2nd Op By

Jon Cadoche 6.0 RATING

While I certainly do have my own views concerning what I regard as "art", as would anyone, I do not share Chis opinion for WWF SmackDown: Just Bring Its "Create-A-Wrestler" mode. Ive always viewed these features as nothing more than extras designed to beef up a game. Such options would attract my curiosity for little more than five minutes, browsing around to see what they offered in terms of choice and originality, before I permanently left them alone. When remembering this game, the first thing that will come to Chi will probably be the Create-A-Wrestler menu. I however, will remember the title as a PlayStation 2 comedy show, something it most likely was not meant to be portrayed as.

Anyone in need of a good laugh need only listen to the in-game voice commentary. Michael Cole and Tazz, the two announcers calling the action, are terrible to the point of being hilarious. First, theres the matter of what theyre saying. Im not sure whether they came up with there own material or not, but I seriously doubt any of the comments in Just Bring It would ever be heard in an actual WWE event. When in a match where a big wrestler is involved, such as Albert, theres nothing like hearing Tazz say "Albert is HUGE!" to have at least one of the two players laugh it out and lose the chance to maintain or gain the momentum. Such is an example of the many brainless remarks found in the rather poor commentary this game offers. Some would justify this by the fact that Im dealing with a "rasslin" as Chi referred to it. Then again, I dont believe the commentary in the actual WWE events is as bad as what Ive heard in the game. It might have helped had they taken Jerry "The King" Lawler and Jim Ross, two men who would have been perfect for the job and would probably have had much more entertaining comments.

Much of what is being spoken sounds like words and parts of sentences taped together. For example, when introducing those who will be competing, the tone of voice used by Michael Cole will vary significantly as he names the wrestlers and describing what type of match is taking place. This reminded me of the automated customer service greeting message I had to listen to whenever I would call my Internet provider. At least, in Just Bring Its case, it wasnt frustrating, only comical.

Ironically enough, with all the bugs that can be noticed while playing through a match, Just Bring Its wrestling generally looks as fake as the real deal. When in a hardcore match, adversaries can often feel the full impact of an object even though they might not be been within the range of strike that same object should have. High risk maneuvers involving tables or ladders are the worst though, when it came to this sort of problem. Ive been left speechless more than once after witnessing the odd and entirely unpredictable results to have come from such moves.

As Chi has so well argued already, the "Create-A-Wrestler" mode can be described as the meat of the game. However, for someone who is simply looking for a good wrestling title and does not seek to practice his or her artistic talents, Just Bring It is not the ideal title. Ill admit I got a few laughs out of it, especially from the voice commentary, but this should be viewed as something that needs to be worked on in the next sequel to come. Wrestling games werent designed to make people laugh and this one, unfortunately was not designed to be very entertaining.

Public Opinion

Kant 3.0 Rating

I thought Chi's cited parallel was artless -- he had his art in the right place, but it struck me as being all artifice. Whilst I certainly agree with his review of the game -and understand why there is more fun to be had in creating your own character than playing with yourself - I'm not sure why this form of expression should be singled out as 'art'. Art is not (just) about expressing yourself - if so, choosing to break wind would be a form of (f)art. And if the game itself enables this expressiveness, then why privilege this aspect of it via the category of 'art'? It seems to me that if and when we use this term, a part/whole relation is required. (we cannot understand the whole without the parts and the parts without the whole) In focusing on this (p)art, we see what is entirely art/less about the game as a whole, and should be more careful when using one part against the other.

Reader Second Opinions