REVIEW: Darkwatch

Developer: High Moon Studios | Publisher: Ubisoft | Format: PS2, Xbox

Reviewer: Craig Gallagher The owners of blood soaked masterpieces such as Resident Evil, Devil May Cry, and Onimusha, can now add another notch to there horror classics gaming collection, with the release of High Moon Studios' Darkwatch, another blood soaked first person shooter. Darkwatch is somewhat similar to an idea I once had for my horror film opus.

The year is 1876, and you are Jericho Cross, an outlaw who unwittingly unleashes Lazarus, the vampire king. In return, he gives you the gift of immortality and you set out to vanquish his demon minions. Your first meal is your trusty steed, Shadow who returns from the dead as your unholy, undead companion and mount. You are also joined by Darkwatcher Cassidy Sharp - at one stage you must choose whether to feed on her, which is one of the games many morality choices which determines whether you are truly good or evil.

This is a bloody, beautiful, fantastically gory adventure that puts almost every FPS of 2005 to shame. The only draw back is that it is ultimately too short and that only Xbox owners are able to play on-line. Though PS2 users do get an extra level and weapon, which goes some way to rectifying this.

Darkwatch is easily one of the most enjoyable games of last year, and while it may be short there’s more ideas and fun contained in it to justify buying it.

Darkwatch is developed by High Moon Studios, and published by Ubisoft in PAL territories and by Capcom in North America.

Comments

The English in this article is terrible. For example, can you make sense of:

"The home blood soaked masterpieces such as Resident Evil, Devil May Cry, and Onimusha, can now add another notch to there horror classics gaming post, with the release of High Moon Studios' Darkwatch another blood soaked first person shooter".

"The" should be changed to "To". There should be a party represented before can such as "Capcom" or "they". "There" should be "Their". And there should be a comma after Darkwatch in the final sentence.

That's just the first paragraph. I couldn't be bothered reading the rest.

[Cian Ginty]

Apologies, my sub-editing is a fault here, after a rushed edit. Mainly due to "Capcom" being removed to make clear it’s High Moon Studios' game (at their request). Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

Still a very poor article to be honest. For example:

Your first meal is your trusty steed, Shadow who returns from the dead as your unholy, undead companion and mount. You are also joined by Darkwatcher Cassidy Sharp - at one stage you must choose whether to feed on her, which is one of the games many morality choices which determines whether you are truly good or evil.

The word "your" is used three times in the first sentence. Then it begins the second. It is then used a few more times. Very tedious.

The word "which" is also used twice in the last sentence, which is very unreadable.

If you want to publish a website, try and make a half decent effort please.

[Cian Ginty]

I will pass on your comments. But I am not editing other people’s reviews, or similar articles of opinion, to that extent.

You're an editor aren't you? You shouldn't be publishing tripe like this on your own site.

First time commentor, long time reader. Just reading through a few of the comments posted and I have to say it all seems to be coming from one or two disgruntled individuals. It seems funny that all this negativity seems to have started after the article on Xbox Ireland. Seems someone rattled a few cages. Theres nothing wrong with the reviews, just a couple of typos. Anyways keep up the good work and don't let a few negative comments put you off.

A few typos and some very poor English in general.

:)

[Cian Ginty]

To correct errors, please use the comments section on the 'corrections & clarifications' page, and not the comments on individual articles – list the article in question, and what you think needs correction or clarification.

This move is aimed at keeping the comments sections open to possible discussion about the games or topics covered in articles.

[nakey]

Cian:

Another long time reader, first time commenting.

Rushing the edit isn't really an excuse for that kind of thing appearing on the front page of the website, to be fair. Most of those errors would be picked up by running through a simple spelling/grammar checker, which would take all of ten seconds.

Furthermore, if you don't have the time to read through and edit an article before it is posted, perhaps you should hold off posting it until you do have the time. It's not like it was some breaking news story that the world couldn't wait for.

I'd also agree that if you're unwilling to rewrite badly written copy, you shouldn't really be calling yourself an editor.

Hope you don't take offence to the above. I genuinely like this website and have nothing but goodwill for what you're trying to do. I'm just offering constructive criticism.

[Cian Ginty]

Thanks for the comments, nakey. Rushing an edit is obviously not an excuse in the ‘you must forgive us’ type of way. However, after the article originally went online, my sloppy rushed edit was the reason the first paragraph was so tangled up. I was taking responsibility for my error, not simply making justifications.

The original text by Craig Gallagher, had a factual error – it made out that Darkwatch was Capcom’s game. When first published, the first paragraph had none of the grammatical errors listed above in the first comment.

In addition, I’m not unwilling to rewrite badly written copy. When I said, “I will pass on your comments. But I am not editing other people’s reviews, or similar articles of opinion, to that extent”, I was directly referring to comment saying this following section of the review was in need of correction – “Your first meal is your trusty steed, Shadow who returns from the dead as your unholy, undead companion and mount. You are also joined by Darkwatcher Cassidy Sharp - at one stage you must choose whether to feed on her, which is one of the games many morality choices that determine whether you are truly good or evil” - I don’t think there is any great need to edit such and there are no real errors in that part of the review.

As I’m sure you’ll agree, this has been quite an extreme, if not the most extreme, mess up on our part. Similar mistakes are, of course, something we will try to avoid in the future.

[nakey]

I see. The explanation of the errors appearing in the first paragraph is quite understandable! However, the question still begs as to why an edit was so hastily done as to create so many errors.

Regarding the editing of copy:

While the text in question isn't especially badly written, it could in no way be described as flowing. I guess it's down to what level you're aiming, but I'd suggest many editors would have rewritten it. Entirely subjective though, so harsh to criticise for.

Anyway, hugs all round.

[apologies for MY badly written english, as I'm just in from 6 hours of karaoke]

[Cian Ginty]

Again, I’m not trying to make excuses; I know it should have never happened, but it was a number of factors all at once. Next time, if a factual error (even a small one like this) needs to be corrected, it’ll be left alone until I have time or if needed the article will be taken temporarily offline. I hope this has drilled home the message that no matter how small the edit the article should be read through at least twice again.

And with editing of copy, as you said that section wasn’t especially badly written, but I often edit similar copy. Using a mixture of editing and getting writers to change their ways is quite effective sometimes. I just didn’t see the need to edit such a small thing after it was online for some time.

Don’t worry, I can take constructive criticism, I just don’t like the apparent witch hunt others were trying to pursue.