Your character, Charles Deckard, as a result of his opening Pandora's Box gets a swell Animus tattoo on his hand at the beginning of the game. After dispatching an enemy, Deckard can suck up their remaining life force, which is then used for healing and a few other small tricks here and there (energy pulses, repelling things, etc.). It's an interesting notion, and even if I can't quite wrap my head around why the tattoo should allow Deckard to use Animus to heal himself, I can accept that it does.
What's harder to accept is that in this day and age, too many things in Deckard's world cannot be interacted with. When one comes across a person on the street (or in the subway), it may not be good manners to shoot them (unless they're evil) in a game, but I fully expect to be able to shoot them. Legendary doesn't allow that, like magic, your bullets will pass right through anything the game doesn't want you to bother with… usually. You see, you can do some pretty good blasting of furniture and some other inanimate objects… sometimes.
In the end, that's pretty much sums up Legendary – there are good ideas there, and some things are handled well, except when they aren't, which is most of the time. There's a multiplayer included in the game as well. It consists of pitting a maximum of four players against another four in various formats like capture the flag and deathmatch. Werewolves are integrated into the multiplayer, but after playing the main game you probably won't want to see them anymore anyway.
As to the actual mechanics and fun involved in the multiplayer, that's a little bit harder to say. This reviewer spent hours on end trying to join multiplayer matches and creating my own and waiting for others to join it. Sadly, only once did I manage to find another player and they quit after a mere 30 seconds. As the game has been on store shelves for over two months enough copies ought to be in existence to make a multiplayer match a reality. Why aren't people interested in multiplayer Legendary? If I had to guess, I'd say it's because their disappointment with the regular game was so great they didn't want to spend more time with it, but that's just conjecture.
Article comments
1 - Seth
looks pretty good to me! and why to ppl have to rag on the ps3 juts becuase every game isnt perfect.... i never hear stories about an xbox game saying this game isnt perfect!!! =O i just hear this game is good this one isnt.... just becuase its on ps3 dosent mean it will be perfect.... is it becuase we have a cell processor that everyone says is soo powerfull?!?!? just becuase the system is powerful dosent mean every developer is smart enough to harness the technology and make every single ps3 game better than 360 games..... hell i dont even care if half the games are the same quality as a 360 game.... all i know is i payed extra for a huge hdd/ built in blueray/ built in wifi/ and some cool exlcusives like resistance, little big planet, killzone 2, ratchet and clank, and some other great ones (not gonna go into a list becuase nobody listens to a fan boy... lol but seriously!!! what the hell!?!?!? and ppl are like well if you dont mind 360 quality games get a 360... well i didnt say every game was 360 quality... id love to see a 360 get red ring of death trying to handle running little big planet, or resistance, or killzone.... watch that sucker crash and burn... all i know is i like quality in my system.... and you see stuff done better and better the longer the console is around.... take god of war 2 on ps2, nobody even knew a ps2 game could look so good or do so much... but it did!!! give the ps3 a little more time.... and dont blame 3'rd party developers trying to learn coding on a new system.... give it time....