I don't mind the brevity, the lack of danger/puzzles/complexity etc. But this could have been an actual journey and enigmatic discovery of mystical past with just a little bit of storytelling. We find out at one point that the character isn't a human (or rather a "baseline" human), but some kind of machine or a transhuman perhaps, presumably borne of or previously in league with the antagonistic machine entities. Why is she now trying to undo them and help the marine life? Did something happen to make her change sides? Was she created by the machines? Did she create them? How did they end up underwater, and why? What are the underwater ruins? Were they built by the same people as the machines or their ancestors? Are the machines even native to the planet? How about the dreamworld accessed by the portals, what's that all about? So many questions that could have been used to grip the player's intellectual curiosity amidst all the visual feasting. I tried to look at some of the wall murals to get some clues, but didn't find much. A bit of a background story fleshed out could have been easily incorporated in them for instance. Now we get just a little tease which makes 2001 look like Captain Obvious. Perhaps I'm missing the point - yes it's just supposed to be a relaxing experience rather than a proper game. But why put all those elements there then. Oh, and about the "clunky controls" - if you've ever snorkeled or dived they feel quite right actually. Your movements underwater aren't frantic or precise; I'd love that kind of freedom in fact! It's a gorgeous couple of hours, although by the end I was ready to surface. It's a good length for it as it is.
A gaming experience, I've found lately, doesn't always have to be enjoyable only when you're being coached to achieve. This is almost like watching a relaxing, zen-like movie, except with greater participation on the viewer's part. The story, the puzzles, mechanics, they're nothing ground breaking or flawless. But they're put together in a lovely way that'll on occasion call to mind bits of dreams you might have had that are whatever is the opposite of the nightmarish kind. If you're looking for some ambitious, amazing title that'll be in the game of the year lists (and nothing wrong with that; I often do too), well sure, skip this. Or actually, on a second thought - maybe you shouldn't.
As with the first installation, it's the graphics, scenery and music that sustains the sense of magic and wonder throughout the game. If you know a game that's prettier to look at, which one would it be? Maybe Trine 3? I killed a character a few times just getting screenshots. Many of the weaknesses of the first one have been rectified. There are more and different kinds of bosses. The skeletons have been replaced by opponents with more personality. The game is longer (a few times you think it ends, only to continue), and the knight now has a meaningful, sometimes crucial role in the action. Meanwhile, the gameplay is just as precise and intuitive. Many games incite cursing and rage because of their flaws, bad controls, stupid, random idiocies etc. With Trine, you pretty much only blame yourself when you die. One thing missing from the first one is a worthwhile reward/hidden item system - I'd rather collect something more consequential than poems and paintings. Getting to them is still fun thank god. And you will miss many of the orbs if you don't really look for them, nor are they easy to reach. The challenges are only repetitive if you only use one method; Trine 2 allows even more freedom in how to solve the puzzles in myriad of ways. You're the one with the tools, be creative. It's very pleasing to reach some item, having built and climbed a towering, leaning pile of debris that is just a pixel or two away from collapsing due to its own inherent instability, maybe inside a gravity bubble - on purpose! How much can you stretch it? I generally stay away from platform jumpers but the mesmerizing imagery made me buy the first one, and then immediately the second. It really does look that good, plays that good. You even sort of start caring for the characters. To not recommend it would be to undermine why computer games exist.
The others have already adequately pointed out the playability, mechanics issues etc. Here's my concern, though I sincerely hope it's not a valid one. Most who have played the original - whether they like the genre or not - understand what a masterpiece it was for its time. It is quite astounding that they did what they did with it, and I think that's a party what makes the original so enjoyable. A Doom contemporary, yet so, so much ahead of its time. But, that was in '94. What was fresh, innovative, unprecedented and ingenious then has become rehashed, cliche and done-to-death by now (ironically, thanks to the original's influence on game development). Sure, I loved the demo since I think the original was so great. But is that enough? I mean, the first SS to me is about the best game ever made; but in that, I include the consideration when it was made. It's a difficult balancing act that the developers have to walk. On one hand this will certainly please those who played the original. But it has to offer something for the new players too, and then you risk upsetting the old timers. For instance, do you really want the same level design that constrained the programmers due to the limitations in '94? I'd rather see a sequel that is faithful to the original's feel; that way, you have a chance to satisfy both camps and create a whole new world within the SS universe. A world where I don't know the exact corridor where Shodan first craps my pants, or what's ahead. But maybe I'm too skeptical. After all, I did like the demo, and many new gamers who haven't played the original seem to accept it too. Maybe it's doable. Maybe it'll still feel "new", smart and immersive, not just a splendid deja vu. I sure wish it the very best. The Saturn vista is fantastic, btw. I always hoped I'd find that in the original once I got far enough. Just please don't have the same view in windows of rooms facing different directions. We SS -kind of gamers notice that stuff.
Everyone says the game's graphics are beautiful - and indeed, to try to overstate that would require a serious sitting studying a dictionary - and I don't care in what language. I noticed myself often delaying the solving of the puzzles to take in the vistas a little longer, hoping there'd be an easter egg that'd allow you to walk off the path and into the backdrop in 3D. Ari Pulkkinen's (of the Angry birds fame) soundtrack also fits the game perfectly - it's like he and the art director were seeing the same dream when the game was being developed. The gameplay and dynamics are fluid and seamless. The puzzles aren't hard enough to fool you into thinking you need to fill your Mensa application, but they don't really need to be. Trine is one of those games that even if you don't like the puzzles, the abilities, enemies, or achievements in some regards (personally I think they're fine), you can't not like it. You start it up, and something inside you starts feeling... enchanted, to an extent where you don't care about uttering a cheesy line like that. The only negative that comes to mind is the final level. You're getting lost in this fun fairyland for hours and suddenly, out of nowhere, you're thrown into this Mad max den of lions with a timed bomb strapped to your back - and even if you're like me and don't like cursing, watch out. That $&#@*%n level's gonna get you. However, change the difficulty to "easy" and then it's almost too simple for a final level. I don't normally play side scrollers, but I bought Trine based on the screen shots and the talk about how pretty it is. And boy am I glad I did.
Firstly, I didn't "grow up" playing this game so I have no sentimental issues with it whatsoever; I just recently discovered it after a stint with Doom. Secondly, when judging old games, I think there are two considerations - how good the game is overall, comparing it to all games one has played, and how good it was for its _own time_, taking into account contemporary hardware limitations, other games etc. In both regards, I find SS superb. It's exquisitely crafted by a team of obviously very smart bunch of people who also had an excellent knack on how to tell a story, create an atmosphere and characters, and utilize every single byte and Hz out of the limited hardware of the time. I mean, the in-game physics alone - you can throw objects, and they bounce when hitting things and have inertia, in 19-bloody-94! Voice logs are a cliche now, but then they were a new idea, which is important to remember. Oh, and you can go back and forth between levels, at any time. It was much ahead of its time. It has in-game-games that serve no purpose whatsoever. They're just there for your amusement, to create immersion, and you can collect them and play them in a safe place. I just saw in one review that there was a game cartridge somewhere with a Wing Commander -like game in it - I never found that one, and now I want to (I mean, who ok'd all that stuff?)! The cyberspace is also a sort of another dimension within, with its own rules, enemies and tactics. It's just extraordinary. Much has been said about the difficult interface. I personally only found it difficult in the beginning; by the 2nd level you're fine. I don't even want the new mouse look. I like that you can aim and move independently, as in real life. I enjoy the fact that the interface had so much going on. Once you master it, it's a blast, you're in control freak heaven. And yeah, as a game, it's better than SS2. The graphics are '94 of course. But its genius, attention to detail and design are timeless. 10/10
