Throwing the terms "sandbox" or "open-world" around these days is as meaningless as saying "walk" or "run". They're so over-used (and often misplaced) their position in pitching title ideas or goals seems superfluous now. Don't get me wrong, there are most definitely a host of games whose "open-world" or "sandbox" claims are on the money, but sifting through the rest has become a tedious and non-joyous exercise in criticism, disappointment and affirmation.

Still, that isn't to say a lot game ideas are wrong in their creative direction. It's one thing to see the final result as the above and another to see it on the drawing board, in development as a cool idea. So there has to be an element of "benefit of the doubt" involved when critiquing a game, and it's with said benefit of the doubt I approached the preview version of Sony and Sucker Punch's inFAMOUS for PS3.

Like Crackdown before it and Prototype alongside it, inFAMOUS is a superhero romp with the intention of allowing the player to utilise said powers within a vast, expansive open environment. There are pedestrians below, cars, trucks and more – all littering and populating the streets of the fictional metropolis of Empire City while you run along the rooftops above; demigod of parkour and power.



Just as in Prototype, inFAMOUS's protagonist (or proantangonist - depending on how you play the game), Cole MacGrath, has been granted amazing powers, but at the cost of a massive explosion that not only destroys six city blocks, but also unleashes a deadly virus upon Empire City. A disc-jockey then claims Cole the source of the destruction and virus, thus setting the city against him (and conveniently setting up the game's karma system).

As a former courier (ala Mirror's Edge), Cole already has a parkour edge. He can climb buildings with ease, perform lofty jumps and maintain balance better than most. Adding to this natural ability, his newfound powers - electricity-based - help make him one powerful individual who can hover, lob electricity grenades, shoot lightning bolts and land from up on high with a tremendous EMP-like thud, scattering objects and enemies within range like so much garbage.

The emphasis with all of the aforementioned, is to string together incredible combinations of agility and power. A video attached to the end of the preview is proof of this, making it clear Sucker Punch want to create a free-flowing open-ended battle and exploration system that encourages players to be creative with Cole, his abilities and the game-world at large.



Unfortunately, the missions the preview offered didn't really give a good indication of this, nor encourage it. Beginning on a rooftop not far from an above ground railway line, we're told by our comrade-in-arms and ex-girlfriend (so there's some animosity there), Trish, to head down and get the stationary train moving again. There's an obstruction in front of it on the tracks, and given you're electrically charged, once the blockage is cleared, you'll act as a conductor (heh, get it) and the train will roll again. Cool, easy enough.

Get down there, use your Force Push-like ability and blow the wrecked cars blocking the train clear off the tracks. Now jump onto the roof of the main carriage and the train starts moving again. Well, that is until you come across a signal box that lacks power. Jump down onto the street, take out the Reapers below (more on these guys in a minute), find the signal box (pretty much right underneath the train), shoot electricity at it and then climb back up. Now, rinse and repeat this for about 10 minutes – mission over.

Oops, things aren't looking too good for the game if this is the style of mission-structure. What was worse about this, and I'm seriously hoping this is a preview code issue, was wanting to leave the mission to just go and play in the game-world ended the session. If that's a feature that will carry over, then "open-world" and "sandbox" are definitely the wrong terms.



Further into the preview, I was given plenty of destruction missions, such as following and destroying an armoured truck. Taking on hordes of the Reapers was also thrown into the mix, but all I really gleamed from most of this was a linear, bottle-necked style of play that didn't really utilise dynamism. Events were all scripted and failing them revealed the second play through unscathed – you're doing everything the same over because the pattern ultimately never changes.

The Reapers I've mentioned are a gang of baddies who also seem to have garnered some powers. For the most part they're fairly easy to take out, and the AI (at least in the preview build of the game) proved pretty useless and stupid. You'll find them perched throughout the game-world attempting to impede your linear mission paths. From what I can gleam from this version of the game, as a superhero, you'll have moral choices to make such as disabling the bad guys or killing them. However, the only affects I saw were your powers going from blue to red if you chose to be more evil; though it's likely this is going to be a much more intricate path to walk in the final version of the game.

Visually infamous is pretty much a mixed bag. It's nowhere near the level of polish of other PS3 titles like this such as Drake's Fortune or Assassin's Creed. Cole's parkour animations are functional for the most part, but equally repetitive. I felt like I was constantly restrained and pulled back into old-school elements of game design (which coupled with poor AI and repetitive animations) counter-acted the open-world buzz of the game. But, this is only a preview build of the game; the final version may prove more tangible.

There looks to be a fair amount of fun here, but so far the mission-structure, poor AI and seemingly linear gameplay path aren't helping me feel confident in the idea of a sandbox superhero game. Cole feels like there'll be some value to him as a character and if the story can hold its own, there may be more hope yet. And again, this was only a preview version, we'll save final judgement for our review copy – but so far infamous has a lot more to prove.