![]() While in "Lost Ember" you can basically poke your head or tail into everything – the wolf's hit box apparently is not much larger than its chest – in "North" the collision detection is partly overcautious, allowing you to literally stand in mid air next to an edge. Some parts of "North" looked odd, too much like a "parcours" to me, especially chapters 3/2, 5/1 and 5/3.Īnother thing both games share are the visual glitches and awful hit boxes (collision detection). In my opinion "Lost ember" managed this a bit better. Level design is always a compromise between a useful gameplay, preventing the player to go astray and still looking plausible. The number of chapters and time for completion is about similar.īoth wide open areas and narrow labyrinth-like caves or buildings can be found in both games. As such they fit players who look for relaxing games with low frustration level. Neither game is really challenging, they are basically walk-through stories with several simple (and few more difficult) puzzles or jumps inbetween. Same goes for their capabilities and game controls. Foxes are significantly smaller than wolves in reality, but in the game the difference is hardly noticeable. ![]() wolf and some other animals), and actually they both act very similar and even seem to have the same size. Now that I've completed both, I find it's time for a comparison.įor a start, both games are the same genre (3D exploration game) and both feature a quadruped (fox vs. I wondered which one to play first and decided to start with "Lost Ember" because it had the simpler graphics and I expected to be disappointed if playing it after "Spirit of the North". Some weeks ago I bought both games a the same time because discovery/puzzle games are one of the genres I prefer playing.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |