Odell Down Under

The Short


Pros
- "Edutainment" game involving eating smaller fish while avoiding bigger fish...hey this sounds familiar
- Has like thirty fish to play as an many different locations and scenarios
- Every fish plays completely differently, based on its actual natural predators and prey
- Looks pretty good for an old PC game
- I love that fish go "ARRRGGGHHH" when they die

Cons
- Kind of boring
- Some fish are overpowered. Learn to balance your games, Mecc. Wait, actual marine biology? PFFFFFT.
- For being "Edutainment," in order to learn I'd actually have to read the fish facts before I picked them. Like that's gonna happen.

Good ol' 265 colors. 

The Long

This is a weird game to review, because technically I never owned it. Growing up we played it at the computer lab at our local school department, though we mostly played it at the Children's Museum in L.A. of all places. And even though technically I probably haven't played it enough to give a fair review, it's a freaking ancient Edutainment game so I think you'll let it slide if the last time I played this game I was like...ten. 

Since I've been reviewing the Feeding Frenzy games (read review for #1 and #2!) I figured I'd review the game it obviously was inspired by (though PopCap made a casual game that does not follow actual fish biology, despite me saying otherwise in my Feeding Frenzy review). Odell Down Under is the sequel to Odell Lake, which was more of a text-adventure fish eating game rather than one where you actually swim around. Let me tell you: having to pick from a menu to eat fish is super boring guys.

SNORE. 

So in the "sequel," Odell Down Under, they book it from the lake and focus on fish that live by Australia and in the ocean. And it's a lot better for it.

The concept is actually more of survival rather than "eat everything and get big." In order to stay alive you have to both eat other fish and avoid the dangerous ones. If you are a herbivore, you actually have to just eat the plants. If you are a carnivore, you have to learn to recognize which fish are poisonous and which are safe to eat, and which can kill you. Each fish's "stats" are based on their actual biological characteristics, so just because a fish is smaller doesn't mean you can chow-down. It's a clever way to trick kids into learning about actual fish facts, even if most kids would just play the practice mode where you play as a shark and just eat everything that moves. 

Guess what. Sea Urchins are poisonous. Just because you can eat something means you should. Like McDonalds. 

The game gives you a small grid to explore, and tons of fish to interact with. Seriously, there's like thirty or more fish in this game, and you'd better learn 'em all if you are going to not become food (or eat something and die). Different fish come out at different times of day/night, so that's something you have to be aware of as well. It's tricky, especially when you play as the tiny herbivores (which basically means you become a snack for the bigger fish while you are trying to eat plants), but it's weirdly fun. There are no real goals rather than the ultimate one: SURVIVAL. You don't magically grow or anything; you just want to live. Which is weirdly...fun? I think?

You can learn stuff about fish, or just zap stuff with the Ray's stinger. 

The game looks pretty decent for an old Windows 95 game. They use the 256 colors well enough, and the fish all animate smoothly. I dare say the animate better than Feeding Frenzy 2, which is kind of sad considering the massive time gap between these games. Also, fish go AAAAAARRRGGGHHHH when you eat them or get eaten, which is hilarious. It sounds more frustrated than actually dying, which makes it even funnier, like I minorly inconvenienced them by eating them. 

arrrrgh

There really isn't a goal in the game besides getting better and eventually unlocking the shark, which I suppose is a decent enough goal. Mostly it's just here so you'll learn more about fish, and to be honest I don't remember jack crap about fish from this game sixteen years later. I do remember to not eat urchins, though, which has probably saved my life more times than you'd think. So thanks, Odell Down Under. You're a real pal.

I have no idea what sort of score to give this game. I was freaking obsessed with it as a kid for whatever reason (which is also probably why I secretly liked the Feeding Frenzy games) but...I dunno. It's to teach kids stuff. What, am I going to review The Oregon Trail on Apple II now? Actually, yeah, I should totally do that sometime. That would be awesome. Hunting in that game is great.

Anyway, if you have a kid who really likes fish and also somehow own a Windows 95 machine that supports floppy discs or whatever this game came out on (and you can find a copy) then why not. I liked it, but that was also a simpler time. But hey, pound-for-pound you won't find more Australian fish facts in any other game ever made, so it has that going for it.

Four out of five stars? Why does this even matter? 

You think Demon Souls is hard? Try playing Odell Down Under with the Silver Sprat and surviving more than ten minutes. Seriously. You can't. You are prey. 

Feeding Frenzy 2: Shipwreck Showdown

The Short


Pros
- Takes the addicting formula of Feeding Frenzy and amps up the modes
- Co-op for the main campaign is excellent
- Main campaign also mixes it up much more frequently and to a greater detail than Feeding Frenzy
- Has a wide variety of silly minigames
- Graphics are much improved over the original

Cons
- Still essentially the same thing over and over, albeit mixed up a little this time
- While graphics are decent they aren't exactly gorgeous
- Limited replay options

Time for some more fish eatin'.  

The Long

So after getting hooked on the original Feeding Frenzy, we decided to take the dive and pick up the second game. The oddly subtitled Feeding Frenzy 2: Shipwreck Showdown promised better graphics, more varied gameplay, and a co-op mode as well as a handful of minigames.

Guess what? It delivered, resulting in a "deeper" (hur hur) casual game than it's predecessor, though it still remained a bit simplistic and light on overall content. 

There are more levels and fish to play as this time.

Essentially, the game at its core hasn't changed. Eat fish smaller than you, get big, win. Repeat every stage, as you keep shrinking down between them. After a set number of levels you'll swap to a different fish that plays almost exactly the same as the previous ones. So there's that. 

What PopCap does better in this sequel is mix stuff up along the way. There's more "bad" fish to eat, including poison fish that reverse your controls, squid that can shoot ink at you and disorient your fish, etc. You can jump out of the water to eat bugs and perform tricks on certain levels, which is entertaining. Some particularly unique levels are the angler fish, which happen mostly in the dark and require you to eat lights to see what is going on. Again, not a huge amount of new variety here, but certainly a lot more than the first game. 

You can jump out of the water for power-ups and bugs, but watch out for birds!

There's a wider range of power-ups as well, which helps because the increased level variety also ups the difficulty. Feeding Frenzy 2 isn't a particularly difficult game, but it certainly is faster than the first game, and with increased options comes more way to screw up. It's a strong blend, and while it's still a very "casual" game, it maintains the addictive quality of the first Feeding Frenzy.

Another awesome addition for the XBLA and PSN versions of the game is full co-op. Now you and a friend or significant other can play together, both working to eat fish, avoid bigger fish (and mines, the bane of my wife's existence) and grow big and then go on an eating spree. The only real downside with co-op is you share both lives and size progress, so if one of you gets eaten all progress to the next "rank up" is lost, even if the other player is still alive. Annoying, but it works. 

The "Frenzy" combo meter is still here, which will help you get more points and rank up faster. As it stands, it's just a slightly deeper game than the original, shallow offering presented in Feeding Frenzy. But co-op makes up for a lot.

The Xbox/PS3 versions also have four player minigames. These are not in the PC version. 

There's a handful of minigames you can play with your friends; about...six in total? Sorry; I should probably fact check this, but just know they are reasonably fun and can be a decent diversion. The favorite for us was the one where one person is a tiny fish and the rest are big fish. Eating the tiny fish turns you tiny, and you only gain score when you are little. Kind of like Juggernaut mode in Halo, but fishier. Anyway, it turns into a frantic madhouse quickly, which I'm all for. And while the minigames won't exactly have you coming back for more (especially since there are so few of them) they are worth a chuckle. 

This image came up when I searched for "Feeding Frenzy 2." I felt it appropriate. 

Graphically, the game looks a lot better than the original Feeding Frenzy, which I have difficulty believing is even in HD. Everything looks crisper, the water effects are better, and the color is more vibrant. It still is very simple, but the fish look less like cardboard cutouts floating around, and it all is easy on the eyes. Sounds are also good, with more chomping noises (the most important part) and a few light, watery tunes to play during stages. 

Not all the minigames are winners. 

As it stands, Feeding Frenzy 2 is a solid diversion, especially if you have a spouse or girlfriend to play it with. the $10 asking price on XBLA is a bit steep, though; $5 might be more in line with the game's value. Unfortunately, nobody remembers this game exists anymore, so waiting for a discount would probably be fruitless. Hopefully PopCap drops the price permanently, like they did with so many other of their XBLA releases. 

Regardless, Feeding Frenzy 2 is a large jump over its original, and those looking for some casual, fish eating fun could certainly do worse. Like the first game. Which is worse. 

Three out out of five stars. 

Feeding Frenzy 3 should involve sushi somehow. 

Feeding Frenzy

The Short


Pros
- Simple, "eat fish to get bigger to eat bigger fish" game
- Despite having literally no depth (hur hur ocean joke), the game is oddly addicting
- Bonus stages and special activities help mix things up
- Time Trial and other modes included
- Was my wife's first favorite Xbox 360 game

Cons
- Really simple
- Really repetitive
- Doesn't mix things up enough
- Short
- Graphics are also simple, and while they have style look rather bland
- Time Trial is stupidly unbalanced. It gets way easier after the first few levels
- Achievements require stupid amounts of grinding
- Doesn't play very well on mouse and keyboard vs controller

If there's anything I like, it's eating seafood. 

The Long

So along with Luxor 2 (aka "Suxxor 2," hur hur wit), when we bought our brand spanking new Xbox 360 way back in 2008 it also came with a handful of other Xbox Live Arcade Titles. One of these was Feeding Frenzy, made by the fine folks at PopCap to invade our subconscious and sell more seafood. A simple game about fish eating fish, it was either play that or Eternal Sonata, and considering how lazy we were at swapping discs we tried Feeding Frenzy out instead.

And something about it weirdly resonated with my wife, and she played it non-stop for...quite a while. I think we beat the whole game in only two nights.

So with that in mind, I've decided to give Feeding Frenzy my usual unbiased assessment. After playing its sequel (which we bought the second my wife found out it existed), is Feeding Frenzy really worth playing? And, despite all the great memories we had, I'm sorry to say the answer is "no." Feeding Frenzy just isn't that great of a game, when you boil it down.

But there is still something there that hooked my wife, so read on.

It's a fish-eat-fish world under the sea. 

Feeding Frenzy is about as simple as it gets. You start a stage as a little fish. At this point, the goal is to just eat fish that are smaller than you and avoid becoming food for everybody else. Eventually, when you eat enough, you'll "level up" and become bigger in an instant (which is totally how fish evolution and development works. Trust me. I got my Marine Biology merit badge in Boy Scouts.) and then those fishy bastards that were one rank up that kept eating you are now your food, ha ha! Repeat the process one more time and you'll be king of the ocean, and then you simply reach the end of the bar to win.

Every single stage is like this. I have literally described the entire game.

CHOMP. 

The only real trick comes in getting "Frenzies" (hence the name). Eat a lot of fish in a row and you get bonus points. Get enough bonus points and you'll get extra lives, and a place on the totally hacked XBLA leaderboards. So there really isn't much for the points, I guess. I think it also makes you grow bigger, but I might be confusing it with the second game. Whoops.

The game also gives you new fish to try, and a few stages are a bit different (there's one where the currents are fast so fish go flying and it's hard to control, etc.). There are also bonus stages that require eating a number of fish in a time limit and what have you, and it keeps adding unique fish that do weird things (like puffer fish you have to sneak up on, etc.) but they really don't do much. While it does seem to add new stuff at a decent clip, the core element and scenarios doesn't ever really change, so the whole thing feels like the same grind over and over. You shrink back to tiny between every stage, so each time you are back at square one. These fish must have crazy metabolisms. 

There's a decent single player and the same thing with "Time Trial," and that's about it. 

Unlike most PopCap games, this one doesn't have much content. All the stages can be seen in the graphic above, with clear indications when you switch fish. It's fine (and the Orca is awesome) but still...just the same thing over and over.

I will admit, however, there is a strange draw, which is how PopCap earns its place amongst the gaming greats. Levels are quick, simple, and easy, and the fish control quickly. You soon get a dash ability as well as a "vacuum" suck ability to catch large groups at once, which is nifty. Since stages are so quick they can pull off the whole "one more level" thing, and before you know it it's two in the morning. However, just because a game is addicting doesn't mean it's really good, and Feeding Frenzy just...isn't that good. 

Free Willy. Eat sharks. 

It also looks kind of awful. The graphics would look bad even in an online flash game, and the animations are choppy and poor. While I'll admit the "CHOMP" sound effect is funny and the "FRENZY" voice is also pretty great, the images look static and not like they are even under water. It's like playing with badly animated cardboard cutouts. It blows my mind this is in "HD" and on the same console that can punch out stuff like Gears of War 3. I mean, come on. At least try here.

Music is decent, and as I mentioned the sound effects are all fun and evoke the sounds of...well, devouring other fish with large crunches. 

I'm running out of screenshots, so now you get the Xbox Live menu screen. 

As it stands, Feeding Frenzy really isn't worth the asking price of $5. This is especially so because the sequel, Feeding Frenzy 2, is also on XBLA and PC and is way better. It's essentially the same core addicting gameplay in the second but with more variety, options, levels, and multiplayer (both co-op and competitive mini-games). So in comparison, Feeding Frenzy is looking pretty bare-bones. 

If you have a weird inclination for fish-eating-fish based video games, I'd say ignore Feeding Frenzy and grab the second one. The second one is also co-op, which means you can play it with your significant other, and it looks better, plays better, and actually has a decent amount of content. As much as I love you, PopCap, and as much as I'm glad my wife found a game to play on our new Xbox 360, this game should be caught and released.

Get it? Fish jokes. Not to bait you on or anything, but I might be jumping the shark with all these fishy fish puns. 

Ok, I'm done. At least I tried. Two out of five stars. 

Oh yeah, this is what the XBLA version looks like. All the rest are PC. Probably should have mentioned that earlier...whatever. 

Luxor 2

The Short

Pros

- Fun enough match-three puzzle game in the vein of PopCap's awesome Zuma

- Lots of powerups, which are obtained by matching three in a row, keep things interesting

- Absolutely insane number of levels and three difficulty levels

- Has an ancient Egypt theme. ANCIENT EGYPT IS AWESOME.

- Decent enough time to burn a few hours

Cons

- Speaking of Zuma, this game rips it off. Completely. 

- While ripping off Zuma, it doesn't do anything original like Zuma did.

- Seriously, Zuma's Revenge on iOS is my new addiction. This game just is the same thing over and over.

- A very limited number of stages that repeat way too often.

- Music is repetitive and gets obnoxious very fast

- Game also get unfairly difficult fast, with limited extra lives and continues making it a pain even on "Easy"

- Some powerups are completely useless

- Has achievement points that aren't divisible by five. That's just garbage. 

- Overall, this is just a piss-poor Zuma clone

S

Stop bustin my balls. 

The Long

Hey, have you heard of PopCap? No? Does the game Bejeweled ring any bells? How about Peggle? Or Plants vs Zombies? Point is, PopCap practically prints money with every game they put out. Bejeweled has been ripped off so many times because it's more addicting than crack, and honestly I'm surprised nobody's tried to steal the Peggle formula considering how quitting that game could require a support group.

Anyway, they also released a nifty game called Zuma. Essentially, you play a frog that spits colored balls at an incoming chain of colored balls, all set to a nifty Mayan theme. Match three and it blows up. Same colors are magnetically attracted, so you can make long chains if you are smart. Power-ups spawn, and the general goal is simply to fill up a "Zuma" meter (made my getting matches), which will make the ball-chain stop spawning and let you clean up. It's a clever, easy game that plays really damn good on my iPhone (seriously. Zuma's Revenge. It's like $2. Buy it.) and falls into that "casual but addicting" class of games.

Did you catch that? Because Luxor saw all the money Zuma was printing and ripped the game off completely, and somehow managed to make it bad.

As you can see, Luxor 2...hey wait, this is a Zuma screenshot! How did I possibly get these two games confused?

Everything here is the same. Instead of Mayan, we have Ancient Egypt (which I will admit is much cooler because nothing beats Ancient Egypt in "Coolest places ever."). Instead of a frog that spins in the middle, we have a winged...thing that can only go back an forth on the bottom to shoot balls. Instead of Mayan coins you can pick up ancient Egyptian looking...things that sometimes spawn from balls. And so on. In truth, the only real major change between these two is that you aren't spinning in the middle, and power-ups are dropped instead of randomly spawning on the chain. 

Oh, and that Zuma is way better, but that's not the point.

Little known fact about ancient Egypt: The pyramids were erected by BALLS. 

So you sit at the bottom and get color balls and shoot them at an oncoming chain until your Luxor meter is full and then you finish off the remaining balls and then you win, hooray! If you explode three match-three balls in a row a random powerup is dropped, and it's essential to exploit this to beat the later levels. Powerups are frequent but mostly really lame, unlike Zuma were they were all useful. Some really crappy ones include the "net" powerup (which just means you can catch more coins if they randomly drop...for a limited time) and the "aim" powerup, which is good if you really suck, I guess. There's a few decent ones like fireballs and lightning, but they hardly ever drop. I once was about to die and it dropped six nets in a row, dooming me to a catastrophic failure. Maybe I'm still bitter about this. You decide from the tone of this review.

So now that you get it, let me explain quickly why Luxor 2 is way worse than Zuma. In case you didn't get that point already.

Where the balls is this chain's path? It's about as intuitive as...something that isn't intuitive. 

Aside from the bad powerup spawning (which I mentioned already), the fact you can only go back and forth on the bottom is actually more hindering than you'd think. The reason is the stages aren't designed around this changed mechanic; instead they just seemed to put random paths. In Zuma, every sage was specifically designed to work with the frog at its location and with 360 degrees of aiming. In this it's like they just slapped it together, which means some later levels are damn near impossible.

Speaking of levels, there's an extremely limited number. You'll be recycling quickly and, while Zuma did it, this one has less stages than Zuma. Another big issue I had is that in Zuma the path is very obviously outlined. You know where the balls are going so you can plan ahead. In Luxor 2, they just seem to wind around at random. The background images (while of the Egypt variety) don't project where the chain goes. It's annoying. 

The whole game just feels like a cheap cash-in. Which is especially stupid considering this is the second Luxor game. Come on! At least have an original thought in your head that isn't "Hey, we could put it in EGYPT!"

Again, no hate against Egypt, but this game is balls. 

It doesn't help the game is ugly, especially the backgrounds. The rendering is really low and unappealing to look at, and while the balls animate well and the powerups are flashy it just looks like a cheap game (which is because it is). The music is also really obnoxious: same one song, over and over. And when the balls get close, same high-intensity song which is shorter. And you'll hear the latter a lot in the later levels, meaning it'll drive you insane as it's just the same few notes over and over. Ugh.

At least this stage projects where the balls are going. Lightning, away!

I got this game for free as a pack-in when I bought my Arcade 360 unit way back in the day, and for the brief stint of time where I only owned Ninja Gaiden 2 and Eternal Sonata, Luxor 2 was a decent diversion (at the cost of free). However, after I got better games (and found out Zuma existed), I haven't played it since. Added bonus that the game gets nuts hard near the end, and with the limited lives and really obnoxious continue system it's easy to get stuck in an infinite loop of suck. Seriously, I'm good at these games, I swear, and I still couldn't beat it. Maybe I'm just the worst Luxor 2 player, or maybe this game is just balls.

The fact they are still asking $10 for this game on XBLA blows my mind. And they haven't stopped milking their Zuma ripoff idea: They are at like Luxor 6 or 7 on PC. I see them when I go to Target, in the "paper sleeve crappy cheap games" side of the PC gaming section. Usually the pack like four of them together for $10, which is like getting 4x the suck for one not-so-low-price.

Point being: just pretend this game doesn't exist, and go buy Zuma's Revenge on iOS. Or PC. Or whatever; that game rocks. This game does not. 

Two out of five stars. 

Plus, they even designed some of their stages to knock-off Luxor. What goes around comes around, buddy! Also, balls. 

Silent Hill HD Collection

The Short


Pros
- Two of the best horror games ever made repackaged for a current generation
- Despite being quite old, both games still animate fluidly and have fantastic art direction
- For a new player, both these collections look great, play great, and still are downright horrifying
- Installed, there is virtually no load times in both games, keeping the game flow consistant
- Has a pretty awesome box

Silent Hill 2 Specific
- Silent Hill 2 still has one of the best crafted and told stories in video games, and it shines
- New voices for Silent Hill 2 are leagues better than the original, but the option for original voices is still here
- Includes bonus "Born from a Wish" scenario previously exclusive to the Xbox and PC versions of Silent Hill 2
- Indoor areas look downright stunning, maintaining the original game quality with improved visuals
- Enemies are well-rendered in HD, with that same otherwordly movement mixed with the "sheen" effect
- This is still one of the greatest games ever made

Silent Hill 3 Specific
- Silent Hill 3 dramatically benefits from the HD upgrade, making the game both scarier and funner to play
- Monsters look quite good and being able to see them and where you are going makes the game easier and less frustrating
- A few audio tweaks (footsteps, etc) make the game scarier and less annoying


Cons
- Both games suffer from being more washed out look and a less dramatic color pallet (blacks aren't as black, lights aren't as light, etc.)
- I played the 360 version, but the PS3 version apparently has some serious problems in crashing, framerate, and audio synch
- Radio in both has been altered to "hiccup" or "pulse" rather than give a steady horrifying screech when enemies are near, which is way more annoying (it's way worse in Silent Hill 3, though)
- Whenever you get an achievement the game drops to a massive slowdown crawl. I have no idea why this is but it is really great at kill the mood for first time players
- Sound glitches seem to happen every time you save (worse for Silent Hill 3)
- Complete omission of Silent Hill 4: The Room. Why not include it too?

Silent Hill 2 Specific
- Fog is toned down and more gray, but due to the fact the fog was there to hide the rendering you get a "wall of fog" effect that can look pretty bad at times
- Outdoor textures (ground, etc.) look rather bland and less ominous than the PS2/Xbox/PC originals
- Water (especially during the boat scene) looks so bad it makes me wonder if someone even playtested this

Silent Hill 3 Specific
- Frequent audio issues abound
- Right channel sounds come out of the left speaker, and vice versa. How do you screw that up?
- Many audio loops (including music, persistant sound effects) don't have a smooth looping transition, meaning music cuts out before restarting. That's just sad.
- Any large burst of sound (using the Unlimited Submachine Gun, etc.) will cause the game to spew massive amounts of sound static and essentially break the sound for a few seconds
- Audio synching of cutscenes gets off during the latter 1/3 of the game. It isn't horrible, but you will notice it during the final few cutscenes
- A few of the dirtier, uglier environments are slightly more washed out than the originals
- Shadows/lighting has somehow downgraded from the original
- New voice actors are not as good. Douglas is better, but new Heather is downright awful compared to the flawless original

Is this collection worth the return to the horror?

Note: My copy of this game is the Xbox 360 version. From what I understand, the PS3 version has all the same problems only to a greater degree. Konami released a patch that apparently did not fix these issues, so buyer beware. 


The Long


It should be known that I absolutely love Silent Hill 1-3 (and sort of like 4, even if it is hard to love). I consider them to be the finest and scariest horror games ever made, and absolutely necessary for anyone who wishes to write, design, or just has an affinity for horror. These games are absolutely fantastic, and should be played by everybody at least once (at least Silent Hill 2) anyway.

I reviewed the games in this collection already, so I'll refrain from gushing too much about them and save that for their respective reviews (Silent Hill 2 and Silent Hill 3). I will say this though: After playing both games back-to-back, my opinion on what my favorite Silent Hill game is has changed. Originally I said Silent Hill 3 was my favorite (probably because I played it first and it was the first game I ever played to give me nightmares), but after experiencing Silent Hill 2 from beginning to end for the first time in about six years, I must say it is by far the better game, and solidifies itself as my favorite. While Silent Hill 3's story ties in with the first game (and because of that gets kind of bananas), Silent Hill 2's narrative (aided by the improved voice actors) remains strong from beginning to end, giving you just enough to go off of without spoon-feeding you information. It's sort of a beautiful catastrophe, a depressing experience that requires you to think and continue to dig deep to fully understand exactly what is going on in James' head.

As a blend of atmosphere, narrative, and psychological horror, I have yet to find a game equal to it. And I said I wouldn't gush, so that's it.

I still love you, Silent Hill 3, but you really don't compare. 

This review is going to mostly be for those who have played the PS2 originals (or on Xbox/PC) and are looking to buy this collection out of nostalgia. So if you haven't played these games and aren't interested in reading about me pick apart the differences between the originals of these two games an this HD re-release, I'll save you a lot of time with the following blanket statement:

If you haven't played Silent Hill 2 (or 3, I guess) and own an Xbox 360, buy this collection. Despite my laundry list of complaints up in the Cons (and forthcoming), the experience is still authentic. Both games are chilling and must be played. So go pick it up, and you can come back and read this review when you are done.

The rest of you, hang on, because I have a lot to say about both games. I'm going to break it up between the two, and I'll also try to be a light as possible on spoilers if it's been a while and you want to experience the games as "fresh" as you can.

For many people, this is the game they are getting the collection for, and with good reason: it's a fantastic game. However, does it stack up to the original? After release a lot of crap went down on message boards and all over the community complaining about how they'd "changed" Silent Hill 2. Reviews were all over the place, from IGN's 9.0 to Destructoid's 3.0. What are the problems? Is this game really as bad as people say?

Well, let me start with another blanket statement: As the Silent Hill 2 experience, it still works just as well as the originals (hence why I can recommend this collection to newcomers). The game is still extremely atmospheric, claustrophobic, and gets under your skin. I played from where you first meet Maria to the end of the game in one sitting, from 8:30 am - 12:00 pm (in the morning, with all the lights on) and when I hit Toluca Prison I actually couldn't take the suspense anymore and had to take breaks (same as during the Hotel). So, as it stands, this game still completely works. Angela's final scene is downright heartwrenching, the story still stands up strong, and it's still a great game. So in that regard, it's fine.

Now...the problems (HD on left, PS2 on right)

The biggest issue people have been going about is the reduction of the fog effect. Originally the fog served two purposes: providing a claustrophobic feeling even when running down wide-open roads, and hiding the fact they were rendering stuff right in front of your face because the PS2 lacked the power to render beyond just a small distance in front of James. It worked because before the "wall of fog" (which was essentially where they were actively rendering the world) they masked it with tons of white fog before it that made it look less awkward. Some person thought it would be good to take away the white fog (or most of it) leaving the wall there to...look bad. So when you run there's like a visible wall of fog moving with you, which is sort of how the PS2 version felt, but this is more obvious.

For those looking for it, it will annoy, and the lack of claustrophobia (and inability to see enemies until they are right on top of you, requiring reliance on the radio which was an important part of the PS2 original) is disappointing. It is also gray fog instead of white for whatever reason, though it makes the game feel more dreary than it did before which I actually sort of like (it looked a bit like snow in the PS2 version). However, the point is this: it isn't that bad. Do I miss the wispy tendrils of fog dancing about me and hiding tons of nasty beasties? Yes. Does it ruin the game? No. 

This, however, is unforgivable. 

It does, however, culminate with another factor to completely ruin a certain scene in the game. There's a part where you have to row towards a light across a lake near the end of the game. In the original, the wall wasn't obvious, so it didn't look completely awful when you were rowing towards the light. While I was fine with running around town, this scene looked horrible, and as an added bonus somehow the water got rendered completely wrong (see above...that's supposed to be water. Yeah.). I guess it looks kind of like a fever dream or something...who am I kidding, it looks like total crap. Luckily this is just one two-minute scene, but holy crap did you not playtest this?

There are only a few very minor additional graphical issues I found. Outdoor sidewalks and environments are less "dirty," with the HD up-rezzing losing a lot of little marks and dirt on the sidewalks and essentially rendering it much more boring looking. It wasn't a huge deal, but while the original obviously had a lot of work put into its art design for the limited system power, this just feels really lazy.

The start of a horrifying adventure. 

However, it is worth noting that aside from these issues, the rest of the game looks really, really good. Indoors looks fantastic, with all the rust and dirt and grime that permeates James' interpretation of Silent Hill showing up in exquisite detail. While Silent Hill 3 suffers from muted color pallets, Silent Hill 2 seems to mostly avoid this. Dark areas are pitch dark, shadows are long and intimidating, and overall it just looks straight up perfect. Character models are also improved, and I found they look much better. The night scene (after you leave the Hospital) and wander around Silent Hill in total darkness is still one of the scariest and tensest moments in games. It still all works. 

Unlike Silent Hill 3, Silent Hill 2 manages to dodge almost all the audio issues the other game on this compilation seems riddled with. Sound effects are mostly as you remember them (a few monster footsteps are slightly changed, but it's fine) with one rather large exception: the radio has changed. While it still has its signature static-mixed-with-whistle sound, when enemies are just a small distance away the radio has a sort of "pulse" for some reason. It's not nearly as noticeable as in Silent Hill 3 (making me wonder if this too is actually an audio bug and not intentional), but it isn't as good. However, it still invokes that sense of tension and dread when you leave a room, think you are alone, but the radio is screaming its head off...so there you go. 

Oh, and the new voice actor is really really good. All the new voice actors are really good, I should point that out. People sound like they are actually having conversations rather than just talking in a sound booth, and I prefer the new voices for everybody except Eddie. Eddie in the original you could feel the tension rising throughout. This one feels like he's trying too hard to be a psychopath so...alright then. 

One last audio thing: the new "panting" sound James makes when recovering stamina is awful on the new voices. It's like a half-second loop playing over and over that doesn't sound natural at all. Again, a little thing, but how did they not catch this? 

The film grain, grit, and grime of Silent Hill 2 are all intact. 

Ultimately, I was wholly satisfied with the port of Silent Hill 2. Yes, it was maybe a bit smoother and less gritty, and that "wall of fog" thing sucks, but it still looks great, runs in HD (and widescreen), and plays exactly as you remember it. So for this fan, it passes, and I can't wait to play through it again (gotta get that "Dog" ending...)

Oh, it also has the "Born from a Wish" side-mission from the Director's Cut/Restless Dreams version of the game. This side-story is...um...actually kind of garbage. You play as Maria, only go into one unique area (a mansion, which has hardly any monsters and reminded me more of Resident Evil than anything) and then...it ends. It's about 45 minutes long at most, and adds nothing significant to the story. But hey, it's here, so that's nice I guess. 

It's funny when comparing these two games, because I know Konami could have done this right. While Silent Hill 2 has graphical issues but no audio bugs, Silent Hill 3's graphics are near-perfect but the game is an audio glitchfest. Clearly they needed to swap teams or fire some people or something and that would have made everything better.

Anyway, let's get to the point here: Silent Hill 3 looks pretty good. The game was already better looking than Silent Hill 2 in terms of environments and simple graphical prowess, which I'm assuming made the HD conversion easier. It also uses a pallet of more red, yellow, and black compared to Silent Hill 2's emphasis on brown, black, and gray, which means the HD graphics are noticeably more vibrant simply due to color choice alone. Several areas (specifically the Otherworld Hospital and end-game Church) were completely indiscernable due to blurriness on the PS2 version (I'd like to think the game's art design bit off more than they could chew), and they look much better here. The improvement is substantial because it effects both gameplay and graphics; before I had no idea what was a door amongst the pulsating wall of gooey blood and flesh, but now I can sort of tell! So good on that one. 

The monster design isn't as consistant as Silent Hill 2, but it works. Except the dogs. I'm never afraid of dogs in horror games. 

The is one rather massive, glaring oversight that people who played the original will notice right off the bat: the game's contrast has been significantly muted. In the original Silent Hill 3, the game got super dark. Many areas were completely pitch black, with the only thing you could see being the very bright light of your flashlight beam. This contrast made the game horrifying, because you could literally only see what was directly in front of you for many parts of the game (it also made it disorienting, which is kind of a minus, but whatever). In the HD version, the brights have been toned down and the darks have been lit up, making the whole thing more uniform but also less stark. Which kind of kills some parts of the horror.

Now it isn't all gone. There are still many areas that are pitch dark (much like Silent Hill 2, which somehow this didn't get messed up on) and evoke the same feeling...but why only some parts? It's like one team did some areas and other teams the others...I don't get it. 

Luckily I really only noticed this for a few parts of the game. Since the game was so dark already, it still is super creepy in the later areas (though the Amusement Park, my favorite Silent Hill location, is a bit muted too). 

It's easy to see the difference here. Granted, the light isn't on, but still...

But the absolute biggest problem in Silent Hill 3 (and, on that note, probably the worst problem in this HD compilation) is the persistant audio glitches and problems. There's really too many for me to list in any detail, so here's just a quick wrap-up. 

- Audio cutting out randomly (only happened twice and restarted when leaving the room)

- Transitions between repeating tracks not being smooth, same with several repeating sound effects

- Audio channels switched (left/right) which breaks the part of the game where you rely on monster sounds to avoid them

- Radio is similar to Silent Hill 2 only much worse and much more annoying

- Glitchy gargled static mess when saving, every single time (only happened once in Silent Hill 2)

- Audio voices going off-sync during cutscenes (only happened badly during the last 1/3)

- Sound effects (gunshots, etc.) just not happening

- Footsteps disappearing or being really quiet on one terrain and much louder on another

- Using any secret weapon causes the audio to glitch so badly it's a horrible sounding mess

These won't ruin the game for you, but considering how much of Silent Hill games rely on their audio to freak you out, it's a stupid oversight. Again, it just makes the people who ported this look stupidly lazy. It's not like they did this on purpose, but it is like they didn't care. 

Overall, though, the game looks much better graphically. 

The new voices are worth mentioning. Rumor has it they couldn't find the original voice actor for Heather anywhere to confirm the renewal of rights (and therefore give her the cut for her work on this re-release), so they re-recorded all the voice. The script is still as bananas as ever, but unlike the Silent Hill 2 voices I fell this batch is much worse. Douglas is a bit better, as is Vincent, and I guess Claudia is...sort of? But what straight up sucks is the new Heather. The original's voice actor was spot on, conveying the sarcasm, worry, and genuine annoyance a teenager would have in this situation. It wasn't the best voice acting ever, but it was surprisingly endearing. This new voice actor just sucks, like she's trying to sound like a teenaged girl and totally failing. Really lame. 

Also, they rewrote a few lines of script but didn't bother changing the subtitles, resulting in a weird dissonance if you have both going. Usually it's just one or two words (and all for the better) but come on...you couldn't even change the subtitles? Seriously?

The lighting is also a bit weaker, with duller shadows, but I might blame that on the pallet color-muting. 

While still totally playable and still evoking the same sense of claustrophobia, dread, and fear that the original release did, Silent Hill 3 really took a bad hit in the audio department. Here's hoping, since these are technically really minor issues, that a patch is released that can fix most of these problems. As it stands, the game is still fine, it just feels cheaply done, much worse than Silent Hill 2. Which is too bad, because this game is pretty freaking creepy (despite having a really slow start). 

So...what are my final comments? "RUN FROM PYRAMID HEAD" might work. 

A few other problems: one of the biggest issues is the fact that whenever you earn an achievement (on the 360 version; don't know about PS3) the game goes into a massive, system-wide slowdown. Like I can't even open the Xbox menu because the slowdown is so bad. It'll resume as normal after a cutscene ends (or if it's just in-game, it'll only last about a second) but it straight-up ruins several scenes in Silent Hill 3, as it gives achievements after each boss and then fades to "boss dying" cutscene, which can take like an hour. After killing that stupid worm boss, it's 10 second dying animation took almost five minutes. I am not even kidding. 

Lastly, just some stupid annoyances: Why isn't Silent Hill 4: The Room in this collection? If you were going for all the PS2 games, why not include all the PS2 games? It wasn't that bad of a game, not at all! I'm guessing it's because the Xbox 360 disc is completely full (based on install size) and they didn't want to ship on two discs for that version so they abandoned it. Or they are just lazy. Also, the PS3 version should have a download code for Silent Hill 1, since Silent Hill 3 makes a crap-ton more sense after playing through the first game.

 

Dark and creepy. Just the way I like my Silent Hill. 

As it stands, if you are a fan of the originals, it's very hard for me to say whether or not to jump on this (unless it's the PS3 version, than don't bother until a patch). I still genuinely loved my experience with both these games, and I think the ports' numerous flaws can be overlooked if you are willing to take a deep breath and just accept that this is a sub-par HD remake. I think the ultimate issue fans have is that almost every other HD re-release (Metal Gear Solid, ICO and Shadow of the Colossus, God of War, etc.) have been significant improvements over the previous games, while still retaining everything that made those games classics (and worth re-releasing). This one does some things right, some things wrong, and just feels shoddy overall. Again, since the original games are so good the collection holds itself up well, but as a token of goodwill from Konami to its fans after all the awful Silent Hill crap its been putting out...this just seems more like another insult. 

I'll repeat what I said at first: If you own a 360 (and not a PS2) and haven't played these games, get this collection. If you do have a PS2, are a long-time fan, or are basically anybody else...I still suggest it, but only if you can swallow your anger and just roll with the games. If it's been a while you might not even notice, so in either case dive back into the horrifying world of Silent Hill and enjoy some late-night scares in the dark. 

But...man. I really wanted this to be so much more.

Three out of Five Stars.

These games are like an older woman who is naturally attractive, but she pours so much makeup and other crap on herself she ends up looking like she's trying too hard. Actually, they aren't now that I think about it. ANALOGY FAIL. 

Kirby's Adventure

The Short


Pros
- Fun, colorful, energetic Kirby game that solidified his power-stealing abilities
- Beautiful 8-Bit graphics are some of the best on the system
- Airtight controls
- Levels vary from being completely linear to being open-ended
- Autosave feature was unique for the NES, and does it better than many modern games
- Music is straight up fantastic
- Strikes a good balance of difficulty, even if it is a tad easy
- Tons of fun and silly minigames to play
- Lets you replay any level to find alternate paths/unlocks
- One of the best NES platformers

Cons
- ...I actually can't think of anything. Huh. It's...a little easy? Is that actually a con?

It's Kirby! And he's ready for an adventure!

The Long

Kirby's Adventure is the NES game that solidified Kirby as the pink, monster-sucking guy that he is now. While Kirby's Dream Land on the Game Boy was technically the first Kirby game (and he could suck enemies up), this was the first one where he could steal abilities, which has since become a staple of his gameplay (with the exception of Kirby's Epic Yarn). So how does Kirby's first real big adventure on the NES play out? Well...really, really good, actually.

Kirby's Adventure is just an all-around solid platformer.

As far as the game goes, it's the same Kirby stuff you've played since. Kirby can jump, or suck up air and float if you prefer that. He climbs ladders, swims, and does it all with airtight controls. But the real pull of this game is that now-staple: the ability to suck up enemies and steal their powers.

There are lots of abilities in the game, all shown in a charming picture on the bottom of the screen when you acquire it. You can dump a power at any time, or if you are hit it'll fly out of you as a star. You can suck it up and recover it if you are fast, or if you aren't it disappears and your awesome sword power is gone forever. It's a very simple mechanic, but it opens up an absolutely massive wealth of options.

Pictured: Wealth of options. 

While some are better than others (that Wheel is freaking useless), you can easily swap out if you just see an enemy whose power you like. While you could technically just stomp everything with the Sword, if you mix and match you might find yourself better suited for various situations. Again, it's a very simple mechanic, but it is executed very well.

And the parka on Kirby for the "Freeze" power-up is just freaking adorable. There, I said it. 

Things start simple, but get crazy fast!

You don't have to just eat powers. You can suck stuff up and spit it back out if it's "useless" (many bosses require this mechanic) to damage enemies, and you can do a quick suck-up for air and blow it out which also does damage. The options here are many and all are unique, and while plenty of games have ripped off Mario, I can't think of any that have successfully mimicked Kirby's unique abilities.

The stages accessed via a variety of hub worlds, represented by doors on each individual world. You can replay any world anytime, and as a cool feature you can also quit out anytime (something that Mario didn't develop until Super Mario World). You also keep whatever power you currently have when you quit, so if you are stuck on a boss you can just jump into a world, suck up the sword guy, and bail and keep the sword. Pretty sweet!

The game also sports auto-save, something that wasn't really adapted (especially by Japanese games) until way, way later. It saves your progress automatically after each stage, and while lives and powerups are reset on a load (back to three lives), the simple fact that an NES GAME AUTOSAVES is mind blowing, especially since many modern games can't figure out how to do it right. Like Silent Hill Downpour which literally came out last month and still has awful autosave positions. Kirby's Adventure: 1. Silent Hill Downpour: 0. 

And yes, I know I just compared Kirby's Adventure to a game that is literally on the other end of the spectrum. Whatever. 

Kirby as a wild-west gunman in a quick-draw minigame might bet the most awesome thing ever. 

Since most levels have branching paths, secret exits, and tons of new things to explore (hence the reason it lets you replay them), you'll also unlock a variety of minigames to play. These range from a crane game like the ones you pump quarters in at Wal-Mart in an attempt to get an Angry Bird plushie, an egg-eating game where you eat eggs and avoid bombs, and a totally hilarious wild west quickdraw game where kirby blows enemies away leaving only their hats. So good.

The amount of content in this game is actually pretty significant, and it never once feels frustrating or unfair. Bosses happen after beating every stage, and while it's true you can breeze through a lot of them with the right powerups, lose it and many become a difficult challenge. All of them usually involve sucking up something they throw at you and spitting it back, but they have unique patterns and all look so different I didn't mind the fact that it was essentially the same mechanic. Plus I could just go get the sword and slash 'em up if they really annoyed me.

TREE, YOUR TIME HAS COME. And look, Kirby's blue! And has a parka in the picture! I love this game so much. 

This game is graphically gorgeous. While you could argue the pixel art in the Castlevania games is deeper and more complex, Kirby's Adventure finds its aesthetic of cuteness and sticks to it all the way through. I seriously couldn't believe this was just an NES game at times at how clean the UI, menues, stages, levels, and backdrops worked. When I was walking around a giant rotating column that moved so smoothly it would fit in well enough on modern games, I was completely blown away. The art direction for this game is insanely well done, using the contrast in colors to present a very clean look with a touch of cuteness. Perhaps the only complaint I could issue is they really like their browns, but that might also just be because the menu underneath is brown (which is also easy on the eyes, so I'm fine with it).

The music is also incredible. Again, you could argue the Castlevania games or Mega Man games really present catchier and better tunes, but everything about Kirby is just so...happy. And bouncy. Even on the darker levels, the music is just so cheerful you can't help but smile. Really good stuff, and the Green Greens version is probably the best out of all the games. Even the Kirby's Epic Yarn version with the pianos. 

So good. It's all just...so good. 

So...is there anything bad about thsis game, aside from being ahead of its time in nearly every area? Um...it can be a little easy, which is weird considering it's an NES game and they are notorious for being, well, not easy. As it stands, I'm totally fine with it being not as ball-bustingly hard as most other platformers of the day. It showed a refinement of style, that Nintendo was beginning to figure out how to design games that were both fun and challenging, rather than just the latter. It makes sense, considering this game was released in the US just a few months before the SNES came out. That's also why it isn't as well known as other NES platformers, since most people were rearing up for the SNES rather than still buying NES games. Too bad, because this game is damn near perfect. 

When that thing in the back starts spinning, you'll forget you are in an NES game. 

Kirby's Adventure is a must have. Unlike many NES games, where nostalgia is the main reason people can go back to them, Kirby's Adventure is still an excellent, fair, and well designed platformer, even today. You can get it for the extremely low price of $5 off the Nintendo Virtual Console on the Wii, and I highly suggest doing just that. If you have an NES carts can range from $10-20, which I'd also say is a perfectly fair price for it. It's a must-have for collectors, and a fantastic game in its own right. 

So what are you waiting for? Go buy it!

Five out of five stars. 

THE END.