. I had far less problems with this in Jak III than Jak II, so Jak III did this better. What you could do in the world was also more varied and more polished in Jak III than Jak II. They had that animal you could ride on as well in Jak III, which made it much more enjoyable.

 

 

Worst? Everything you don't like about the game personally I've noticed you labeled as a flaw or bad part of the game.

 

 

Yup.

 

 

You just can't do this, it's not rational.

 

Please do explain.

 

The cops ka the Krimzon Guards made the traveling more difficult and getting to certain destinations more difficult when alerted (which is generally fine, as that's one of the damn points of cops; their job). Going off personal experience, im going to claim you're wrong here as well. While im not going to use the term, "easy", I have been able to travel mostly fine while guards were on my ass.

 

I don't care what a cops job is. It's a game. If it doesn't make for good gameplay or good experience etc, don't include it. I found it very easy, it was just to walk. Problem solved!

 

 

It seems like you're not aware how useful the changing hover zone system is.

 

Wrong.

 
 
Mar, on 02 Aug 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:
"It's because of this system why the cops are mostly not as big of an issue as you're claiming to be."
 
I'm not saying it's difficult or anything like that. I'm saying they're just annoying. It just adds to how pointless the city seems, they just serve as a boring hinder, a chore to get around. You either have to walk slowly, or risk getting into annoying situations. In other words, the city became a walking simulator or you likely have to deal with the cops.
 
 
Mar, on 02 Aug 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:
"The other half of the reason why it's not as big of a deal as you're making it out to be is because they are not that sensitive to being alerted. As long as you hit a person not too close to a guard, the guards won't be alerted, meaning the guards are consistently on your ass in this game as if they were designed brokenly or way too hard."
 
They're sensitive to being alerted. Anything from accidentally roll jumping into a cop to driving around bumping into something. Unfortunately a lot of cops, and they may appear anywhere. I've alerted those cops when I want nothing to do with them one time too many. Way too easy to bump into cop vehicles that come out of nowhere, same with when you're just roll jumping. They would come out of nowhere, the vehicle you drive is likely to brake slowly or you can't stop roll jumping mid-air, so you will hit the cops. But it doesn't really matter if it's a cop or not, you're likely to bump into other vehicles all the time too, all too easily, which ends with your vehicle exploding all too easily.
 
 
Mar, on 02 Aug 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:
"Lastly I will use the games of GTA and Just Cause 2 police systems. WHERE IS YOUR COMPLAINT HERE? GTA even has the hardest of the cop's system, I think (if not, then JC2). Just Cause 2 has the ability for cops to essentially get stronger in various ways via a level system: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, and the higher it goes, the harder it gets.. to the point where helicopters, RPGs, multiple helicopters, and other things really really annoying.. so let's not complain about a game with a not as difficult cop system."
 
I'm not saying having a police system is bad. Neither have I said I didn't complain in GTA. So let me state that having a police system isn't bad, and I didn't complain about it for GTA, but it's terribly executed, especially in Jak II. I've already explained why, they just served as a boring hinder that made my experience worse, rather than a fun gameplay element. It may be fun once or twice, but after that it just gets bothersome, very bothersome.
 
 
Mar, on 02 Aug 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:
"so let's not complain about a game with a not as difficult cop system."
 
Again, has nothing to do with difficulty, only with it being an easy hinder, a boring chore. This is much the same reason why I for example found Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons boring. You constantly get to a new "mini-puzzle", but I usually solve it in my head in a matter of a second (not seconds), and then have to spend anything from 15 to 150 seconds or something doing it. It's just a boring and annoying task, and it feels like work.
 
 
Mar, on 02 Aug 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:
"Dude seriously, you're wrong. Your memory is extremely bad. There was a good bit of platforming. May'be you had to use the gun more than platforming, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN there wasn't enough platforrming or too little of it. There was definitely enough platforming in both the games."
 
You can be of the opinion that there was enough platforming, but I'm not. I know they can do so much better from past experience. Just going to point out I didn't start with PS2 or anything, I've played since NES era. I still play games old games I've never played before on older consoles, so it's not nostalgia. I also replay older games, so it's not bad memory either. :P After Naughty Dog's PS1 era and Jak and Daxter (1), I know they can do platforming.
 
 
Mar, on 02 Aug 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:
"Edit: I have been multitasking while typing this and randomly came across this recently posted comment on a website that leaked more images of the cancelled Jak 4 (the convenience though) - I really do hate when they turn fun, interesting, light and humorous games into some dark, nitty gritty game. That's why I found Jak 2 to be the weakest of the series, and I loved how they went back to roots with the humor and platforming in the third game. It does seem to be implied that Jak II had no or awful platforming by this guy, but ignoring that, he acknowledges that Jak 3 had good platforming (even though Jak II did to, which the FIRST mission you do involves you platforming up a building that's collapsing)."
 
Honestly though, Jak III had more and better platforming sections. I'm also not too concerned with how they had to turn it all gritty. Could have been either way for me. They could have done well with guns too, like Ratchet & Clank did. They tried to do a bit of Ratchet & Clank and GTA, which isn't bad, but the end-result really wasn't all that good.
 
 
Mar, on 02 Aug 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:
"It's not as simple as "words are opinionated", it depends on the situation. Considering what the word "awful" means and then lining it up with Jak X, this is factually impossible, especially considering the overall rating for this game disagrees with you. This actual logic can be flawed at times, rarely, but with majority of votes and ratings having Jak X above decent, the game is like I said, factually impossible to be awful. Im generally and personally speaking. You don't realize that what you dislike = awful. That is false and irrational. If you dislike a game and did not enjoy it, that does not always make the game awful. Either it just wasn't for you and/or you suck(ed) at it."
 
It's not logic, it's fallacious. It's called an appeal to popularity. Awful is a word used to describe something you think is bad. It makes little sense alone, but should be used in comparison to something. I've compared it to Crash Team Racing all along. I don't care if they tried to go for something different, I just care about my experience of that. You getting emotionally worked up about someone saying something you don't like about something you like is your problem. You shouldn't be as emotionally connected to it.
 
 
Mar, on 02 Aug 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:
"I've seen pretty much equal hate,dislike, and love for Jak II, so I disagree and that is wrong. Jak II only has several issues (like every game does). Aside from those, the game is great. Many of the flaws are exaggerated heavily and consistently. Like there's the issue with the camera, but it only happens on less than 4 levels (does not last for the whole level either, barely last a minute) and it's mostly brief. There's the difficultly with the traffic in this game, but changing hover-zones allows you to bypass most of that, something you cant do in any other openworld city game with traffic (you have to go through all of that), and with enough skill (which I have mastered several years ago) traffic while doing missions or just reaching another destination is pretty much irrelevant. It's like dumbasses are not aware of and do not abuse or take advantage of this changing hover-zones system. Changing hoverzones with heavy traffic present is the equivalent to getting passed multiple big groups of enemies in a stealth game by turning invisible. You can bypass usual impossible odds by simply turning invisible, like in the Crysis series. It's the same shit in Jak II with the hzs. I defend this series for a reason. A lot of people are ignorant, did not acquire certain skills, sucked, and many other things."
 
Apologetics and rationalizations.
 
Mar, on 02 Aug 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:
"The first game is overrated as hell, and in multiple areas. It wasn't THAT superior in platforming, it seriously was not. It's literally, mostly a more kind, or less dangerous, world than the world of the sequels (even though Jak was actually starring at Keira's ass multiple times, places like Rock Village felt dark and lonely, and the plot of the game was centered around evil guys using a dark substance to fill the world of it and destroy everything), that's pretty much it! In the first game you run plenty and do not platform at times. Like this really pisses me off. The platforming is practically balanced the same in all 3 games. I already stated that it's not until you get into the actual levels that platforming exist. After all, did the first game's main hub have platforming?"
 
The first game had some issues. I can talk about those if you like, but that doesn't mean I didn't enjoy my time with it a lot more. A platforming game doesn't need some kind of solid story. It was though an adventure game as well, which usually has more focus on the story, and while nothing exciting, it was sufficient. The gameplay was more in focus with this game.
 
No, the platforming was not as balanced in all three games. First game is pretty much all about platforming. Second game has little and even less good platforming. Third game had more and better platforming than the third game, but still little compared to first, but it was decently balanced out in Jak III, but Jak III had a lot of other stuff too.
 
 
Mar, on 02 Aug 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:
"Btw, not sure if you noticed or not but im a very technical person. Awful is a term worst than bad, so if I especially see the term "awful" applied to something in Jak's games that's not actually awful, I will say something about it. Awful/terrible =/= bad."
 
It's not Jak's games. It's Naughty Dog's games. I don't think Jak 1-3 was awful, but I didn't like Jak 2 and 3 as much, and I think they were worse. As for Jak X, I thought that compared to CTR was garbage and awful, whatever word you prefer. Remember, I'm comparing what I consider the best in the genre to it, but compared to most games in the genre, it's around mediocre and below average. Why I even emphasis how bad Jak X is compared to CTR is because they are made by the same developer. That after they had delivered two of what I would consider their worst games to that date. Which just to top it all off came with a memory card glitch.
 
 
EDIT: Sorry about how I quote, but too many quotes in one post, wouldn't allow me to post otherwise. ;)
Edited by MMDE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

@MMDE. Ok, I just can't reply to all of that. That is way too much, but mostly only because of the way you broke that down. I skimmed through some things though. I could very easily prove you wrong on more than half of what you said if Jak's Collection (including X) was remastered on PS4, because I could record footage of certain things that would make a lot of what you said invalid, false, or inconsistent.

 

The claim with Jak X being awful is going to have to be your worst complaint here though. (Jak X has several positive and advantageous aspects over Crash Team Racing, clearly.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Ratchet and Clank is in my opinion the best overall. With unique weaponry that still looks good to this day and seeing millions of bolts flying towards you how can this series not top the other two? Going Commando really stepped up the series whereas the first game was more of a stepping stone and experiment. Up Your Arsenal added more carnage, but in terms of innovation falls short of the second title.

 

Jak and Daxter is a good title platformer wise but lacks the fluidity and motion of the Sly Cooper games. As far as I've heard Jak II and Jak 3 drift away from the first game into a more open, action packed series, which in doing so is more limited than Ratchet and Clank. Daxter steals the show here, I haven't found Jak nor a number of the other characters all that great.

 

Sly Cooper is the best in platforming. What it lacks in pure action it makes up for in good jumping and what was considered a unique look. It is also the easiest of the three platforming series that dominated the Playstation 2 era. Much of the first game, and going through the Cooper vault towards the end of Sly 3: Honor Among Thieves demonstrate the excellent platforming. Sly and Carmelita have good chemistry throughout the games, even if Carmelita's voice changed every game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think R&C deserves the first place. Great gameplay, great stories and characters, creative as hell in the settings, weapons and enemies department, and best longevity.
Sly comes in as a close second, having great gameplay, platforming, stories and characters, but lacking some of the all-out mayhem and destructive fun of R&C.

J&D is the worst among these three, with only one truly well-made game in the series, even though it has a very simple gameplay (J&D The Precursor Legacy), a bad game that tried to copy GTA III and failed miserably at it (Jak II: Renegade) and a good game that felt more like a patched version of the previous game in the series (Jak 3). At least the other two series have always been consistent in their quality level, whereas J&D managed to be a tone, gameplay and quality level rollercoaster...not good.

Edited by Valtekken173
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Ratchet & Clank were the first i ever played out of those on PS2 , played the trilgoy and the Gladiator ( Deadlocked ) one also and that was my favorite franchise of the PS2 era and cause of that i also start to get the trilogy of Jak and Jax X combat racing on PS2 but never hear or knew about Sly back in the days . I rebought both Jak & Daxter and Ratchet & Clank trilogies on PS3 to relive the good times and the fond memories i had with both and in the end also got the Sly trilogy on the PS3 to give it a chance and try it for the 1st time .

Imo , Ratchet and jak are supreme for me but Ratchet cames out a little bit on top cause of gameplay and weapon diversity as in Jak the best arguments for me is the comedy , story and character development .

As for Sly is fun when i played first but after the middle of the 2nd game it was getting repetitve for me and out of those 3 ,the Sly franchise is least likeable for me .

Edited by Jiaho24
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...