tkd_matt's Blogs

 So for the last few weeks I've been playing Too Human after getting it cheap off an NZGamer forum user. This game has been great so far and I often find myself still playing at 4am in the morning, it is that addictive.

Before I get into why I think the reviewers were wrong, I'll tell you a little bit about the game.  Too Human is an action rpg created by Silicon Knights set in a technological future with a loose Norse Mythology theme. Players choose a class from the 5 available all of whom are the same character, Baldur. Baldur is a god "a.k.a Aesir" which is basically a cybernetically enhanced human, and it's the Aesirs job to protect the humans from the Machines, on the other hand, the Machines are harvesting human limbs to become more human. Baldur is perceived by the other Aesir as insufficiently enhanced hence he's "Too Human".

  In terms of gameplay, TH seamlessly combines melee combat and gunplay, which some gamers and reviewers have claimed as a "Devil May Cry clone", this game is completely different to DMC, while they may share the same "attack, jump, juggle, shoot" mechanic, the true addictiveness and "fun" of TH is far closer to that of Diablo 2. Doing just one more conveyor run to get that epic loot and respeccing to compliment said loot is where it's at.

TH scored a 65/100 on metacritic, while this is not completely bad, it could have been much better, as there is an alarming amount of <40 scores, even a 20. This is no way in hell this game is should have received a 20/100,  and this is from Destructoid, shame on you Destructoid.

Now I want to make some comparisons to Fable 2, a game that came out recently and received a 90/100 on Metacritic, I picked Fable 2 only a couple of days after I got TH, and while I had been looking forward to F2, while playing it I couldn't help but feel disappointed in it's light rpg elements, which had me continually bouncing back to TH for the hardcore skill tree and gear balancing. Don't get me wrong, F2 is a great game and worthy of a 90/100 and has a much better story than TH, but these 2 games have some similar aspects and I feel Too Human was short changed.

 One of the complaints of many TH reviews was that there weren't enough enemies and they all looked the same, while sure, the 3d models may be very similar, I can think of at least 8 different 3d models used for enemies, and at least 4 variations of each of those models (textures, colours). 32 different enemies isn't bad, and that was "at least", some have much more variations, including polarities (i.e. immunities) and elements (fire, ice). Fable 2 probably has less enemy types than TH, I believe the reviewers only gave this game one quick playthrough, to maybe only level 20, and didn't see anywhere near the amount of enemies they should have seen.

Which leads me onto their next complaint, the game is too short. Sure, this game can be completed in less than 10 hours, so what? A lot of games these days are shorter than that, but the real time in this game is spent in online co-op, grinding levels for loot and level ups, and creating new classes and trying out different alignments, there is more than enough replay here for your money, more than most games. I would have liked at least one more level, but there has been DLC confirmed so heres hoping.  Fable 2 can be done in 8-10 hours, so what's the difference here?  I've put in almost 30 hours already and haven't finished the main story, as my time is spent in co-op, where the enemies are tougher and there's many more, this game gets seriously difficult later on, where multiple trolls will drop you in a heartbeat, and you will die a tonne.

Another reviewer complaint, "dieing doesn't matter", the "death cutscene is annoying",  could they be more wrong? At the higher levels you will die a lot, the penalties for death are that you have to watch a short cutscene, your gear is damaged, and your combo meter is emptied. This does matter, without a high combo meter, you can't use abilities, and your slower and weaker, essentially gimped, and it can be hard to come back to the fight in this state. With damaged gear, there is a heavy repair cost especially for your more prized loot, and you need the bounty for respeccing, and creating new gear from blueprints. While the cutscene can be annoying, it is only about 20 seconds, if that, and people seem to forget it's in place of a loading screen, and let's not forget there's no loading screens from the moment you step foot in a level till when you leave. I also find the time while dead to check my skill tree or new gear I've collected, as the while online going into the menu won't pause the death cutscene. Fable 2 has an even lighter death penalty, scars on your face?

1up reviewer  Giancarlo Varanini claimed that because the enemy levels scale to your level, that it makes the whole game pointless as you never feel a lot stronger than them. Not feeling stronger may be true for a single playthrough and the lower levels, he forgets to mention that they only scale with level, not your gear. You can easily get better gear and customise your spec/gear to really wipe the floor with the enemies, and this means you can play any level in the game and have a challenge, I'm fond of the first level, and it's great that I can go there as often as I want and not face noobish mobs.  Reading his review made my head hurt.

Some have complained about the graphics, sure they may not be great, but this team had to rebuild a graphics engine from scratch after the whole Unreal engine situation, and I think they did a great job of creating huge expansive levels with tonnes of mobs onscreen with minimal slowdown of the gameplay. Sure they could of gone for ultra awesome graphics, but what would be the point when there's only 2 enemies on screen. Diablo 2 has aged graphics but is as much fun to play now as it was when it released. The only downside to this graphics choice is that the closeup cutscenes don't look too great, I believe they should have done prerendered videos for this, it would have improved the overall presentation.

 One of the most annoying comments I continually hear is that this game should be much better considering the 10 year development time, when in fact this version of the game has only been in development for 3 years, the version showed at E3 1999 was only a concept video, they didn't go ahead with it, and in that time since they created Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes and Eternal Darkness for the Gamecube, and possibly others. This game is great and should really shine in its sequels.

Now I don't think this game is perfect, my first playthrough after a rental I felt it was flawed, and could have been better, but the more I played and further I got into the game these flaws vanished, I can't see them anymore. One I thought was the combat, but now that I understand it completely it makes perfect sense, I'm not stuck swinging empty air anymore, the right stick attack scheme is perfect when fighting 30+ enemies, I couldn't imagine trying to lock on to an enemy, pressing a dash button to get to them, then pressing a combo sequence to hit them, and repeating this 30 times, instead I can just point the stick to an enemy, slide to them, double tap to hit them in the air, jump, attack, finisher, only using the right stick and A. The combat is very deep, which is very apparent based on the choices made in the skill trees.

Another weakness of this game is the story, this is the downside to the planned trilogy that is happening a lot lately, developers are only taking a chunk of the overall story and leaving players confused, the story does it's job, and in online co-op the story scenes are cut making for very fast paced play.

Another feature that does its job, the camera. Why do people whine so much these days about cameras, it seems all new 3rd person games have people complaining about the camera, can't they just come to accept that's how cameras are. I notice when watching people first play Too Human they are fighting the camera, trying to get it to bend to their will, this is a dynamic camera, it does the work for you, you just have to flow with it. I've never had a problem with this camera, and adjust it very rarely.

We all know Denis Dyack was very vocal coming upto the release of this game, and while I don't think his actions were very smart, going onto forums and arguing with fanboys, I do feel sorry for the people who worked hard on this game only to be ridiculed and given low review scores based off the games history and reviewers bias against Dyack. I do feel better in the fact that overall the consumer verdict is that they like this game, and many love it as can be seen on the very vibrant community over at www.toohuman.net.

In conclusion, I'm disappointed in the gaming journalists who rushed through this game and the fanboys who ridiculed it based on these reviews, this game is awesome and I'm sure I'll be playing it right through this holiday season and probably up until the next game, in which I can transfer my characters over,  a feature I would love to see in other franchises. My trust in these reviewers is all but gone, and I'm glad NZGamer gave this game a fair review, a 7.5/10.