Not exactly the most highly anticipated game of 2009, WET was originally dropped by Activision Blizzard in 2008, then picked up by Bethesda. Released on Tuesday, there's still very little out there relative to other titles.

Well, it's a decent game, but there are so many flaws that cannot be ignored; every game has its ups and downs. Glitchy walls, cumbersome controls, an amazing soundtrack and a rather neat use of film scratch...

Rarely are we faced with a video game heroine who is confident in her own abilities without having to flaunt her curves in our faces. In WET, we are introduced Rubi Malone, whom developer Artificial Mind and Movement has fashioned into such a woman; she doesn't do mercy, only mercy killings.

Originally to be published under Activision Blizzard, WET wound up one of many games dropped in 2008. Lucky for A2M, Bethesda stepped in to pick up the pieces, bringing us a brutal action title heavily inspired by grindhouse cinema. Complete with catchy soundtrack, tons of violence, and a mild storyline, this game tries hard to impress. Does it succeed? Not perfectly, no. While WET carries its share of exciting play and general amusement, it stumbles terribly and barely manages to reach the finish line.

As with most games, WET starts out feeling fresh and exciting. The heroine is sexy with a killer attitude, dual wields any type of firearm within reason, chops people up with an ornate sabre. Players are ensured plenty of action from the very start, and once in the fray there is very little downtime. The acrobatics and Slow-Mo effect might take some getting used to, but combat does pick up once you get the hang of shooting during gravity-defying stunts. Yet the non-stop action gets old pretty quick unless you play the game with sequence breaks to rest that trigger finger and your patience.

...

Now presentation is where WET truly shines. It's exceptionally stylish, from the music to the artful use of film scratch. The upbeat rock and roll touches various genres, from swing to punk to something delightfully redneck; it's a lot of fun and complements WET perfectly. I can't guarantee every person will enjoy the soundtrack, but there's certainly a good chance most can appreciate it.
| More
News story attached to:
Register as a member to subscribe comments.
  • 0
    Storm Sep 17, 09
    Decent review, it's expected to be an average-above average game. Not paying the retail price for it, but I will pick it up.
  • 2
    Sayyed Sep 17, 09
    Hmm, didn't seem like a 6.7. From what I played atleast a 7. But then again, I always enjoyed bad games a little more then some people.
    • 0
      RabidChinaGirl Sep 17, 09
      I don't consider 6.7 to be an awful score. People seem to forget there are numbers on the 1-10 scale below 7, but that's still above the average. It's a game I can see people enjoying, but there were so many flaws that I felt uncomfortable giving it anything above 7. These feel like the result of a small budget or lack of time, but also note this is probably the first worthwhile IP A2M has ever developed.

      Without bugged walls, subpar textures, and sometimes ridiculously linear play (often requiring no strategy) I'd push it past the 7 threshold. At the moment, it's hard for me to justify full price for this game.
      • 1
        Big A2 Sep 17, 09
        Yeah, but most reviewers treat 7 as the medium. After all, everything under is not worth your time and everything over is an essential, leaving everyone used to reading reviews like that. Just another reason how game review systems are flawed.
    • 2
      chautemoc Sep 17, 09
      Are you honestly sitting down playing the game thinking, 'I don't agree with that reviewer, I am definitely enjoying this 3% more than they were'?
  • 0
    Dragoshi1 Sep 18, 09
    Watch patches come out that fixes all of that, then the score can be raised, just like UT3,Burnout Paradise,ect that got patches that fixed certain things and added certain crap
    • 2
      chautemoc Sep 18, 09
      We don't review patches.
      • 0
        Dragoshi1 Sep 18, 09
        That sucks then. Burnout Paradise got 8/10s and 4/5s for not including things like day/night cycle,bikes,ect,and when all of that content came out, making burnout paradise "complete" reviewers went back and reviewed it again, giving it higher praise.


        Its called giving it a second chance.
        • 3
          VeGiTAX2 Sep 18, 09
          Poor engine design isn't the same as not providing a broader selection of content. UT3 shipped complete out of the box, you didn't play a CTF map and jump onto a ledge only to fall through the level and into oblivion. Burnout Paradise got reamed often on the features not on the bare mechanics that make up the game itself.

          Reviewing based on patches / dlc is flawed anyway, you review a game based on what it is not what it might be or what it can be if you do x, y and z. If that was the case Neo could give everything a 9/10 saying well if they fix all these issues and make up for lost content down the road it'll be awesome!
        • 3
          chautemoc Sep 18, 09
          It's called releasing a fully functional game at launch.
          And BP got content for steadily for about a year after release if I recall -- did the reviewers update their reviews every time new content came along?
    • 3
      RabidChinaGirl Sep 18, 09
      I'm not sure a patch can fix wall bugs and bad design.

This news story is archived and is closed to comments now.