XI
you are not logged in
Opinion

Opinion: Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows Part 2

It's the boy!

It can’t be hard to create a game based on the Harry Potter series, the books (and in most cases) the films giving ample source material for anyone planning sections to use as parts of the game.  Yet somehow – recent LEGO version aside – they’ve managed to become steadily worst over the years culminating in BrightLight’s baffling third person shooter that was Deathly Hallows Part One.  It wasn’t well received critically, but that didn’t stop Part Two following very similar paths.


You do get to play as different characters, which adds a bit of variety and is often the way that new spells are introduced.
Paths that are now more linear, and – somehow – less fun.  I don’t know how or why the games changed from enjoyable arcade adventures last generation to boring follow the arrow Bully-esque  diversions before ending up as Gears of War-lite cover based shooters, but I’m disappointed that they did.  It literally doesn’t make any sense, and You-Know-Who only knows who the games are aimed at these days, because it’s surely not hardcore Potter fans, is it?  Deathly Hallows Part 2, released today, is one of the oddest games this year.

Whilst I’m accepting of the need to continuously advance the games in the series, the decision to do another third person shooter in which magic wands are essentially swapped out for pistols, machine guns and rocket launchers is at best bizarre.  Of course, Potter and his chums are still wielding wands, but they certainly don’t feel like wands when you’re dashing out firing at the seemingly constant stream of dumb AI enemies.  The only thing missing is a weapon swap animation, instead we get our avatar occasionally shouting out the name of the spell as little coloured balls make their way down generic corridors.

Perhaps I’m being too harsh – maybe there wasn’t a way to let the player explore the various environments flitted over in the story because a) most of them have been explored, ad infinitum, in earlier games and b) there isn’t really any point: the plot rattles on at a fair pace and the funnelling down pre-set paths at least keeps the player moving.  The problem is that whilst there’s a certain flow that almost works, the omnipresent threat of another bunch of bad guys to interrupt you becomes a familiar, boring one.

Deathly Hallows Part Two requires liberal use of cover in order to stop getting killed (and facing a lengthly restart screen) which means that you’ll be dashing from one carefully placed block of concrete to another whenever your opponents appear, which is all too often.  Sadly, once behind cover you’re rarely threatened, and can safely pop out and take out any oncomers without much fear unless the game mechanics dictate otherwise.  Battles, therefore, can play out in a rather generic, boring fashion, and are rarely that enjoyable unless you’ve just acquired a new spell.

On a positive note, at least there’s some tactics required with the magic.  There’s a shield (Protego) which blocks some enemy fire and should they use it you’ll need to switch to Expelliarmus to break down their shield before switching back to an offensive spell to finish them off – all this is handled with the face buttons (with double taps for later magic) and – to some degree – works fine.  The spells are taken far too liberally for fans, though, with the machine gun like Expulso one of the main early culprits of creative license.


This screen shows enemys with Protego spells on. You'll need to switch magic to break that shield down before attacking.
What doesn’t work, and yet is rolled out far too often, are sections of the levels in which you have to protect your onscreen buddy.  They’ll (normally) need to be watched over whilst they open a door, blindly stuck to the opening whilst they wave their wand about – and during this time you’ll need to fend off the enemy as it converges on your location.  Even on the easiest level the likes of Ron seem oddly attracted to danger, and even once through the door in question they’ll still be unable to defend themselves, a life force meter draining away as you try to protect him.

A life force meter that, interestingly, isn’t there during the normal parts of the game when said partners are invulnerable to damage.

It’s things like this, along with a dramatically stunted game length and broken cut-scenes that just appear out of nowhere and then suddenly take you somewhere else, that spoil what little atmosphere there is.  With only (roughly) half of the original cast doing voice overs and some visages that are nothing like the real life counterparts, it’s difficult to connect with much in this game and there’s certainly nothing that really stands out.  On a technical level it’s sound enough – BrightLight certain have talent – but as a Harry Potter game it’s far from magical.

8 Comments
  1. R4U Eldave0
    andUandU
    Since: Aug 2008

    Are the visuals that boring that you decided to use the same picture twice? ;D After quite enjoying Halfblood Prince, I was really disappointed with Deathly Hallows pt1. Seems this one follows that theme too :(

    Comment posted on 15/07/2011 at 10:13.
  2. lewis815
    Member
    Since: Mar 2009

    A real shame, some of the games on the PS2 were quite enjoyable (for what it was anyway) – A shame that the transition couldn’t be made for the final films.
    To be fair, a change in gameplay was needed because they aren’t at the school and it can’t be used as a central hub for the game so an open world environment wasn’t possible, so fair enough to making the game linear. Plus the film is a lot more action and fighting orientated so again, fair enough with the third person change.
    Just a shame that it couldn’t be done well.

    Comment posted on 15/07/2011 at 10:20.
  3. Origami Killer
    Member
    Since: May 2010

    Really enjoyed Half Blood Prince, as it was free roam and my favourite book of the series (dont know why :/) But i have passed on the last two games as they look terrible, i much prefer the 1st and 2nd harry potter on ps1, they were fantastic!

    Comment posted on 15/07/2011 at 10:27.
    • G_The_Enemy14
      Member
      Since: Jan 2009

      The first two games were so good! :D

      Comment posted on 15/07/2011 at 11:53.
  4. dave87fez
    Member
    Since: May 2011

    At least we get to murder Voldemort, eh?

    Comment posted on 15/07/2011 at 11:13.
  5. xdarkmagician
    Member
    Since: May 2009

    You just can’t make a movie tie in game as fast and as good as a movie. 9 month production schedule, Movie = good; Game based on movie = Bad. Maybe now that the hoopla is over they can sit down take 2 years and produce some decent western style RPG with totally new characters and story. I’m sure everybody wants to keep milking the Harry cow. It could actually be very good.

    Comment posted on 15/07/2011 at 11:54.
  6. Darksidesystems
    Member
    Since: Aug 2010

    I had to laugh when I noticed the “Better with Kinect” label had been dropped from one box and replaced with “Move supported” on the other one. How quickly times change, eh? Now where is my freakin’ Star Wars: Move Edition? CHOP-CHOP!

    Comment posted on 15/07/2011 at 21:42.
  7. The Lone Steven
    Never heard of him.
    Since: May 2010

    I have played all of the Harry Potter games up to Half blood prince and most of them were decent. Goblet of fire was very linear and was not really that enjoyable. With Deathly Hallows,it would be hard to implent free roaming as they are trying to avoid getting tracked down by the Deatheaters. Some of the games have mixed some elements from the films and books. I don’t get why Deathly hallows has been split into 2 games as there is no limit for time with video games. I can understand the films being in two parts. Although i have yet to see HBP and i am thinking of replacing my copies of the Harry potter films with the bluray collection as some have broken on me.

    Sadly they have turned Harry Potter into a generic shooter with wands. I suspect that the only highlights of the game is battling voldemort and the battle of Hogwarts.

    Comment posted on 16/07/2011 at 12:04.