TimeSplitters 2

Game Info

Publisher: Eidos Interactive

Developer: Free Radical Design

Genre(s): First-Person Shooter, Action

Platform:  PS2

Players: 16

ESRB Rating: T (Teen)

Release Date: October 8, 2002

Intro:

The game starts on an apparent spaceship with a Stargate-type portal on the bridge.  Creatures of a sort, called TimeSplitters have taken a crystal and are entering one-by-one into the portal with pieces of this crystal while a male and female who look somewhat like bounty hunters try to kill the creatures before they escape.  The first thing I noticed is that the game doesn't seem polished at all.  The creatures are boxy and low-poly.  The player characters are better textured and defined, but this makes these creatures stand out even more in comparison.  This is often seen in gameplay of older games, but this may be the first time I've seen it in a CG in a finished game.

Getting Going:

There is no in-game tutorial here.  Controls are found on one of the menus.  There are three options to choose from immediately:  Story mode, Arcade mode, and Challenge.  I chose Story, but I'll briefly cover the other two first.  Arcade mode is a straight-forward first-person shooter.  The player is challenged to shoot 10 people in 10 minutes to get a trophy and are set in a maze with a mini-map in the upper right corner.  You can walk over weapons to pick them up, but finding your way around the maze can be a bit challenging.  Challenge mode gives the player a series of tasks such as breaking all of the windows in a level or killing as many zombies as possible in a certain length of time.  Both provide a nice diversion for FPS fans.  Story mode sets the player in Siberia with several relatively simple tasks to perform.  A few warnings are provided, such as avoid the cameras, and the player is on their own.

Fun:

Fun is subjective.  The game didn't affect me emotionally in any way, at first.  I thought I was there to kill beasts, but I ended up having to kill men.  They were armed military men, but they were just doing their jobs, not bad or evil.  They weren't protagonists, but simply bystanders.  I had a problem with that.  At first I thought I could stealth my way around them, but it became apparent that this was not to be the case. In order to complete the tasks, you have to blow things up.  That tends to draw the guards.  I didn't have any problems in the lower levels, which was filled with zombies, and the crystal piece was easily found.  

Visuals:

As already mentioned, even for a 2002 game, I was surprised at the lack of polish in the videos, especially during cinematics.  The environments are littered with boxes, crates and barrels, which can be used to assist a kill, but tended to be more punishment than reward for the player.  They weren't filled with loot; they were filled with explosives.  Mostly, the game just felt poorly themed.  There are crates and barrels everywhere, while shelves and other assets seemed set in place simply to fill space.  The weapons, however are finely detailed and provide an interesting counter-point to the rest of the visuals.  In addition, Free Radical Design did a fantastic job with weapons damage.  Every time through the environment reveals the same marks from the player's weapons.  So, for instance, if you shoot the satellite dish, the bullet holes remain even once you've left the environment and come back.  Killed enemies, however, disappear shortly after their death.

Sound: 

The main thing I noticed with the sound is the same looping bit of music as you progress through the level.  It gets a bit old.  Attention to detail is noted in the sounds of the weaponry.  Everything has a unique and realistic sound effect.  It is apparent in both the visuals and the sound, that a great deal of time was spent defining the weaponry for this game.

Intelligence:

Actually, this is one of the few stealth fighting games I've played in which the enemies really do notice things.  The player cannot blow up a nearby crate, for instance, without the guards coming to find you.  They don't give up and go away.  They don't head in the wrong direction.  They don't even look around for a bit.  If they've heard a noise and found damage, they are coming for you.  The zombies become aware of your presence as soon as you're within range.  I don't know that they have much personality, but I wouldn't expect that much AI in a 2002 game, either.

Immersion:

As a first-person shooter, the game is paced by the player.  The game went pretty quickly.  The tasks to perform were easy to understand and relatively easy to perform.  Once I knew my way around, returning to an area was so efficient, it felt like my player was floating.  There's always a degree of immersion in a first-person game because the player is literally the player character.  This game succeeds in this mission even if the game itself is not overly compelling in play.

Cameras:

I never felt as if I was walking into walls or having trouble keeping the camera where I wanted it in play.  Sometimes in games the camera is sloppy and goes way to far up or down or you end up way to close to an object and trying to find your eyes.  That didn't happen in TimeSplitters 2.  I was able to easily look up at high items and never felt that the camera was difficult to control in any way.

Controls:

Having a quick trigger button is very convenient.  Having problems with aiming in a first-person shooter, is not.  The button for aiming is on the left, but the right joystick moves the sight.  The sight doesn't stay, however.  It keeps shifting and it's extremely sloppy to begin with.  Aiming was a nightmare that left me quick-shooting everyone.  This resulted in more leg shots than head shots, but it got the job done.  Trying to aim, guide and shoot with two different buttons and a joystick was just a bit much.

Ideas:

I think games can and do stand the test of time, so, when a game like this makes the top 100 I have to wonder what else was going on at the time.  Was this game fantastic in comparison?  How so? What was it compared to?  I've also noted that sequels are so often compared to the previous game that it seems to become great by comparison alone; by fan base.  Many franchises are built on this.  I've said in the past that it seems as if many games are reviewed by fanboys and people familiar with the franchise.  So, I guess my biggest take-away from TimeSplitters 2 is that.  The money is in the franchise.  To be fair, TimeSplitters didn't make the top 100.  I'm not sure that the fact that it's a sequel is what earned TimeSplitters 2 its high rating.   So, I've researched it a little and found one thing this challenge can't teach me...this game was the first of it's kind in some ways.  It had no real story mode, which players wanted.  It offered online co-op play and stunning NPC AI.  Even I've noted the AI in this game.  It's true, they weren't just on the cutting edge then.  The AI in this game is still largely unsurpassed.  Since I can't go back in time, it will always be difficult to see why a game stands out simply for it's time.  I guess I was looking for a game that stands the test of time, in some ways, such as bullet holes and NPC AI, it really does.  But, in other ways, such as polished graphics and good use of assets, it fails. 

Memory:

This game did something I hope never to see in a game again.  It gave me a "GAME OVER" at the end of the level.  It said that the level was completed successfully, but then, "GAME OVER".  I took it out, even though the next level, Old Chicago, looks very interesting.  I wanted to write the review, so I was alright with being done, but I was in story mode and only had one crystal piece.  The game is far from over.  I'm just saying...