They're enjoyable enough spectacles.
Personally I'd recommend playing the numbered trilogy and not bothering with the PSP games or Ascension, otherwise you might get sick of the formula.
nta and the only one that's a bit 'ass' is Chains of Olympus simply because you can tell it was Read at Dawn's first PSP GoW game. It's "fine" but nothing special, and even then it still adds some good characterization to Kratos via his daughter. Ghost if Sparta is great. Ascension's issue was trying to reinvent the wheel as it came out after the big bombastic finale that was 3. It had to justify its existence so it tried a bunch of different new mechanics, some that worked some that didn't.
ascension legitimately feels like a chore to get through. I stopped but tried playing it again after like 5 years thinking it would be better if it could just scratch the god of war itch. But no its still boring and I can't play for more than an hour. Also I don't know what it is but the sound effects and hit animations on enemies just feel really unsatisfying. Its a shame to because its opening environment was probably my favorite aesthetically out of any gow game. I even appreciated the bugs coming out of the cellulite breasts.
it's very short and hands you new powers constantly. it's also the only one designed around the parry instead of having the parry invalidate all challenge
finish it. the final boss is pretty good too.
They're okay. PSP games are basically worse versions of 1/2 and Ascension are worse versions of 3. They feel VERY similar and are not particularly innovative.
Playing the PSP ones today won't feel as great as it could with the proper context. Back in the day, seeing those graphics on a portable was genuinely incredible.
As long as the graphics are cool I'm cool. I'm even wowed by NES graphics. Besides, I was alive when the PSP came out and had one, so it's not like I wouldn't be aware.
The PSP games (especially the PS3 remasters) are good games and definitely worth playing, but the series' gameplay is very formulaic and you'll likely get bored if you play all of them in sequence. >Chains of Olympus
pretty barebones and very short, but the final act has one of the greatest uses of button-mash QTEs in gaming history. >Ghost of Sparta
great, definitely as good as the main trilogy, I'd even rate it higher than GoW1
Ascension is skippable though. Much weaker game in both gameplay and story, and is also the only game that doesn't have a 60fps port outside of PC emulation (and it often struggles to even maintain 30 on native hardware)
Perfect casual hack n' slash adventure games. Easy combos with cool enemies to fight and an occasional puzzle thrown in to make sure your mind doesn't rust.
Yes. They're derided for lacking the depth of the other major PS2/early-7th gen action games but what's there is satisfactory and presented very well. I certainly miss the era where all budget action games copied the GoW trilogy and/or DMC rather than them all copying either Arkham Asylum or Souls.
If Sony is serious about the PC market, porting PS1/2/3 games natively is a goldmine. But sadly I think they'll at best do remasters and remakes of a few random ones from their catalog and port those. It would be awesome to have every Sucker Punch game available on PC like that, especially inFamous 1&2 so they can run better.
I thought the first one was mediocre. The second game is really good though, with some impressive bosses and level design. Third one is great as well, just a bonanza of entertaining violence.
The two newer games are incredibly fricking boring in comparison. The camera alone just ruins the combat for me. It's like the people who made this shit were ashamed of what God of War used to be.
Honestly the close camera can work in melee combat, it's just not very well-done in the new ones, on top of that feeling of it being so unlike the prior games. Evil West is proof it can work if you build something new around it.
The first one isn't that bad, it just pales in comparison to the other two which are chock-full of content. It only has three bosses, two weapons and the environments get samey once you enter Pandora's Temple, but it's certainly a step above many other mediocre PS2 action games
>It's like the people who made this shit were ashamed of what God of War used to be.
This is the trend now in media. Not just games, also movies. Young "artists" whose entire artistic vision and personality is reinventing old stuff by turning it into something completely different. They call it "subversion" and they think it makes them very smart.
It only takes a little over a minute to get thrown into action after you start playing old god of war. Nu-gow starts with unskippable cutscene shit that takes forever.
Better than the reboot that's for sure, replayed 1 & 2 recently and had great fun
Only major issue is the camera, really shitty at times. but I guess that's to be expected with that series, they never figured it out and even made it worse with nugow
>There's nothing wrong with GoW2018
It's called God of War and the player character is called Kratos, but it's not a God of War game. If it was called something else no one would have a problem with it, but studios/publishers somehow don't understand that people don't like it when you take a beloved franchise and radically change every aspect of it.
Everything I heard about Ragnarok was that it's just a bigger, longer version of 2018 to its own detriment but there's a new weapon you get in the latter half that's fun. Not enough to make me grab it but I guess if someone really liked 2018 as a whole it would be worth playing.
In the same way that people criticize new Zelda - asking if they would been as popular without being Zelda - would the two newer GoW be as popular as a new IP?
I don't think so.
It's Nintendo AND open world slop. They would have still been popular.
If BotW/TotK and GoW2018/Ragnarok were the same games AND made by the same teams with the same marketing, they would have definitely succeeded, but the sales wouldn't have been such smash successes I don't think. That said, I think the drop off for the former would've been larger, since modern PS fans that stick to the brand seem willing to play anything with high production values even if it's new IP, while Nintendo fans are very much there for established IP.
Pure delusion. The idea that BotW was only popular because of marketing/branding is an idea exclusively held by the mentally ill. And not the kind of "mental illness" that 80% of people have. I mean legitimate medical schizophrenia and low functioning autism.
I'm not saying that it would have sold like shit. It would have been like XC and XC2, one sells well but doesn't really become a "flagship" of sorts until the Smash popularity boost.
>In the same way that people criticize new Zelda - asking if they would been as popular without being Zelda
That criticism never made sense though because of how much more popular they are than any of the prior entries. BotW and TotK alone comprise something like a third of the series' entire ~40 years sales total. Zelda was obviously never obscure or niche anything approaching that, but sales-wise the IP was never a huge draw until those two.
They're good games. Not challenging like DMC or Ninja Gaiden but fun none the less. Devs threw in fan service and weren't afraid to appeal to the men who bought the games which is nice compared to the nu-GoW which is geared towards women and betas.
They are way better.
They lack the cinematic kinography of the new games.
and that's a good thing
right looks deeper and more meaningful
left* I MEANT LEFT!!
No I meant right.
God of War 2 (2007) is the most cinematic game in the series.
Because hugging a tree and crying is kinography lol. Zoomers need to rope themselves.
And yet you prefer adhd style shit over slow atmosphere.
>doesn't show the opening of 3 because it fricking mogs everything in the franchise
Very enjoyable albeit not much depth
Nu-GOW is fricking horrendous. The older games are much better and anyone who says otherwise is wrong and fricking moronic
They're enjoyable enough spectacles.
Personally I'd recommend playing the numbered trilogy and not bothering with the PSP games or Ascension, otherwise you might get sick of the formula.
Are they ass or just not too innovative on the franchise?
nta and the only one that's a bit 'ass' is Chains of Olympus simply because you can tell it was Read at Dawn's first PSP GoW game. It's "fine" but nothing special, and even then it still adds some good characterization to Kratos via his daughter. Ghost if Sparta is great. Ascension's issue was trying to reinvent the wheel as it came out after the big bombastic finale that was 3. It had to justify its existence so it tried a bunch of different new mechanics, some that worked some that didn't.
ascension legitimately feels like a chore to get through. I stopped but tried playing it again after like 5 years thinking it would be better if it could just scratch the god of war itch. But no its still boring and I can't play for more than an hour. Also I don't know what it is but the sound effects and hit animations on enemies just feel really unsatisfying. Its a shame to because its opening environment was probably my favorite aesthetically out of any gow game. I even appreciated the bugs coming out of the cellulite breasts.
it's very short and hands you new powers constantly. it's also the only one designed around the parry instead of having the parry invalidate all challenge
finish it. the final boss is pretty good too.
They're okay. PSP games are basically worse versions of 1/2 and Ascension are worse versions of 3. They feel VERY similar and are not particularly innovative.
Playing the PSP ones today won't feel as great as it could with the proper context. Back in the day, seeing those graphics on a portable was genuinely incredible.
As long as the graphics are cool I'm cool. I'm even wowed by NES graphics. Besides, I was alive when the PSP came out and had one, so it's not like I wouldn't be aware.
The graphics still hold up, and if you play on an emulator you can upscale and it'll look great.
The PSP games (especially the PS3 remasters) are good games and definitely worth playing, but the series' gameplay is very formulaic and you'll likely get bored if you play all of them in sequence.
>Chains of Olympus
pretty barebones and very short, but the final act has one of the greatest uses of button-mash QTEs in gaming history.
>Ghost of Sparta
great, definitely as good as the main trilogy, I'd even rate it higher than GoW1
Ascension is skippable though. Much weaker game in both gameplay and story, and is also the only game that doesn't have a 60fps port outside of PC emulation (and it often struggles to even maintain 30 on native hardware)
You play them for the boss fights. They completely fricked up this part in the new games which plays like a movie.
>You play them for the boss fights.
They really did find out the best way to do giant boss fights outside of Shadow of the Colossus.
I love how the Colossus of Rhodes fight lasts for (and at one point is) the entire level
Very much worth playing.
Perfect casual hack n' slash adventure games. Easy combos with cool enemies to fight and an occasional puzzle thrown in to make sure your mind doesn't rust.
Yes. They're derided for lacking the depth of the other major PS2/early-7th gen action games but what's there is satisfactory and presented very well. I certainly miss the era where all budget action games copied the GoW trilogy and/or DMC rather than them all copying either Arkham Asylum or Souls.
Great games with unmatched soundtracks and sense of scale, 100% worth it at least the main trilogy
They're very simplistic and repetitive. I can't take anyone seriously who says they're on par with or even better than the new games.
kino games, I wish 1,2 and 3 got native pc ports.
If Sony is serious about the PC market, porting PS1/2/3 games natively is a goldmine. But sadly I think they'll at best do remasters and remakes of a few random ones from their catalog and port those. It would be awesome to have every Sucker Punch game available on PC like that, especially inFamous 1&2 so they can run better.
I thought the first one was mediocre. The second game is really good though, with some impressive bosses and level design. Third one is great as well, just a bonanza of entertaining violence.
The two newer games are incredibly fricking boring in comparison. The camera alone just ruins the combat for me. It's like the people who made this shit were ashamed of what God of War used to be.
Honestly the close camera can work in melee combat, it's just not very well-done in the new ones, on top of that feeling of it being so unlike the prior games. Evil West is proof it can work if you build something new around it.
The first one isn't that bad, it just pales in comparison to the other two which are chock-full of content. It only has three bosses, two weapons and the environments get samey once you enter Pandora's Temple, but it's certainly a step above many other mediocre PS2 action games
>It's like the people who made this shit were ashamed of what God of War used to be.
This is the trend now in media. Not just games, also movies. Young "artists" whose entire artistic vision and personality is reinventing old stuff by turning it into something completely different. They call it "subversion" and they think it makes them very smart.
It only takes a little over a minute to get thrown into action after you start playing old god of war. Nu-gow starts with unskippable cutscene shit that takes forever.
They're okay. It's not DMC or Ninja Gaiden but few things are. If you just want a casual hack and slash it's competent.
Better than the reboot that's for sure, replayed 1 & 2 recently and had great fun
Only major issue is the camera, really shitty at times. but I guess that's to be expected with that series, they never figured it out and even made it worse with nugow
it's a good game, right into the action. Not some pretentious MOVIESHIT slop.
There's nothing wrong with GoW2018, it's just completely different game. Hope Ragnarok isn't as bad as the trailers made it look.
>There's nothing wrong with GoW2018
It's called God of War and the player character is called Kratos, but it's not a God of War game. If it was called something else no one would have a problem with it, but studios/publishers somehow don't understand that people don't like it when you take a beloved franchise and radically change every aspect of it.
Everything I heard about Ragnarok was that it's just a bigger, longer version of 2018 to its own detriment but there's a new weapon you get in the latter half that's fun. Not enough to make me grab it but I guess if someone really liked 2018 as a whole it would be worth playing.
button masher
In the same way that people criticize new Zelda - asking if they would been as popular without being Zelda - would the two newer GoW be as popular as a new IP?
I don't think so.
It's Nintendo AND open world slop. They would have still been popular.
If BotW/TotK and GoW2018/Ragnarok were the same games AND made by the same teams with the same marketing, they would have definitely succeeded, but the sales wouldn't have been such smash successes I don't think. That said, I think the drop off for the former would've been larger, since modern PS fans that stick to the brand seem willing to play anything with high production values even if it's new IP, while Nintendo fans are very much there for established IP.
BotW would have been a B-tier franchise but Smash Ultimate would have made TotK a bigger hit.
Pure delusion. The idea that BotW was only popular because of marketing/branding is an idea exclusively held by the mentally ill. And not the kind of "mental illness" that 80% of people have. I mean legitimate medical schizophrenia and low functioning autism.
I'm not saying that it would have sold like shit. It would have been like XC and XC2, one sells well but doesn't really become a "flagship" of sorts until the Smash popularity boost.
Exactly. You are literally a crazy person. You'd have been lobotomized 70 years ago.
>In the same way that people criticize new Zelda - asking if they would been as popular without being Zelda
That criticism never made sense though because of how much more popular they are than any of the prior entries. BotW and TotK alone comprise something like a third of the series' entire ~40 years sales total. Zelda was obviously never obscure or niche anything approaching that, but sales-wise the IP was never a huge draw until those two.
Some people prefer them to the newer games but they were always just DMC-lite for me.
Gottta play 2. Best in the series. I miss the dumb fun qte sex minigames. Rather have angry baldman than NuKraytose the God of Boi
I miss the time when I took games with cool dudes doing cool shit like God of War, DMC, Ninja Gaiden, MGR for granted
They're good games. Not challenging like DMC or Ninja Gaiden but fun none the less. Devs threw in fan service and weren't afraid to appeal to the men who bought the games which is nice compared to the nu-GoW which is geared towards women and betas.
HE GREW UP CHUDS!
incarnated kino
2 is the best one
marvel has been a disaster for the human race
Michael Jackson passing away before he could buy Marvel had massive negative consequences.
I wonder how that would have turned out
Yeah, they're good. Been meaning to platinum 3 but I keep getting distracted by other things.
I played through the main 3 as they came out. Good shit. Have never tried them a second time, though.