Black may not be the definitive FPS the PS2 world has been dying for, but it is a competent shooter with a few moments of spectacular content.

In 1988 or so, Public Enemy rapped “Don’t believe the hype” and, were they talking about PS2 first person shooters, they’d have been right on the money. Ever since Microsoft unveiled the X-Box and the brilliant beauty that is “Halo”, Sony’s machine has been desperately seeking a title that could compete – nay – play in the same league as the biggest, baddest FPS in the galaxy.



While the platform has a few standouts (“Time Splitters: Future Perfect”, “Battlefield 2: Modern Combat), many have been overshadowed by “Halo” and deemed automatically in competition with Emperor Gates’ (MS is an Evil Empire, after all) glorious game. Whenever a promising title looms on the horizon, the inevitable comparisons are made and the hype surrounding what is sure to be the PS2’s first definitive FPS title starts buzzing. “Killzone” was billed as a “Halo killer” as early as a year before its release. Sadly, we found this was not the case and “Halo” captured the flag yet again.



As a one-player only title, “Black” – the latest answer to the PS2’s FPS desires – managed to avoid the “Halo” comparisons (a rep from developer Criterion – makers of the incredible “Burnout” series – was quoted in an “OPM” interview as saying “Black” was all about the one-player experience), but generated plenty of hype anyway. With stunning graphics (some levels look positively next-gen), highly interactive environments, and more guns than the NRA could ever want, “Black” was sure to be the greatest FPS of all time on the PS2.



Don’t believe the hype.



“Black” is a good game. It’s not a great game, but it’s good and well worth the $39.99 price tag. It simply has too many flaws to live up to the blessings that have been heaped upon it in the press prior to its release. And all of the things that were touted about the game are what really drags it down because, while there are some great ideas there, they are executed rather poorly in some cases.



Chief among “Black’s” features are the destructible environments. This is very cool because we all love to blow stuff up, right? When you’re encouraged to do so as an effective way of taking out enemies, it gets all the better. Since the enemies spawn based upon the player’s location, however, you’ll find yourself blowing a car to bits or causing a caustic barrel to ignite and explode when there are no enemies anywhere near it, only to find them waiting right next to the smoldering shell of the object that was supposed to do them in when you get there a few minutes later. It’s frustrating to say the least.



Like many FPS games, enemy AI is also an issue. In “Black” it’s as full of bugs as an American telephone line. Some enemies seem to know exactly where you are by some means of telepathy while others will watch a buddy’s head explode right in front of them and not react in any way.



The plethora of guns that was reported early on was nothing short of an exaggeration. There are perhaps ten different weapons available through the various missions, but of those only a few are worthwhile. Pistols, Uzis, and shotguns are pretty much out because they lack the necessary range to be effective in a game that requires you to take cover and blast your foes from afar. The RPG makes the expected satisfying amount of boom, but is only really useful against embanked machine gunners and enemies wielding RPGs of their own. Trying to take out an RPG without one of your own is almost completely futile and very frustrating.



Adding to the problems is teammate AI. While there are only a few missions that have you working with partners, the partners are completely useless. They have the aim of Dick Cheney and tend to walk in front of your line of fire quite often. There is no friendly fire, so you can’t shoot them – but you may end up wanting to.



For all its flaws, however, “Black” does feature some stellar levels and has at least one that is easily the most incredible FPS level I have ever played. The hype surrounding the graphics is all true and on a high definition screen, “Black” presents graphics that easily match XBOX and Game Cube levels and, I dare say, muscle in a bit on XBOX 360 territory.



When the interactive destructive environments work the way they’re supposed to, it is a thing of beauty. Grand explosions lay waste to enemies right and left and the ability to chip away at the concrete, wood, and sheets of metal they hide behind is exhilarating. The fact that they can shoot away your cover will keep you on your toes as well. This is definitely not a game where you can get away with running and gunning, but cover only stays intact for so long, so you must keep moving.



It was also widely reported that several of “Black’s” levels were inspired by motion pictures and it is true. You’ll notice shades of “Black Hawk Down”, “The Terminator,” and, most impressively, “The Matrix”, among others as you plod through the rather forgettable story.

Despite Criterion’s claims of the “one-player experience,” however, I can’t help but feel that split screen and online multiplayer modes are sorely missing from this title. Their inclusion would have certainly upped the replay value (which is fairly low – completing the game unlocks some stuff, but nothing that makes you want to do it all again) as well as the score. “Black” is also depressingly short, even on the “elite” difficulty, the game can be completed in eight to ten hours.



Still, some of those defining moments in “Black” make it worth the first play through at least and almost make the game a “must play.” If there were more of them it would most certainly be so.

Take “Black” for a spin all the way around its block – but don’t believe everything you may have read.

Review by Michael Triggs.