Scott Pilgrim is a nice little beat up game in the vein of River City Ransom. However, all the time between the games has not helped Scott Pilgrim. What you expect from a game that comes 10 odd years later is an advancement in game type. It fails to deliver that advancement, if anything, the game goes backward from River City Ransom (easily one of my most favorite video games ever.)

Why is it not as good?

The fighting is not as well done. It is extremely hard to block weapons or thrown weapons unlike River City Ransom which can make fighting difficult.

There are no new moves to unlock via books. This was easily one of the best features of River City Ransom, you only get new moves by leveling in Scott Pilgrim.

It just doesn't advance over RCR in any shape way or form.

However, this is a solid game that I enjoy. It is fun and I enjoy playing it. RCR is a better game though in all respects.

Major problem: there isn't a move you can mistake for AFRO circus. My brothers and I used to call that move AFRO circus because it was funny. It is actually ACRO Circus.

Tungsten wrote on 09/24/2012 at 10:20am

RCR was the most "modern" game on the NES. Not easy to live up to.

jdodson   Admin wrote on 09/25/2012 at 12:18am

Scott Pilgrim wasn't great. I tried the demo on the PS3 and the first few encounters were fun but the game just ground down to nothing pretty quickly. I see the River City Randsom feel for sure though.

In the end, nothing was happening that was of interest to me. OK bad guys, check. Fighting... check. Not a ton beyond that though. Simple is good, this wasn't.

If you want to join this conversation you need to sign in.
Sign Up / Log In