Reviews// Clive Barker's Jericho

Posted 24 Oct 2007 19:14 by
In order to open the tomb, you have to shoot the doorway through. You eventually realise that you have to do this in fully-automatic mode. Why? Because your gun resolutely refuses to fire unless you place it in fully automatic mode. If it doesn't fire in single or dual-shot modes, why are they there? It just doesn't make sense.

Once you get through the door, you are treated to a cut-scene featuring dialogue so poor it challenges the intro to Alien Breed Tower Assault – in which I appeared. We were drunken Yorkshiremen making it up as we went along (ad libbing is the professional term, but we were not professionals). Mercury Steam, on the other clawed fist, has probably paid Barker more for this drivel than the entire Tower Assault cast earned in a year, and our day jobs were making the great game that was Alien Breed Tower Assault.

After some more appalling dialogue, it's straight into a cut-scene (Dragons Lair) sequence, where the floor collapses, and you fall into a pit. The way to avoid death at this point is to press the appropriate buttons as their images appear on screen.

This style of gameplay has no place in modern gaming, but it's rearing its head time and time again, from Tomb Raider to Heavenly Sword. In Jericho, if you die, you just get to replay the section time and time again until you get the button sequence right. It's not fun, and it's not entertainment. By the time I was past this I was ready to give Jericho the heave-ho; the fact that I had a review to submit was all that kept me playing.

It would have been a shame if I had abandoned Jericho at that point, because from here on in it improves rapidly. Once you're past the frustrating start, the game quickly becomes a fairly standard squad-based shooter. As you progress through the underground labyrinth and base below Al-Khali, you are pursued by monsters that appear at first, to be simply undead, but are soon revealed to have supernatural powers. Luckily, your squad members have their own powers and, as the monsters become more powerful, you have to rely on your supernatural powers to defend yourself, and to defeat them.

A quick word on the graphics: Jericho's graphics, on PS3 at least, are far from best in class. The cut-scenes use the game engine and, while this creates a seamless transition between the two, it does make them look pretty lacklustre when compared with games like Heavenly Sword.

In-game, even on SPOnG's immaculate Samsung, Hi-Def monster screen, the 'dark and creepy' theme is taken too far. It's actually, "stodgy" and "drab"...

Your squad members possess passable AI, meaning they'll swarm around you and defend you in combat situations. You can also command them to fall back and wait, or advance ahead of you and take all the flack. Being a healer (oh, you’re a healer, by the way), if one of them dies, you can just walk over and resurrect him. Magic!

As you progress through the game, you will need to switch between your squad mates, to control the one of them who has the power most applicable to the situation at hand.

The characters are mismatched, ranging across a selection of cultural backgrounds and both genders. While this makes the game inclusive, it also makes them look a little like a raggle-taggle band of gypsies – although the modern Goth ‘uniform’ is maintained throughout. None of the player characters are particularly appealing, and the one of them that dresses in quite revealing clothes moves away whenever your character lurks near enough to cop a peek.

Jericho twists the squad-shooter genre just enough to add spice for fans of the genre. But devotees of the more straightforward military style of game may find the occult aspects off-putting. Clive Barker’s name is likely to attract an audience, but his turgid dialogue and stodgy storyline will alienate roughly equal numbers.

The control system - despite the afore-mentioned button-pressing insult - is straightforwardly simple. Analog sticks to move around, L2 or R2 for firing. Well, really, nothing spectacular at all... and that sums the whole enterprise up.

SPOnG Score 67%

Conclusion
I can't help feeling that any sixth form Goth could have produced a story this formulaic and derivative in one free period. This would have saved Codemasters a bundle that it could have spent on more impressive visuals. If there is a better story editor and improved graphics, Jericho 2 could be well worth a look to those who want a mixture of gun and spell-casting.
<< prev    1 -2-

Read More Like This


Comments

Fugue 28 Oct 2007 08:22
1/6
Is this a review of Jricho or an excuse to rant about not liking Barkers stuff? the writer seems to spend only about a quarter of the review talking about the game and even then keeps on obsessing over the story instead than the gameplay
mandy 28 Oct 2007 21:44
2/6
Fair point.. but judging from other reviews it does sound rather stodgy and bland in the gameplay department. For some reason codies external dev titles seem to be a bit naff generally.. The only genuinely good external games that I can remember published by them were Flashpoint and 2nd sight.. (I havent played the Middle Earth online title) and how long ago was that? Internally its like they can only do racing/footy sequals these days.. Im not saying reviving classics isnt bad.. but to do it every year or two is a bit sad.. and hardly genius at play. Oops, I've wandered off topic..
more comments below our sponsor's message
mrjimmy 29 Oct 2007 00:55
3/6
Hard to take the review seriously when the writer is so full of crap

e.g. "that notorious hack and paederast Oscar Wilde."
Dyson you really are ignorant (or desperately attention seeking) and homophobic. Maybe you should stop pretending to be a journo and go work for the Sun. Or try to make better use of your arts degree by writing porn?

Gay=child molester is such a tired old prejudice. Wilde’s lover Bosie (Lord Alfred Douglas) was 22 when they met – he was hardly a ‘boy-lover’. Of course you were probably just having a dig at Barker who is gay. How about throwing in some racism too? But you haven't got the balls because you'd lose your 'job' for that.....

Apparently "The problem with Barker is his lack of subtlety". Pots and kettles eh Dyson? Whilst Wilde had talent, and Barker certainly knows success, I'd guess you possess neither. That might explain why your review reads like the babbling of a bitter, pompous drama queen who’s swallowed a thesaurus. Grow up.
PreciousRoi 29 Oct 2007 04:05
4/6
meh, seems like a fairly balanced review, these anonymous idjits need to get off yer nutz.

as far as the story goes....everything seems derivative and utterly predictable these days anyway, even the "twists". codemasters probably didn't expect much in the way of story, nor is much neccessary. they prolly paid him for the name to hang on it.

DoctorDee 31 Oct 2007 21:36
5/6
mrjimmy wrote:
Hard to take the review seriously when the writer is so full of crap

I am full of crap, but no moreso than the average person, and certainly no more than you.

e.g. "that notorious hack and paederast Oscar Wilde."
Dyson you really are ignorant (or desperately attention seeking) and homophobic.

I suspect that I am far less ignorant than you sumise. But possibly far more attention seeking.

Your screed seems to show that you do not know the meaning of paederast, or that you confuse it with paedophile.

Maybe you should stop pretending to be a journo and go work for the Sun. Or try to make better use of your arts degree by writing porn?

That's interesting. What makes you think I have an arts degree? Are you perhaps someone who knows me?

Gay=child molester is such a tired old prejudice.

But Oscar was not gay. The fact that he had children should attest to that.

And paederast does not mean paedophile. And you really should know that before you embark on a criticism based on that premise.

Wilde’s lover Bosie (Lord Alfred Douglas) was 22 when they met – he was hardly a ‘boy-lover’.

I was not alluding to Wilde's affair with Douglas, but instead to his self confessed - nay, self proclaimed - paederasty. You can deny it all you like, but Wilde was a paederast. History stands with me, not you. At least Time Magazine believes so. That dubious source, Wikipedia, too.

Of course you were probably just having a dig at Barker who is gay.

Oh, don't be ridiculous! Why should I rib Barker for being gay, which is perfectly acceptable, when I can far easier rib him for being a poor and tedious writer?

How about throwing in some racism too? But you haven't got the balls because you'd lose your 'job' for that...

If I want to be racist, I can do so without fear for my job. But I am not racist, just as I am not homophobic, and I will be lured into neither for your entertainment.

Apparently "The problem with Barker is his lack of subtlety". Pots and kettles eh Dyson?

But I am writing video games reviews, a genre that does not benefit much from subtlety. He is writing horror, a genre that does.

Whilst Wilde had talent, and Barker certainly knows success, I'd guess you possess neither.

Then you'd guess wrong. But I'd have guessed you would.

tt_rage 9 Nov 2007 12:14
6/6
"This is not the first time Clive Barker has been involved in the production of video games. His previous flirtations with the genre, however, have been inauspicious."

I dunno - I thought Undying was pretty damn good entertainment. And a quick trip to www.gamerankings.com shows an average review of around 85 to 90%, so I suppose I'm not alone in that camp.

Past examples suggest a "celebrity" attached to a game simply provides a broad story arc, the occasional snippet of dialog and a casual glance over content to make sure he or she is happy with how his/her intellectual property is being used. And then they walk off with the first 200 grand of the profit the game makes.

If a game is poorly realised or cliche-ridden it can't always be laid squarely at the foot of just one individual (unless that inividual was a power-mad meglomanic of a project director who didn't take anyone else's view on board). Unless Clive Barker was micro-managing the direction of the game down to the setpieces, the level design, the lighting, the sound effects, the weapon accuracy, etc etc etc, all he's probably guilty of is cashing in on his name.

Just one more thing - video games development is a team sport. If a game is a success, that success is it's down to every artist, every programmer, every tester, every producer, marketing guy, sound technician and musician who put their life into it for two long, hard years. In the same way, a failure means the blame has to be spread around a bit, from the guy who didn't get the lightning weapon effects quite right, to the musician who decided a heavy guitar track was the right way to go, to the audio engineer who didn't ask the voice actor for just one more take.

If Jericho had been a top-notch 98% rated galaxy-blowing game, would you have said it was all down to Clive Barker's involvement?
Posting of new comments is now locked for this page.