The good things I heard about Ico, especially from John Siracusa on Hypercritical, was one of the factors in finally breaking down my Nintendo wall and buying a PS3. So I was very pleased to find it a rewarding and engaging experience.

I guess you could say that in some ways it’s in the “art game” category, but I tend to think of it as Zelda but more realistic, with a tighter focus and more emphasis on immersion and atmosphere than I dunno finding items or whatever. I love Zelda but as a variant on that formula and a change of pace (warranted for a series that, like many Nintendo properties, is getting oh so slightly, shall I say, stale?), it was a best game. Maybe not the best, but a best.

Seriously though, compared to other Zelda-likes I’ve played and also loved (such as Okami), it just goes in a different direction. I can’t call it the best because that’s not what it’s aiming for. This may be the first sense it’s an art game: it’s not comparing itself to big games and trying to be a flashy super game.

The second sense is the style and aesthetic. The whole setting is very muted and oppressive, but also dignified and other adjectives, then there are moments that open up or secluded, beautiful spots. It really draws you in just by the places you visit and the climbing over huge things that you do.

The main mechanic of the game, I’d say, is the relationship between Ico and Yorda. You meet Yorda early on, and she’s *sigh* a princess, but it’s not like that really. You’re just two kids trying to escape shadow demons in an empty castle. Everywhere you go, you drag Yorda along by the hand, and that really reinforces your personal connection to her as a player. It’s probably the best case of developing real caring for an NPC that I’ve experienced, and it’s a great strength of the game.

The other bits are a lot of fun, too. The aforementioned climbing, exploring each new area as you find it to locate the switch you need, protecting Yorda from waves of shadow creatures. Conquering each area may take a while, but that makes it really rewarding.

Oh before I forget the manual (the PS2 one anyway) is full of spoilers, and I found it much better to read it only after I’d finished. There are a few reasons I found this. One is that it goes into too much detail and ruins the interpretive aspect. I preferred to develop my own ideas about the plot and my own conceptions about how the game was structured, rather than having it all laid out plain. The other reason is the game has very minimal interface—no on-screen interface during gameplay, ever—and “gamey” things about it, so that trophy notifications became jarring (they weren’t in the original spec), and the process of saving (by sitting on stone couches) quite abruptly takes you out of the world (appropriate enough I guess, for the end of a play session). In the same sense, the manual devalues this from whatever it is into a mere game. (I blame marketing for American audiences.)

Whatever it is, then, is something more. But what to call it? Art, or interactive experience? Sounds pretentious. More like, this is what a game should be. What other games should aspire to be like. Sure, it doesn’t suit every genre, style or developer, and I don’t think everything should be a lot more Ico. But maybe more things should be a little bit more Ico.

Anyway, I had a blast playing this great game. Hmm, well blast is the wrong word, my playthrough was more ponderous than that. I had a slow burn. But a good one. Anyway I had fun. And there’s more to look forward to! See I bought the Ico&SotC Collection, so soon I’ll start on Colossus, and there’s much more widespread praise for that so it should be good, but I have different expectations for it. Plus, there’s the New Game + option, with co-op. I think I’ll call it here. Not a long game but so good, concentrated quality.

Wife’s comment: “It made me feel dizzy when you moved the camera.” Yeah that feature was a bit sensitive.