Home
Twitter
RSS
Newsletter
Michael Kontoudis
10 Sep, 2008

Too Human Review

360 Review | Too little, too late?
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he doesn't become one himself.

Silicon Knights’ Too Human opens with the above Nietzschean quotation, which turns out to be startlingly emblematic of the game’s ambitious nature. The Xbox 360 exclusive, originally conceived for the PS One, has finally arrived despite lawsuits, developmental reboots, and poor public showings, and attempts to recast the icons of Norse mythology in a cyberpunk setting and mesh the loot-collecting, character-building gameplay of Diablo with the guns-n’-swords aesthetic of something like Devil May Cry. So does Silicon Knights’ troubled epic surmount its lofty goals or fall flat on its face?


Admit it... I look fine.

Admit it... I look fine.
Close

One of the game’s most prominent components is its story, which sees the player assume the role of the Norse god Baldur and attempt to fend off a menacing race of machines which threaten humanity. At the same time, Baldur must unravel the machinations of the other gods of Aesir and come to terms with his own humanity. The majority of the plot is conveyed through unexceptional cut-scenes which are betrayed by stiff animation, a juddering framerate, and some clumsy character models, but the writing and voice acting are generally good enough that most players will derive some enjoyment from Baldur’s exploits. In truth, the curious melding of Norse mythology and technological dystopia plays out as awkwardly as the concept suggests it might, but it’s at least a unique idea that remains intriguing throughout. Still, the overall quality of the narrative is slightly disappointing given that Too Human heralds from the studio which blessed us with Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem and The Legacy of Kain: Blood Omen, two titles with far more satisfying stories.

On the gameplay side, Too Human is just as curious. Players must first choose Baldur’s class from a range of five, including the all-rounder Champion, melee-focused Berserker, and health-regenerating Bio Engineer, and traverse through generally-linear levels dispatching robotic hordes with a variety of blades, mallets and artillery in order to procure an even-larger selection of weaponry and loot. By cutting a swathe through foes, Baldur will level up and gain skill points which can be spent upgrading his abilities through branching skill trees which can, in a nice touch, be reset at any time for a small fee.


Baldur rued the day iPhones became sentient and rebelled...

Baldur rued the day iPhones became sentient and rebelled...
Close

The game's combat resides somewhere in limbo between the 'point and click' simplicity of Diablo and the combo and juggle-heavy flailing of something like a Devil May Cry title. Players control Baldur's melee attacks with a simple nudge of the right analogue-stick in the direction of their desired target. If Baldur's weapon cannot breach the distance, he will simply 'dash' across the screen, during which time one can even nudge the analogue stick in the direction of their next target. This allows Baldur to chain his attacks together and dart viciously around the battlefield dispatching foes with frenzied analogue-nudging (and unconvincing animation). Twirling the sticks provides a handy defensive attack in which Baldur attacks enemies which closely surround him. In addition, a quick double tap of the stick will launch a foe into the air, where they can be attacked with aerial melee strikes or juggled by a hail of bullets. These ranged attacks are handled easily enough with the left and right triggers, although the enemy 'lock-on' mechanic is troublesome to say the least; oftentimes Baldur will lock on to an invisible object while being pummeled with projectiles from another direction.

Once a player becomes accustomed to the idiosyncratic controls and develops Baldur's skill tree and armoury, the controls service the game relatively well. However, at no time do they feel like the best possible design choice Silicon Knights could have made. Assigning attacks to the right stick means that 360-degree camera control is lost, and the system strangely never feels quite as satisfying as a mouse-click. So while the combat itself is decent fun and fairly flexible, it never quite provides the complexity or thrills delivered by the truer, action-focused titles like Ninja Gaiden. The net result is a game which looks like an action title, plays somewhat like an action title, but never matches up to the best in the genre and is left looking a tiny bit ragged around the edges.


"You sir, shall eateth my cold, hard, steel!"

"You sir, shall eateth my cold, hard, steel!"
Close

The role-playing facet of the title is far better serviced than the combat - there is a plethora of loot and armour dropped by vanquished foes and each and every one possess different stats and can be equipped at any time depending on Baldur's level. Further, these weapons and items you savagely pluck from the dead may be augmented with a variety of runes which impart different attributes to that item, such as increased ammunition, damage and range. For those interested in tinkering with some cluttered inventory menus (although not as poorly-designed as those in Mass Effect), the customization is truly rewarding and watching Baldur grow through acquired armour, weaponry and cybernetic enhancements provides the real impetus for persevering with the strange combat system.

Visually, Too Human is the quintessential mixed bag; character models vary from excellent (Baldur and the majestic Valkyries) to unintentionally hilarious (everything else) and everything generally appears fairly low-rate, with blocky textures and flat shading doing nothing to hide the fact that the game has had a troubled technical development. What ultimately saves the presentation of Too Human is its sumptuous artistic design; the game's half-dozen major locales are lovingly-conceived, and many of the characters look great - until they move. Sadly, the game's animation is uniformly ragged and stiff; Baldur jumps like Mario, which sounds good in theory until you realise he is a cybernetically-enhanced god. The effect is comical to say the least.


"It's all right Baldur, we'll get you some Pro-Activ...".

"It's all right Baldur, we'll get you some Pro-Activ...".
Close

Aurally, the game is much more consistent, with very professional voice acting and a tremendous score which one never hears quite enough of. The vast majority of the music is comprised of brooding orchestral atmospherics and pulse-pounding battle anthems, and in conjunction with convincing sound effects Too Human presents a cohesive and well-executed listening experience which complements the action.

Too Human, it must be said, is a game built for replayability, even though the single player campaign can be experienced in about a dozen hours. It will take many more for the average player to reach the maximum level for every class, however, and this will be quite an appealing proposition for those who take a shining to the core gameplay mechanics. Rounding out the package is a competent two player online co-operative mode which takes your characters through the campaign levels while excising all the story elements. It would have been nice to see a local co-operative mode for those who prefer to play together though, and one cannot help but shake the feeling that the central conceit of showing off loot and weaponry really would have worked better with the promised, full-blown, four player co-operative mode which was jettisoned late in development. Still, with the promise of downloadable classes and loot, this is a game which should keep on giving for quite some time.

Too Human is ultimately a game which attempts to bestride the generic boundaries of action titles and RPGs and mesh rich Norse mythology with a cyberpunk aesthetic, and as such cannot be faulted for a lack of ambition. The problem is that Too Human never transcends its origins to become more than the sum of its parts. Oddball controls, an unsatisfying story, and a general lack of polish leave the game soliciting little more than a casual "...it's fairly good" reaction. So while far from a flop or disaster, Silicon Knight's magnum opus will probably be remembered as a game which reached for the stars and almost succeeded - which is not too bad an epitaph, all things considered.
The Score
Too Human is a very competent action-RPG let down by clunky controls and a pervasive air of sloppiness. It's definitely worth a look for the dungeon-crawling Diablo crowd, but most will regard it as nothing more than an ambitious curiosity which never quite comes together.
Looking to buy this game right now? PALGN recommends www.Play-Asia.com.

Related Too Human Content

Win one of five copies of Too Human
15 Sep, 2008 Too good a chance to miss.
More Too Human screens
14 Aug, 2008 This time featuring the character Heimdall.
Too Human media
13 Aug, 2008 The screenshots just keep flooding in.
15 Comments
1 year ago
Agreed 100%. you can tell that the game took a couple of console generations to develop. Shot 4 in this review is a shining example of that.

A bit sad really considering how much work was put into this. Would of it have been better for them to scrap it and start fresh each gen? Is this a sign of what could happen to Duke Nukem Forever?
1 year ago
Poor Too Human. Another Internet fad of recieving poor reviews when the game is actually rather good. Alas, come join my brother Shadowrun, another shamed game with no good reason.

Btw, "clunky controls and a pervasive air of sloppiness" certainly aren't an issue once you become quite powerful. The game suffers from the classic *everything works* when you hit the higher levels. The combat does become very rewarding and fluid.

The curious and compelling thing I found about this game is how it is designed. The idea is to grind back through the levels to hit your cap, with an excellent co-op to help you do this, all the while being challenging due to the enemy leveling with you. The achievements are pretty well thought out here and there are some good times to be had grinding with buddies.
1 year ago
From what I gather from this review, they're not saying the game isn't good, what he's saying is that it isn't great. From what I gather Silicon Knights have tried to put their fingers in a few too many pies and in a case of the old proverb Too Human came out a "Jack of all trades, master of none". So it's still worth it for people into a dungeon crawler but there are a few issues that prevent that A+++ status.

Completely unrelated to the topic but I wanted to mention the repetition at the beginning of my post is annoying the crap out of me, but now I don't want to change it because I've made a note of it to everyone else in the hopes that those with a semblance of grammatical knowledge also chastise my stupidity in this particular instance. What exascerbates the issue is the fact that the words are right on ******* top of each other.
1 year ago
LeonJ wrote
Poor Too Human. Another Internet fad of recieving poor reviews when the game is actually rather good. Alas, come join my brother Shadowrun, another shamed game with no good reason.

Btw, "clunky controls and a pervasive air of sloppiness" certainly aren't an issue once you become quite powerful...
I'm not sure if you are referring to the PALGN review when you cite 'poor reviews', because the text actually says that the game is moderately good. It is not a critical drubbing by any means.

It is probably a bit reductive to dismiss an average critical consensus as a 'fad'. Most reviewers do not go into the reviewing process wanting to dislike a game; the opposite, in fact. Too Human is flawed game, which of course will not prevent a certain niche audience from appreciating it.

While we won't go toe-to-toe over every comment in the review text, it is PALGN's opinion that the game's controls are simply clunky - no matter how skilled the gamer or experienced the character. Further, the game's 'pervasive air of sloppiness' extends not only to the combat controls, but the visuals, story, and interface also.

Agree to disagree - but there is certainly no agenda at play.
1 year ago
you're being much more polite than i would be if what i'd written was dismissed as a "fad"...
1 year ago
I'm sure no agendas are at play but I'm sure you read a few other reviews while writing this. If the game received 8s and 9s I doubt you would reward something lower.

Have you played the full game Obs? I'm thinking not more then the demo. And that's fair enough, you tried it and hated it. I was the opposite. I thought the comment section for for discussion? His review was very well written, doesn't mean I agree with the text. This is no way a personal attack.

I have played the game thoroughly and read many other reviews similar to this. The consensus of this game is a 6.5, *tried to hard blah blah, sloppy controls, buggy etc* as per Gamerankings. As I have said somewhere else, personally, I find games getting panned lately to be good and the opposite for highly acclaimed titles, and I never base my decision on reviews now. I play what I like and my gut feel of the game. Certainly something I would have never said 5 years ago. That may be because I have **** taste but I think it may have more to do with the general hype of the Internet community and momentum for a games status. The game isn't perfect but what it does is great. It's different, fun and rewarding. Something not avaiable on the shelves right now. I don't' want to hear crap like a 6.5 is good, check the review criteria. 6.5 is a bad review in any ranking system.

While I disagree with this score and certain points of the review text (for almost all reviews not just this one), but it is my humble opinion, and if I was reviewing it, it would be different. As you are entitled to your own. Take from that what ever you want. This is the only forum I interact with (but not so much lately as it's been quite dull), so don't take this as a personal attack on your review. It's simply reflection most other reviews, which, I don't agree with.

As Gabe from PA once said in regards to Assassin's Creed (not quoting, just in general from his opinion). Reviewers who rush through games for reviews tend to miss the point and miss the soaking of the atmosphere. He felt sorry for people in that situation. Reviewing games is a tough gig, espically when you are not interested in the game. Reviewing for the sake of reviewing is always bad. But I think in Too Human's case is, most of the *good* content is locked away after you spend time with the title and then understand where most of the design of the game comes from. Too Human may be a badly critised because of this. Flawed yes, heavily, no.

But whateva, each to their own.
1 year ago
^ funny how you think your opinion on the game is right but how negative reviews are coloured. You wrote all that, complained about the "reviews" - this review with NO BASIS on where michael came from when playing this game which make me take you less seriously, especially when you could have easily been succinct and just say "hey personally I enjoyed it, rate it X". You can disagree with him without trying to put his opinion down.

The game has been panned - most podcasts talk about how bad it is - even people who "enjoy" the game talk about how ugly it is, how bad it is, how broken it is, how the ending is abrupt, how in co-op, the game makes no sense.

6.5 sounds about right. Gametrailers video review of too human is a 6.5 if I remember right. Must watch imo. The tone of the verbal review is SO negative I was suprised it didn't get a 4/10. Good review by the way michael.
1 year ago
For everyone's interest, a PALGN score of 6.5 is not a 'thumbs-down' review.

A score in the range of 6.5-7 demarcates an above-average title which most gamers would describe as 'good'.

PALGN is a site which is proud of its tough reviews - agree, or disagree, make no mistake that Too Human has been given an 'above average' score by the site.
1 year ago
THEMAN wrote
^ funny how you think your opinion on the game is right but how negative reviews are coloured. You wrote all that, complained about the "reviews" - this review with NO BASIS on where michael came from when playing this game which make me take you less seriously, especially when you could have easily been succinct and just say "hey personally I enjoyed it, rate it X". You can disagree with him without trying to put his opinion down.

The game has been panned - most podcasts talk about how bad it is - even people who "enjoy" the game talk about how ugly it is, how bad it is, how broken it is, how the ending is abrupt, how in co-op, the game makes no sense.

6.5 sounds about right. Gametrailers video review of too human is a 6.5 if I remember right. Must watch imo. The tone of the verbal review is SO negative I was suprised it didn't get a 4/10. Good review by the way michael.
What did I say? I never said my opinion was asbolute nor was his wrong, I said it was MY opinion. Big difference. I said there is a general feeling with a 'flow' of internet media nowadays. His review was well constructed, justified and well written. I have no problem with THIS particular review, but making general discussions about MY opinion of the game and how I don't agree with the general panning of it. See my comments above to why. I watched the gametrailers review as well, before I purchased the game. In fact all the negative media almost made me NOT buy the game.

Btw, co-op does make sense. It's not about playing a story driven game, but a traditional loot fest to become a top leved equiped bad ass. If you play the game it makes sense. It's surprisingly addictive and well designed.

Yes yes, 6.5 is a great score according to the *PALGN* score system. Jolly good. If I get 6.5/10 in my next exam I'll be pleased as punch.
1 year ago
I haven't played the full game, only the demo. But the game felt to me kind of like Hellgate; I can see what they were aiming for, but it missed the mark.

Which is what I was doing with the shooter character, actually, since I had no way to lock on to enemies. Pointing completely the wrong way when the boss is hacking away at me isn't fun.

I think I might give it a chance when it's gone to the bargain bin, but a "good" dungeon crawler will consume far too much time when there's so many "great" games out there (and coming out!).
1 year ago
LeonJ wrote
Have you played the full game Obs? I'm thinking not more then the demo. And that's fair enough, you tried it and hated it. I was the opposite. I thought the comment section for for discussion? His review was very well written, doesn't mean I agree with the text. This is no way a personal attack.
i have, but not to any reasonable amount, still not enough to form any definitive opinion on the game, except that i still had trouble working through the control scheme. it was only a -1.5-2 hour session, but if i'm still concentrating on how i move my guy and get him to do something, as opposed to it being intuitive, then i feel there's something wrong with the scheme, but then i have read reviews that say the learning curve is ~4 hours, and obviously i didn't reach this yet.
and as much as i disliked the demo, and the play session i've had, the game is still intriguing to me, and if it weren't for the fact there are so many games i want coming, i'm sure i'd have impulse bought it already, and truth be told i have very nearly bought it many times anyway.

i'm not saying you don't have a right to like it, far from it, i'm glad whenever anyone likes something regardless of my own preference toward the game, i just took umbrage at the implication that the review was nothing more than a fad, or peer pressure. "everyone else is reviewing it low, so we will too."
(i'm not saying this doesn't happen in some publications, it possibly does, i just don't think PALGN reviewers are quite such gutter-writers.)

from the admittedly little i have played, 6-7 sounds about right to me, especially under the PALGN review code. it's a severely flawed game imo, it might be fun, but it doesn't mean it couldn't have been improved on.
when i played it, i noticed frame-rate issue, the graphics weren't great, and the voice acting and dialogue scripting was pretty mediocre, so it fits with a 6.5.
it's fun, but could be better, which i think is the whole point of the 6.5.
but despite this, i'm still not turned completely away from it.

and i guess it's important to note that i don't find anything wrong with liking average-rated games (even if 6.5 is "above average"), lord knows i've got plenty in my collection that would probably sit here, and i'm expecting The Force Unleashed, and Mercs 2 to score around here too. both games that are flawed, but provide some form of visceral glee when playing. (well, based on the SWFU demo, and 2-3 hours of Mercs 2.)
1 year ago
LeonJ wrote
there are some good times to be had grinding with buddies.
There's something just so wrong about that statement... icon_lol.gif
1 year ago
LeonJ wrote
As I have said somewhere else, personally, I find games getting panned lately to be good and the opposite for highly acclaimed titles, and I never base my decision on reviews now. I play what I like and my gut feel of the game. Certainly something I would have never said 5 years ago. That may be because I have **** taste but I think it may have more to do with the general hype of the Internet community and momentum for a games status.
And that's the case with any review of anything. I think you're on the right track in deciding not to trust certain reviews - likewise you might find a reviewer who you like, who has similar tastes as you, and you'll trust their opinion a lot more.

SMH has two different movie reviewers - one who does the Pick of the Flicks video review, and another who does the text review. Over the past couple of months they've given very different reviews to the same movies. One example was the latest X-Files movie which the video reviewer didn't like, but the text reviewer liked. I saw the movie, and now I trust the video reviewer a lot more. icon_smile.gif

That said, there's more likely to be an agenda at play with movie reviews. Like when you pick up a magazine from Civic Video or something, and every video gets a good review. Coincidence?

Anyway, the point of this is to say that reviewers are human. Get to know what they like and you can read their reviews with that in mind. If a friend tells you a game is awesome but you don't trust his opinion you take it with a grain of salt.


Of course, this attitude to reviewers may be coloured by this tepid review of a solo show I did last month: http://www.australianstage.com.au/reviews/sydney/the-mockingbird--twisted-melon-1794.html
1 year ago
LeonJ wrote
Poor Too Human. Another Internet fad of recieving poor reviews when the game is actually rather good. Alas, come join my brother Shadowrun, another shamed game with no good reason.

Btw, "clunky controls and a pervasive air of sloppiness" certainly aren't an issue once you become quite powerful. The game suffers from the classic *everything works* when you hit the higher levels. The combat does become very rewarding and fluid.

The curious and compelling thing I found about this game is how it is designed. The idea is to grind back through the levels to hit your cap, with an excellent co-op to help you do this, all the while being challenging due to the enemy leveling with you. The achievements are pretty well thought out here and there are some good times to be had grinding with buddies.
From what I've heard in reviews, this game does sound rather crap.
Add Comment
Like this review?
Share it with this tiny url: http://palg.nu/15v

N4G : News for Gamers         Twitter This!

Digg!     Stumble This!

| More
  Pre-order or buy:
    PALGN recommends: www.Play-Asia.com

Australian Release Date:
  28/08/2008 (Confirmed)
Publisher:
  Microsoft
Genre:
  Action Adventure
Year Made:
  2008
Players:
  1

Read more...
Currently Popular on PALGN
Bioshock 2 Review
Welcome back to Rapture...
Win 1 of 10 Bioshock 2 packs
Includes free stuffs!
PALGN Weekly Releases - 08/02/10
Christmas in February?
Dante's Inferno Review
Is it Divine, or unwittingly Comedic?