Might as well let Sleeping Dogs lie

Sleeping Dogs would have been quite the game four or five years ago, before Saints Row 3, Just Cause 2, Grand Theft Auto IV, Assassin’s Creed, or Arkham City. As it is, in 2012, it is a thunderless game that does things that have each been done better in at least two or three other games.

After the jump, finding a place in an open-world world

Sleeping Dogs’ greatest claim to fame is that it is the most Hong Kong of all the open-world games. It’s a bit like Just Cause 2 for its attempt at overseas exotica, but Sleeping Dogs has a single city intimacy that pales next to the country-wide sweep of Just Cause. You get a decent street’s eye view of Hong Kong, but it’s a small Hong Kong, with only about three flavors of neighborhoods. Since Sleeping Dogs’ debt is to martial arts movies, it can’t really bust loose into any sort of Crackdown city-as-a-playground dynamic. There is no Infamous parkour. There is no magic parachute or grappling hook. It’s as grounded as LA Noire, but with none of the storytelling heft of LA Noire.

Not to minimize the Hong Kong setting, because it’s presented with a lot of enthusiasm. Sleeping Dog has all the localized flavor of a Yakuza game, yet all the atmosphere and energy of a Rockstar game. Even though the engine feels dated, it tries mightily at its interpretation of a bustling neon wonderland. It has color and elaborate geometry and detail. It’s alive with signs. There are times you can all but smell the urban stink of dumplings, low tide, and sweat. So what if the framerate jerks or the textures pop or the streets occasionally empty because the engine can’t manage enough cars? You’re getting your virtual Hong Kong.

The story is trite and familiar, most likely a holdover from when this was one of Activision’s True Crime games. You’re an undercover cop infiltrating the Triad in Hong Kong blah blah blah. You’ll wantonly kill bad guys, cops, and bystanders, almost always consequence free, as if you were in a videogame. There are a few different progress bars to mark your progress as a cop, as a criminal, and an all-around badass. You can learn new fighting moves at the dojo by collecting jade statues, which are dropped in front of you as you do the story missions. Each mission is scored by your criminal performance (How much did you fuck shit up?) and your cop performance (Did you knock down any street signs?). This is a welcome gesture to encourage law and order, but it’s rarely in effect. For the most part, this is a typical open-world game without any ideas about how to keep you from running over hookers. Except that the karaoke bar girls probably aren’t hookers, technically speaking. I’m not really clear how that works, as I was assiduously avoiding the karaoke minigame as much as possible.

Sleeping Dogs plays it under the top enough that its occasional dalliances with supergore seem out of place. You’re mostly a nice conscientious protagonist agonizing over how best to fight crime viz a viz loyalty, honor, and various other protagonist values. But look, now you’re a psychopath impaling people on giant fish hooks, shoving their heads into incinerators, or slashing them with a power saw! Mostly you only break an arm or leg when it’s necessary to defend yourself. Oops, sorry pedestrians. I’m trying to do this achievement here.

This is partly why Sleeping Dogs would have been quite the game four or five years ago, when open-worlds were anarchy playgrounds because they couldn’t help it. But in a post-Saints Row 3 and post-Just Cause 2 world, open-world games have to decide whether to go all the way over the top or whether to fumble around trying to find new ways to keep you from jumping the curb, literally and socially. When games like LA Noire and Sleeping Dogs shirk that duty, it feels lazy and inconsistent. Build me a world, game developers! You can’t just put pedestrians on the sidewalks and leave it at that. I play videogames. I don’t mind rules.

But the far more disappointing dated part of Sleeping Dogs is just the basic gameplay. This is merely an open-world game with the now standard Batman fighting scheme, godawful driving physics, a mostly pointless freerunning system you’ll almost never use, and a horrible sense for how to build optional activities into the world. Sleeping Dogs hasn’t learned a single lesson from the Saints Row series. It relies on forgettable missions, awful races, preset chases from the early days of Grand Theft Auto, unrewarding side activities, and minigames for cracking safes, hacking cameras, planting bugs, and tracing calls, all at carefully scripted points. You’ll even pick a few locks by diddling tumblers, Oblivion style. Sleeping Dogs wants you to variously visit shops, food stands, and massage parlors for temporary buffs. It’s all very Yakuza. And it’s all blatant busywork. It doesn’t even have a meaningful money sink.

A middling open-world game can get by if it’s well paced. The Saboteur and Prototype 2, for instance, weren’t necessarily good, but they moved. Really moved. They pulled you forward, thanks in large part to great progression systems. There is no such sense of progression in Sleeping Dogs. You have a few tracks that gradually unlock moves you may never use. Early on, I slogged through surveillance missions to level up my police skills to go straight to a ability to get guns from the trunks of police cars. And I never figured out how to use it. Not that I cared to. Part of the lack of progression is also a lack of stuff to care about. Clothes and cars are a negligible part of the progression. Weapons aren’t a part of the progression at all. In fact, guns occupy a weird role in Sleeping Dogs. Sometimes you find them during scripted points in a mission so that you can do some obligatory bullet time stuff. They tend to vanish after that. It’s an odd open-world game that has such strict gun control. Such is the lot of a game that wants to be a martial arts movie. With car chases.

One of Sleeping Dog’s oddest progression tracks is dating. You acquire women’s phone numbers, at which point you can go to pink waypoints to start vaguely creepy dating sequences. Wei — your name is Wei — will readily fling his arm around the hapless woman, as if he’s claimed her. Then the two characters do something awkward like a photography minigame, a freerunning race right out of Assassin’s Creed, or karaoke (oh lordy, that karaoke…), followed by an awkward flirting cutscene. As far as romance goes, I suppose this is about on par with anything in a Mass Effect game. But it seems like a cheap ploy to get more female characters into the story, which would otherwise be a bunch of elaborately tattooed Asian dudes. It’s a shame the developers took a page from Rockstar’s “bitches and hos” playbook. At least we also get a dragonlady variation on the Titus Andronicus theme. But the whole dating rigamarole — in fact, a lot of the game in general — is enough to make a guy fondly recall bowling with Roman.

2 stars
Xbox 360

  • amanda_chen

    Wait… 2 stars? Again? I haven’t read your review yet, and I’m kinda afraid to. What a disappointment.

    “You’ll wantonly kill bad guys…” Is that a food joke?

  • Paul_cz

    Since I finished Saints Row 3 and was not that thrilled with it, I assume I will like this a lot more.

  • Mercanis

    Mr. Chick, wasn’t there someone who worked on True Crime: Hong Kong that originally put the game on your radar? I looked through the Qt3 archives but couldn’t find mention of the individual. I remember that the guy was associated with Bioshock 2…

    I could be misremembering.

  • Chris H.

    A bit of overlap with the team who did Bully for Rockstar back in the day would be that connection.

  • Chris H.

    wan-ton: adj meaning “deliberate” or “unprovoked”. Good lord.

  • Mercanis

    I’m pretty sure she knows that “wanton” is a word. She was suggesting it was a pun on the word “wonton”. Good grief.

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/kqhacker kqhacker

    been playing it for a while ,its very fun , its 8/10 for me ,well thats just my opinion ,but go check other reviews they give more details about this game

  • bawlsforface

    Tom “trololo” Chick strikes again.

  • ken

    What an afwul review.

  • George_Parros

    2 stars really? I love the “I WANT EVERYTHING PERFECT OR ELSE” reviews. I picked it up and put a bunch of time into it already – great game! Take a vacation and come back with a healthy review perspective……….

  • Anon

    Once again this moron destroys the average with an incredibly ridiculous low score compared to everyone else. This site is pathetic.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jason-McMaster/607680289 Jason McMaster

    And the weeping begins

  • Jonathon

    Wow at least the review wasn’t 2 paragraphs long. Progress right? *gives Tom a treat* good boy!

  • Anonymous

    Went from an 83 to 78 because of this idiot. Nice, hope you feel good about yourself knowing you destroyed any chance of the devs getting any sort of bonus they earned.

  • TheDude

    I was looking at the reviews on Metacritic and saw this website brought the rating down dramatically. Bravo.

  • anon

    Wow. Just wow.

  • Jmacgregor5

    No Tom, when they’re dead they’re just hookers.

  • BadWebDesignFTW

    How does this geo-cities era website get on metacritic anyway? Here I was thinking there were standards…

  • Matthew Nicholls

    ‘godawful driving physics’ Hmmm they’re arcade controls… this isn’t fucking gta for god sake. this guy is a dick. Makes ridiculous reviews and low scores to get more hits on this pathetic site.. my fucking nan could put together a better site than this…. it’s embarrassing.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jon.akerman Jon Akerman

    Must be sad to not be able to get any simple enjoyment out of any game. Ever.

  • Mercanis

    Come for the review. Stay for the shenanigans.

  • shahab

    Because the current “7-9″ scale that most large sites is better than someone’s real opinion of the game?
    I would much rather have an honest opinion of game, even if I disagree, then the kind of cheerleader reviews at places like IGN. Big games from big publishers almost NEVER get panned by the larger outlets unless the game is just 100% awful. They are too afraid of losing early access or opportunities at exclusives, they have become just a part of the marketing engine.
    So complain, whine, boo-hoo all you want that the mean Mr. Chick panned a game others have praised. I hope Mr. Chick keeps on giving us his honest opinion for years to come, if I ever felt he wasn’t I would read his reviews.
    Thanks Tom!

  • Reemul

    Do’t be pathetic. It’s reviewed as he sees it. While you may not agree with it to be sad enough to post about it as if it’s going to change is pathetic. You like the other complainers seem to think a game should be scored between 7-9 regardless of how good or bad it is. The game isn’t any different if Tom thinks it’s 1 star or 5 stars to you. Unless that is you game magically changes it to something totally different and rubbish to you

  • Reemul

    In what way, in the fact it didn’t get the score you think it deserves? It doesn’t make the game any different to play and be enjoyed by you regardless of what score anyone in the world gives it. It’s sad that you feel you opinion needs to be reaffirmed by people you don’t know rather than just enjoying the game yourself regardless fo what other people think.

  • Iain

    No you miss the point totally, you like it he doesn’t that’s fine everyone has their own opinons that’s why you read the text and don’t just look at the score. The fact you like it is great it really doesn’t matter if everyone else thinks it’s rubbish just as long as you are happy should be all that matters to you.

  • Iain

    Lets be honest, when there are a 50 reviews out there the aggregate will not move at all. Now if you are sad enough to work for an employer that pays you or bonuses you on stuff like metacritic you get everything you deserve.

  • Reemul

    YOur nan probably has more manners than you as well and doesn’t find the need to swear to get their point over or make personal attacks. QT3 has been here for 10 years and certainly doesn’t do poor reviews for hits but it must work as the trolls are out of the woodwork today.

  • Anonymous

    Yes because everyone lives in lala land that can work anywhere they want and can easily quit a job and find that perfect work place. They have no family to take care of, kids, to feed, etc.

  • Anon

    based on all your “rah-rah” replies, how much are they paying you?

  • http://www.facebook.com/chase.dahl.10 Chase Dahl

    +1 for Archer reference

  • http://www.facebook.com/chase.dahl.10 Chase Dahl

    But it must be great to just dig in to whatever pile of swill is placed in front of you and gobble it down like it is ambrosia. OM NOM NOM

  • Joe

    And even if it’s 100% awful, it’ll still get a 7. I heartily disagree with a number of Tom’s reviews, but I can respect that he thoughtfully explains what’s important to him in a game and why he dislikes what he does.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jason-McMaster/607680289 Jason McMaster

    hahahaha

  • Kevin S.

    I prefer the “If game plays, then 3 stars” approach.

  • MrRichway

    Good review. I had a feeling this would turn out to be a mediocre release. Looking forward to reading what you thought of Darksiders 2.

  • Peter Michelsen

    Couldn’t have said it better myself. There’s nothing wrong with getting your own opinions challenged, but then this is the internet, where insecurity runs wild, and usually ends up trampling common sense.

  • LowKey

    I’ve played a few hours of the PC Version and have enjoyed the experience so far. I’m guessing, unless things take a horrible twist, that I’ll end up enjoying the time I spend playing Sleeping Dogs. I have no issue with Tom’s opinion of the game as everyone has their own unique experience during a play-through. I know for a fact that there are plenty of games that are loved by a large amount of gamers that I simply haven’t been into, so again I’ve no issue there.

    The issue I do have however, is with the review itself. I found it be poorly written, flippant and lacking of any genuine critique. I counted 12 different references to other games while “slogging” (to quote Tom) through the review. It’s as if Tom wanted to say something and then was either too lazy or lacked the words to complete his thought. For example: “Sleeping Dog has all the localized flavor of a Yakuza game, yet all the atmosphere and energy of a Rockstar game” or “It’s as grounded as LA Noire, but with none of the storytelling heft of LA Noire”. Grounded as LA Noire, but none of the storytelling heft of LA Noire?. How about saying why and how it’s grounded and then going into what is was about the storytelling that you didn’t care for? When Tom did get around to the story itself in the next paragraph he simply stated: “The story is trite and familiar, most likely a holdover from when this was one of Activision’s True Crime games. You’re an undercover cop infiltrating the Triad in Hong Kong blah blah blah.” Again, What makes it trite and familiar? The setting? The characters? The plot?

    I’m stopping there as this is probably too long already. I’m sure I’ll get trolled or deleted etc. but when I read something as egregious as this review, it’s hard not to comment.

  • yadadada

    What a terrible review

  • Mike

    Trying to get more views to the site, hilarious

  • Tim James

    Finally someone not thrilled by SR3 so I can convince myself I won’t like it, just like I don’t enjoy most other mainstream third person open world games. I love saving time!

  • tomchick

    Mr. Lowkey, thanks for your detailed feedback, but I feel you and I have a fundamental difference of opinion on how to critically discuss a videogame (I feel the same way about movies, musics, books, etc). To my mind, context is one of the most valuable things you can bring into a critical discussion. How does this game (movie, book, etc) fit into the larger context? How does it compare to others in the same genre? How does it compare to other entertainment? What is its relationship to the other games that obviously inform its design?

    Open-world games are a really exciting genre for a number of reasons, and I’d rather bring that into a discussion about why I didn’t care for Sleeping Dogs rather than talk about Sleeping Dogs in a vacuum.

  • tomchick

    As Chris mentioned, it was crossover with Bully. The lead designer of Bully is the lead on Sleeping Dogs.

  • Donnie Yen

    hey reviewer, did you forget to take your anti-depressants?

    anybody who makes a wonton pun joke shouldn’t be allowed to pull a metacritic score down…anyhow check out the ps3 metacritic of this game…i wonder if they made it better on ps3 (a developer which made modnation racers on ps3)..?

    for fark’s sake the reviewer should be wing chuned to death like Ip man.

  • Donnie Yen

    ok im sorry about the prev message…everybody’s entitled to their opinion, its a democracy HK-style.

  • tomchick

    Okay, I loved the Edison Chen reference, but you got me all paranoid I’d been misspelling wanton all these years. I AM NOT AMUSED.

  • chrook

    sorry reading some of your review just makes me think you lack objectivity and gaming experience needed for reviewing games.

  • youcantwrite

    Yakuza is Japanese. Idiot.

  • Danny

    Most honest review you will find, the game is pathetic when taken in the context of 2012. Everything about it is SUBPAR. If you want an openworld game worth playing then just wait for GTA5 and Dishonored. This is actually a step backwards from True crime 2 if you can believe. Bravo Tom, I sincerely applaud you holding the line with integrity on this one. I noticed that the powers that be have promptly taken your review off of metacritic after some palms were greased no doubt, fucking insane this modern world of ours.

  • garbage

    I guess this is the review bobby and activision paid for?

  • David G.

    I know, it has the odd ‘feel’ of sock puppets maybe? Some weird vibe.