Prince of Persia is potentially back, maybe

No one is quite sure.

Do you remember: Assassin's Creed? I'm being facetious, of course I am, right now you are probably one of thousands of people out there who actively wishes that they could forget Assassin's Creed, what with it's overflowing homogenisation of quality. It's hard to truly quantify, for a laymen who hasn't experienced it themselves, why exactly it is that Assassin's Creed is such a cursed series now, but all us fans seem to agree anyway. The games are competently made, except they're awfully designed and bloated. The setting are imaginative and spacious, except they're derivate and underexplored. The story promises so much scope and potential that builds with each entry, except it's building to nowhere and has been since Assassin's Creed 3. Trying to wrap your head around the state of Assassin's Creed is dancing a Waltz whilst walking the Samba with a Rumba's hips and a Charleston's swivel. Which it to say, it's a totally confused mess.

But do you remember the Assassin's Creed before Assassin's Creed? Do you remember the game which took up the historical climbing simulator timeslot before the heads at Ubisoft booted it for something new and, eventually, trite? I have no doubts in my mind that were fortunes reversed, and Assassin's Creed got dropped, then we'd be sitting around bemoaning the crapness of the Prince of Persia games anyway, so perhaps its for the best. Oh, I was talking about Prince of Persia by-the-way. A game which felt like Ubisoft's personal answer to Lara Croft, adapted from a 1989 platformer of questionable quality into a 3D action adventure title for the age. I'm not going to lie, I found Prince of Persia to be really exciting back in the day, to the point where I even bought the entire trilogy collection for myself, (about 50% sure I never completed a single one of those games) but looking back on it I may have been a bit of a fool towards myself.

I can't speak for the general reaction to the game, as besides from the decent scores there wasn't a lot of credible journalism happening the industry back then so no-one was really talking about which series' were blowing up around the world. But I seem to remember really finding the controls, especially for combat, to be absolute cowdung. And remember that I played this game as a kid, and when you're a kid you don't really question things like 'are these controls poorly designed', because that's how games just were; so if something stood out to me as a kid, then you know it was an issue. I just remember this really stiff feeling of being locked into single-file combat which made any groups a chore to have to face and the really flashy moves impractical to pull off. (Although if you could manage a wall launch slash, that would be the highlight of your day.)

The series went on for three 3D entries before Assassin's Creed came along to kill the steam out of that sail, but people seem to forget that the series had 2 more games from there. (Yes, I'm serious) One was a cell shaded game that was a total pioneer with that style (even if Borderlands would arguably do it better a year later) and it did one of the worst things a reboot could do- it 'reimagined'. I put that in quotes, because that's the emphasis I can just hear the person pitching this game using when trying to sell it to a board of totally uninterested Ubisoft execs. They 'reimagined' everything from the Prince (now he was just called 'The Prince' because he acted like a smug dandy) and the object of his affections 'Farah' was transformed into a Donkey he only sort of cared about. Honestly, it would have been just fine calling the game anything else, but it was a reboot of a series I kind of liked so you can bet I played it. And my assessment of the game? Troy Baker out of Ten. Which seems like a copout until you realise that it was actually Nolan North who voiced The Prince. Now what do you think of my score?

Then there was 'The Forgotten Sands', so called because even at the time the developer knew this game would forgotten in no time flat. And it was released to coincide with the the movie starring... oh my god, I totally forgot there was a movie! Freakin' Ubisoft, always trying to cash in on their un movie-able properties. And Jake Gyllenhaal was playing The Prince? I would comment on the believability of casting him as a Syrian, but it's pretty clear that Ubisoft never cared about that anyway, what with having Nolan North give the most American Troy Baker voice he could muster in the role. (Did he even know Troy back in 2008? Might have been his famous prescience kicking in.)  I've heard from second hand sources that the movie was alright, which wouldn't mean much but it was my Dad who said it, and he hates every newish movie. Maybe the game was fine too? I don't know, I didn't play it and neither did anyone else, it never got a sequel. And then there's  'Prince of Persia: Harem Adventures'. Oh wait, we're not supposed to talk about that game. But it is real. (Never forget.)

All of this talk is, of course, because of the announcement that Ubisoft are on their way to remaking 'Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time', the first proper action adventure title that stormed the world back in 2003. This series hasn't seen a continuation since The Two Thrones, (Forgotten Sands was an in-between prequel) and maybe that was partly because Assassin's Creed blew up so big, and partly because (as I realise now with much more hindsight on the rest of the industry) The Two Thrones really was a huge Devil May Cry rip-off. (Fight me, I can take it!) Coming back to the games after all this time feels a little bit like too-little-too-late, I can't imagine there's much of an audience left for a game this antiquated, but I'll still show up for it Ubisoft, I promise!

They use words like 'Remake', and whilst that technically is true, don't look upon this with the same bated breath you might for Final Fantasy VII Remake or Demon Souls; because it ain't in that sort of league. As far as we can tell, Ubisoft are going for making the same game as true to how it was originally, but looking like something releasable this generat- actually, judging from the screenshots, it looks barely passable for last generation. But it's got ray tracing! (Sort of, kinda, not really.) There's a few subtle bits about some new enemies and a new control scheme (it better have a new control scheme, damn!) but nothing crazy to justify the £50 price tag this game is destined to have. Still, how often do you really get a chance to see nostalgia this old dragged from the depths? For mere spectacle alone that might just be worth of price of admission. Maybe.

But the thing has to come out first. Oh damn, that's right! How could I forget that this is a Ubisoft title? The only games they can actually make these days are the ones which only require copy-paste hatchet jobs with the coding, anything new gets thrown out the door after a year in development. Yes, this remake was actually due for January. 2021. Now it's been delayed indefinitely. (That just bodes peachy, doesn't it?) Heck, maybe by the time this blog comes out (one week from writing) we'll have seen an update during The Game Awards and I'm fretting for naught, but something tells me that my Ubisoft experience is robust enough for me to suspect foul play behind the scenes. All I have to say is: just let the Prince come out to play, Ubisoft, he may not have the grandeur and charm he once had, he may not be able to draw the crowds like he once could, but damn it he's an old friend that I'd love to see face-to-face one last time. (Oh wait, the entire '2003 onwards' franchise is for sale on Steam! Nevermind, I don't need this remake anymore, feel free to dispose of him.)