Tookewl Needs To Stop Making Sequels.
My love for Tookewl's games has been the subject of a lot of jokes (Many of which came from Neal) over the past few months. What you must grasp is the fact that there is a reason for this. For better or for worse, Tookewl never makes a game unless it does something never done before, and never releases a game unless it meets his own extremely high standards. He is known for taking months on a time on one game, delaying games which aren't perfect, never once rushing work, and cancelling his games if they aren't what he thinks is pitch-perfect.
Having said that, I was very disappointed by Locked In 4.
Although, this is definately the last time I will be disappointed by a Locked In game. If Tookewl ever makes another, I will know it's destined to be worse then this one. I don't know what exactly it is about Tookewl's games, but any time he makes sequels, they very nearly are NEVER as good as the origional was. We all remember Duck 2 being deleted, right? And what little I played really didn't interest me the way Duck did. Kill Phil wasn't that good, and Escapee 2 became too laggy too quickly.
Perhaps I knew that this game would disappoint, from the moment I heard about it, but just didn't want to admit it. I remember when Locked In 3 was published, and I played it, and didn't like it as much as I liked the second. And I didn't like the second as much as I liked the first.
So, why is this game not as good as the others?
Lag. The game lagged more then any other Locked In game. And no, it wasn't just my computer. I have the fastest computer of anyone I know, so apparently Tookewl has a super-computer of some sort. But seriously, the first and second Locked In games hardly lagged at all compared to the ending of this game.
The beginning. If you look at Tookewl's page, you'll notice a large number of very stupid pointless games, put there for the sole purpose so that Tookewl can say that he's the only member who made it a puzzle to get to a game. It might've sounded good at first, but it was immediately ruined when the game was published, and everyone viewed the real game. So now, basically you have to see the game with the most views. It wouldn't bother me if Tookewl stopped being stubborn and just deleted all the stupid extras, because they really do nothing in the positions they are, and screw up his page of otherwise brilliant games.
The beginning, part 2. The beginning isn't half as brilliant as the beginnings of part 1, 2, and even 3. Those beginnings were what interested me to continue playing the games.
The bosses. You know those bosses Locked In is known for, which were at their peak in part 1, but still somewhat held up in part 2 and 3? They really aren't that good here. Rather then attempt anything brilliant in terms of item placement, Tookewl chose a race boss - something that can be easily done with a game issue which could've been easily fixed, as you can go through more then once - and then a boss which was basically a key with arrows and enemies. Been there, done that. And the final boss - Actually, the final boss might've been good had Tookewl not made it the final boss, but early in the game. Since it was the final boss, it lagged BADLY. I really feel that Tookewl needs to grasp the fact that an epic boss cannot come at the end of a long ship game, unless you are absolutely brilliant and come up with a boss which needs very few items and lags very little. And this is not one of those bosses.
And in general, pretty much everything seemed downgraded from previous Locked In games. I feel that the only thing in this game which matched the brilliance from previous LI experience was the amazingly misleading arrows room. But other then that - And I never thought I'd say this about a game by Tookewl - all I saw were attempts at greatness, and a lot of failures.
DARUT1234'S RATING SCALE:
10 - An absolutely brilliant game. It revolutionizes gaming, does things I've never seem before, and is in general a lot of fun to play.
9 - Very close to perfect. Still an extremely good game which has done things I haven't seen before, or brings a new concept to the table, if slightly flawed.
8 - Very good game. Could probably be edited slightly into a perfect 10.
7 - Good game. Would be willing to play it.
6 - This is what I give games that are just average, and basically do nothing new and take concepts from other games, but are still fun to play. Also the last passing grade.
5 - Okay game. Needs work.
4 - A bad game. Not horrible, but bad.
3 - Pretty bad game.
2 - Very bad game.
1 - Leave Sploder.
Like this review? Then go to the link at the bottom and become friends with that account, then post a comment on the game to request me to review one of your games.