[CVG's Alice: Madness Returns review is based on the Xbox 360 version]
Alice's latest adventure in Wonderland is a dazzling bore. The art's filled with clever flourishes and the story's a wriggling mass of psychological thrills, but ho-hum platforming and repetitive combat are the price you pay.
It's all a bit front-to-back, as the Caterpillar might have said. Plenty of effort's been put into Madness Returns - but sadly, it's ended up in the wrong places.
Following on from American McGee's original (get it free from the Store with the code in the box), the story sees Alice escaping back into a world of deathly fantasy - the world of her mutilated psyche. She's wracked by guilt, tortured by visions and confused, perhaps, by the way her hair keeps flickering out of existence during cutscenes.
SNICKER SNACKER
Those weapons are an early indicator that priorities might be a little skew-whiff here. Your deadly gadgets all look brilliant, but they rarely feel right. The Vorpal Blade's the main slash attack and probably the best of the lot, but the Hobby Horse club lacks heft and the Pepper Grinder rifle is ham-strung by sleepy aiming - and an idiotic lock-on that always seems to prioritise the most harmless enemies.
The same goes for the Teacannon mortar. Ah, enemies. Here again, it's more of the same: care and attention's been heaped on the sights and sounds, but there's a gaping hole where the fun should be. The Eyepot - an arachnid kettle made of brass - sums up Madness Returns' problems most comprehensively. Funny name? Check. Interesting walk? No problem. Boring combat loop? Absolutely. Shoot it a bit, and then hack it a bit. Oh, and then repeat.
Later areas eventually introduce the odd decent baddie, including an invisible sailor with a penchant for flinging bombs and nimble Samurai Wasps. These flutter through an oriental fever dream of carved soap and jade dragons, but sadly they share it with tiresome damage sponges and back stabbers, and are often lost entirely within a trudging blend of brainless puzzles and weightlessly inaccurate platforming.
Wonderland's beautiful but overstretched, meaning even its better levels outstay their welcome. It's almost a tragedy. Squint and you see the game you almost got. It all looks so promising: playing-card castles float beneath fluffy white clouds; frosty angler fish guard a ship trapped in a bottle; slivers of rock rise and fall in hellish valleys, suspended on gusts of smoke belching from a hookah pipe.
OFF WITH HER HEAD
On top of all that come a dozen tiny annoyances: a hiccupping frame-rate, a camera that kills you when it's just trying to help, and weapon-levelling with so little bite it's almost funny the devs chose teeth as the collectible power source.
As in the original, Alice uses imaginative visuals to hide a blandness and lack of polish. That original is eleven years old, so you can't blame rushed production for the lack of progress. It's hardly bonkers, then - but it is a bit stupid.
Order PSM3 here and have it delivered straight to your door
Comments
12 comments so far...
Kirbish on 9 Jul '11 said:
Only a little bit late for a review of a game that came out nearly a month ago......
dragonjim on 9 Jul '11 said:
Their late for a very important date
PevMaster on 9 Jul '11 said:
Yeah CVG, what's going on with you and review dates? You posted a review for Duke Nukem Forever about a month late!
RetroJB on 9 Jul '11 said:
They've already reviewed it once. http://www.computerandvideogames.com/30 ... ns-review/
Wrong on both accounts as well.
No doubt, however, CVG will be creaming themselves over the next Call of Duty, Battlefield and any other genric, repetitive shooter out this year.
It's the major downfall of most of todays game reviewers - a lack of consistency. What's good for one game is a failure for another.
jackybeans on 9 Jul '11 said:
I agree with previous post.
Wrong on both accounts
I have played it on PC and it has been a treat..
Veyr good game that I'd recommend to anyone looking for something different and distinguished.
I often have the impression that reviewers "copy" themselves and play (if they really do) with already a verdict in head.
Lately I simply dont understand how the games are being reviewed..
Is there some kind of checklist? Is it becoming so systematic?
Gaming, just to remind some, is inserting a cartridge/disk/cd/blu-ray/download, playing it and having this feeling of enjoyment, of wanting to get back of having a good time..
It's definately not having a checklist, expecting features and hammering the game if it "doesn't fit here or there"
I'm 31 years, have been gaming for almost 20 years now, the industry has changed a lot..
It's not innocent anymore and worth of all who to trust when planning on getting a game other than yourself...
Although I do appreciate CVG for their daily news and updates, I still don't understand their scoring and appreciation of today's games..
Regards
blitzpoisonpunk on 10 Jul '11 said:
Not that I trust 90% of reviews by people or by critics but Metacritic.
PS3, PC, 360, user score all higher than critic score from half a point to nearly two points
gamefreak666 on 10 Jul '11 said:
The reason that there is two reviews on here is that this is actually PSM3's review of the game. It looks like CVG have posted it here to justify the poor score that they gave it themselves.
Sure the game has one or two issues but it doesn't necessarily make it a bad game. The perfect example of this is Deadly Premonition, which has been slated by everyone for just about everything. But Destructoid gave it 10/10 calling it "a beautiful train wreck".
Madness Returns has been one of my more enjoyable gaming experiences this year and one of the few games where I have been determined to get a platinum trophy (got it yesterday
), however, it is not a game that everyone will enjoy, but definitely worth a rental for those that are unsure.
RetroJB on 11 Jul '11 said:
Really? Jesus, that is lame.
As I say though, give 90% of todays professional game reviewers a chance to play some generic shooter featuring US Marines and the SAS and they'll happily give each other a reach around for it.
Hence why I don't use todays game reviews as a guide for which games I purchase.
rustym on 11 Jul '11 said:
Not only is it late but its a ps3 review based on 360 version, quality journalism that cvg, are you the new News of the world?
WHERESMYMONKEY on 11 Jul '11 said:
You might want to learn to read before bashing the quality of CVGs writing. It clearly states that the CVG review was based on the xbox version. Meaning the review that was posted a couple days after its release. This is the review of the ps3 verison from psm3 magazine.
As for the review itself. i disagree, its a little old school in its platforming but it works and reminded me of banjoe kazooie on the n64, which i loved.
The combat was also spot on if you ask me. The ai was a little too mailicious at times. but fighting as alice was fluid and fun. being able to seamlessly switch between the vorpal blade haooby horse and pepper grinder to dish out damage was great.
Yes its a little ecentric as a game. but surely as a game based on one of the most ecentric book ever written thats surely the point.
almanac2015 on 11 Jul '11 said:
I've been playing this game recently and really enjoying it. The dialogue is great and I love the platforming and combat, it's just too repetitive. Though I perhaps notice this more since I read the reviews beforehand. I love the Vorpal Blade (though wish it had a downward slash attack for jumping) and the targeting criticism is unjust - so easy to change targets.
Psychonauts did platforming and mind-games better though.
Cody64 on 12 Jul '11 said:
I Reviewed this game on my Blog. Thought not perfect, I did enjoy it.
You can check it out at: http://bit.ly/qGCtAq