ariasa
09-10-2008, 02:57 AM
Certainly this is an imperfect comparison, as both games represent two distinct genres and were released during two separate console cycles. Nevertheless, ED and TH are Silicon Knight's most contemporary original franchises (Twin Snakes being excluding for obvious reasons). So, how do these games stack up in areas that they share, such as voice acting, story telling, technical soundness, overall experience, etc.? Personally, I don't think this comparison favors Too Human too kindly.
A soul crushing monotony permeates TH in terms of enemy diversity, level puzzles (or lack thereof), massive - yet slavishly linear and homogenous - environments: even Baldur, although admittedly taken from Norse mythology, fits into the stereotypical beefed-up, bald-headed, white 20-30-something male with stubble Zero Punctuation recently lambasted in its Mass Effect review. Eternal Darkness, while also lacking somewhat in enemy diversity, more than compensates for this with an array of incredibly unique playable characters (including one of the best, least stereotypical female protagonists in a game), clever puzzles and a slew of uniquely looking, functioning and feeling levels. Overall, Eternal Darkness' missions don't feel like tedious chores to complete: Too Human's levels do.
Speaking about tediousness, let's get to these games respective stories. Certainly Eternal Darkness' plot wasn't over-simplistic, nor was it presented that way. You have a huge cast of characters, each situated within unique situations, that are strung together by a book the player initially knows little about. These players' situations (like Too Human) were created based partially on outside resources (inevitably leaving gamers to miss at least some of the references) and, to make matters more complex, followed one of three paths. Nevertheless, ED struck a fantastic balance between accessibility, complexity, and (with regards to its meditations on Evil, religion, etc.) philosophical and cultural musings.
As Denis Dyack is happy to point out, Too Human is stuffed with references to Norse mythology and the video game industry. The game explores both implicitly and explicitly the relations between technology, society, and the individual man, and tackles high falutin' questions ranging from epistemology (it wasn't Locki: oh nos!) to (once again) religion. The problem is how readily Silicon Knights sacrifices an engaging plot for an amorphous blob of a story too bloated with obscure references to pull the gamer in. I share Dyack's concern for establishing video games as a legitimate art medium, but the truth is any respectable critic from film, literature or (hell, why not?) music would have labeled Too Human's plot as a convoluted, pretentious, un-affecting mess.
Another important distinction needs attention called to it. Eternal darkness is truly interactive. The sanity meter pulls the player in during gameplay while the multifaceted yet intriguing and comprehensible plot (supplemented by surprisingly solid voice acting and above average script) keeps the player's interest during cut scenes. For a game whose central theme is the convergence of humanity with technology, Too Human consistently keeps the player at a cool distance with monotonous gameplay, a convoluted plot and piss poor voice acting. If the video game industry wishes to ever be considered art, immersion must come into play. ED immerses the player, TH does not.
Lastly, Too Human is BROKEN. The targetting system, the camera, the damage recognition system - for a game that rests solely on never ending battle sequences, these aspects of a game have to function properly. Anything less spells disaster. Too Human is that disaster.
A soul crushing monotony permeates TH in terms of enemy diversity, level puzzles (or lack thereof), massive - yet slavishly linear and homogenous - environments: even Baldur, although admittedly taken from Norse mythology, fits into the stereotypical beefed-up, bald-headed, white 20-30-something male with stubble Zero Punctuation recently lambasted in its Mass Effect review. Eternal Darkness, while also lacking somewhat in enemy diversity, more than compensates for this with an array of incredibly unique playable characters (including one of the best, least stereotypical female protagonists in a game), clever puzzles and a slew of uniquely looking, functioning and feeling levels. Overall, Eternal Darkness' missions don't feel like tedious chores to complete: Too Human's levels do.
Speaking about tediousness, let's get to these games respective stories. Certainly Eternal Darkness' plot wasn't over-simplistic, nor was it presented that way. You have a huge cast of characters, each situated within unique situations, that are strung together by a book the player initially knows little about. These players' situations (like Too Human) were created based partially on outside resources (inevitably leaving gamers to miss at least some of the references) and, to make matters more complex, followed one of three paths. Nevertheless, ED struck a fantastic balance between accessibility, complexity, and (with regards to its meditations on Evil, religion, etc.) philosophical and cultural musings.
As Denis Dyack is happy to point out, Too Human is stuffed with references to Norse mythology and the video game industry. The game explores both implicitly and explicitly the relations between technology, society, and the individual man, and tackles high falutin' questions ranging from epistemology (it wasn't Locki: oh nos!) to (once again) religion. The problem is how readily Silicon Knights sacrifices an engaging plot for an amorphous blob of a story too bloated with obscure references to pull the gamer in. I share Dyack's concern for establishing video games as a legitimate art medium, but the truth is any respectable critic from film, literature or (hell, why not?) music would have labeled Too Human's plot as a convoluted, pretentious, un-affecting mess.
Another important distinction needs attention called to it. Eternal darkness is truly interactive. The sanity meter pulls the player in during gameplay while the multifaceted yet intriguing and comprehensible plot (supplemented by surprisingly solid voice acting and above average script) keeps the player's interest during cut scenes. For a game whose central theme is the convergence of humanity with technology, Too Human consistently keeps the player at a cool distance with monotonous gameplay, a convoluted plot and piss poor voice acting. If the video game industry wishes to ever be considered art, immersion must come into play. ED immerses the player, TH does not.
Lastly, Too Human is BROKEN. The targetting system, the camera, the damage recognition system - for a game that rests solely on never ending battle sequences, these aspects of a game have to function properly. Anything less spells disaster. Too Human is that disaster.