ICO is one of those games that managed to capture the hearts and minds of the hardcore element of gaming. In some circles for instance, you are simply not allowed to say the original game is quite boring in parts (it is) and you’re most certainly not allowed to say it isn’t a particularly important piece of art (it isn’t).
But SCEJ’s atmospheric platformer definitely did represent something different in a stagnating genre and was welcome relief to those looking for a more cerebral Disney-esque, character-free experience.
So with copies of the original game soaring on eBay, and with the European card version proving most popular, Sony slowly revealed ICO 2, carrying the name Wanda and the Colossus at this point.
The basic premise sees the expansive and cavernous (oh, the cliché!) castle of ICO replaced by a semi free-roaming landscape populated by what can only be described as large, hairy and somewhat angry giants. The saddled protagonist, presumably Wanda, must find these Colossi, climb them and de-activate them from the inside.
And that’s about all that is known at this time. Sony is yet to fully explain the concept behind its increasingly intriguing re-work, most likely waiting until the attention of the gaming world is focused at this May’s E3.
Enjoy pondering these new images until then.
But SCEJ’s atmospheric platformer definitely did represent something different in a stagnating genre and was welcome relief to those looking for a more cerebral Disney-esque, character-free experience.
So with copies of the original game soaring on eBay, and with the European card version proving most popular, Sony slowly revealed ICO 2, carrying the name Wanda and the Colossus at this point.
The basic premise sees the expansive and cavernous (oh, the cliché!) castle of ICO replaced by a semi free-roaming landscape populated by what can only be described as large, hairy and somewhat angry giants. The saddled protagonist, presumably Wanda, must find these Colossi, climb them and de-activate them from the inside.
And that’s about all that is known at this time. Sony is yet to fully explain the concept behind its increasingly intriguing re-work, most likely waiting until the attention of the gaming world is focused at this May’s E3.
Enjoy pondering these new images until then.
Read More Like This
Comments
kid_77 9 Feb 2005 15:46
1/8
If they're in-game graphics I'll eat my hat... either that or SCEJ have squeezed every ounce of power outta the PS2.
*grabs salt & pepper mills*
*grabs salt & pepper mills*
vault 13 9 Feb 2005 20:05
2/8
kid_77 wrote:
If they're in-game graphics I'll eat my hat... either that or SCEJ have squeezed every ounce of power outta the PS2.
*grabs salt & pepper mills*
*grabs salt & pepper mills*
I certainly hope they are in-game. I wanna see someone eat an article of clothing..., again.
The premise, as little as we know, looks awesome. Just imagine all the horse riding mechanics! And puzzles to figure them out with.
more comments below our sponsor's message
LUPOS 9 Feb 2005 20:50
3/8
ICO is one of those games that managed to capture the hearts and minds of the hardcore element of gaming. In some circles for instance, you are simply not allowed to say the original game is quite boring in parts (it is) and you’re most certainly not allowed to say it isn’t a particularly important piece of art (it isn’t).
ok, first off, i am one of those circles!(if such a thing is possible) I was never bored once, and i assure you my video gameing relys heavily on running fast and shooting things so this isn't my usual ybag, i think it was well pased, i was never without somethign to do and none of the thing si had to do where dull. Unless you don't like solving puzzles. In which case these is obviously not your cup of tea to begin with.
secondly sayign things like:
(it isn’t)
is just stupid. there... i said it... i try and be nice... but come on...
FOX NEWS: "some peopel say george bush is the best president ever(he is)"
SPONG: "some people say this game is the best game ever (it is)"
do you not see any problem with this at all?
im not asking for dull boring completely un opinionated coverage but you could throw in a "i think" or a " in this. writters opinion" everyonce in a while
oh and here just another thought, when it comes to every other reviewer of anything or any other dealer of news or opinion or basically any time anythign is written ever... the writter usualy credits himself for doing so... it woudl be nice to be able to direct my comments at the person in question, or better yet... if i know some one i generally disagree with has written said piece, i coudl easily skip over it and save myself the agrivation.
just a thought
schnide 10 Feb 2005 12:51
4/8
kid_77 wrote:
If they're in-game graphics I'll eat my hat... either that or SCEJ have squeezed every ounce of power outta the PS2.
*grabs salt & pepper mills*
*grabs salt & pepper mills*
Tenner says they're in-game.. want to take that?
LUPOS 10 Feb 2005 13:01
5/8
schnide wrote:
Tenner says they're in-game.. want to take that?
they are obviously in game graphics, or at least in engine, possibley real time cut scenes. There are some easily seen hard edges and repeating textures and no real time lighting. It's almost a shame that the xbox makes everythign looks so good, because the best designer have found some really awsome stylistic choices that make ps2 games look way better than they should. Metal gear, this, final fantasy, silent hill, by working with the limitations they have figured out ways to get some really nice looking stuff. Same with the game cube, resident evil continues to impress me... sure if you look around you can find soem blurry textures and odd spots every once and a while... but they are placed in places where you shouldnt seem them so that the more obvious ones can look better. its all about good design.
kid_77 10 Feb 2005 13:43
6/8
LUPOS wrote:
schnide wrote:
Tenner says they're in-game.. want to take that?
they are obviously in game graphics, or at least in engine, possibley real time cut scenes.
I think that's it. Pre-rendered PS2 graphics between action, but not "in-game", as in when you're actually playing it. For one, I can't see any "jaggies", which seem popular on PS2.
tyrion 10 Feb 2005 13:53
7/8
LUPOS wrote:
It's almost a shame that the xbox makes everythign looks so good, because the best designer have found some really awsome stylistic choices that make ps2 games look way better than they should. Metal gear, this, final fantasy, silent hill, by working with the limitations they have figured out ways to get some really nice looking stuff. Same with the game cube, resident evil continues to impress me... sure if you look around you can find soem blurry textures and odd spots every once and a while... but they are placed in places where you shouldnt seem them so that the more obvious ones can look better. its all about good design.
I've come to realise that when a really good creative person (be they artist, programmer, inventor or whatever) is told "you can't do that" is usually about five minutes before they do just "that"!
When you place constraints on things like memory, colours and speed, creative people just try harder to make things cool within those constraints. They seem to make sure they use up every last iota of the limited resource.
When there are no limits, there's also no finesse, no innovation, no passion.
Just look at older games. I think most people on here would agree that older games (i.e. C64/NES/MD era games) were more creative, more "out there" and, in general, more enjoyable than games today. That's because they were created with such a limited set of tools with regard to graphics and sound that the designers had to think about the gameplay.
If the C64 had been as powerful as a PS2, I'm not sure gaming would have taken off as quickly as it has done. There'd be so many lacklustre 3D collect-em-up games that most people wouldn't have bothered even looking at them.
I suppose it all comes back to "necessity is the mother of invention".
LUPOS 10 Feb 2005 13:55
8/8
kid_77 wrote:
I think that's it. Pre-rendered PS2 graphics between action, but not "in-game", as in when you're actually playing it. For one, I can't see any "jaggies", which seem popular on PS2.
i don't think it is pre rendered i would actually guess that its a combination of the fact that it is a higher res image scalled down (i think those shots are only 320) and the fact that since it isnt finsihed game it was probably running on a dev kit which means any screen are probably on a pc monitor and there for progressive scan, every company has special screen shot software to get high quality stills... that how you ge those in game shots that take up two pages of an EGM. if they put a plan 640x480 pic in a magazine full page it would look awfull!