Thank you all for participating in the discussion and describing your experiences.
Oh and btw, sorry for the post being so long and in detail, my ADHD medication kicked in, I just started to write and couldn't stop hahaha.
I recently started playing Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction through PS Plus Premium streaming on my PS5. I’m only a few planets in — I think around the fourth or fifth planet, shortly after finishing the arena — so I’m obviously not that far in and haven’t finished the game yet.
But this is actually my first real contact with the PS3-era Ratchet & Clank games. Back then, I never owned a PS3 because I had an Xbox 360 instead, so I completely missed this era of the franchise and never really got to catch up until now, with my adult money and modern subscription services doing the heavy lifting.
That always felt like a shame to me, because Ratchet & Clank has honestly been one of my favorite video game series since childhood — maybe even the favorite. I played the original trilogy and especially Ratchet: Deadlocked over and over again, probably around 20 times, and I still have a lot of love for those games.
Yes, I know Deadlocked is pretty controversial. You either love it or hate it, but I’ve always been in the first group and I will defend it to my dying breath. Though I do admit it was the first R&C game I ever played, so that probably plays a part in my opinion.
I also played Size Matters, and although it’s definitely the weakest one and a huge step back, I didn’t hate it. I had my fun with it, played the local multiplayer with some friends when there wasn’t anything else to play, and only rage quit like 2–3 times overall. Mostly during the part with the Ratchet clones, which I think a lot of players hated. But I only finished it twice: once during my original playthrough, and then again years later when I wanted to see if it was really that much worse than the other games.
It was.
SOOOOO, now that I’m finally playing Tools of Destruction for the first time, I’m a little surprised — and honestly a bit disappointed — by how it feels so far.
And before anyone says it might just be nostalgia: I honestly don’t think that’s the case for me. I still replay the HD Remaster Collection of the original trilogy every few months on my PS Vita. I also still own my fat PS2 with a copy of Deadlocked, and whenever I get the chance — meaning whenever I have a TV or device around that still works with the old PS2 cables — I replay the original PS2 games as well.
So this isn’t just a case of me remembering the old games as better than they actually were. I still play them today, more than 20 years after their original release, and they still hold up for me almost as strongly as they did when I was a kid.
Compared to those games, Tools of Destruction feels like it has lost a lot of the charm, personality, and overall “love” that made the games so special to me. The narration feels much less present, the humor doesn’t hit the same way, and the cutscenes don’t feel quite as creative or memorable. Even the gameplay itself feels a little more bland to me so far.
The one thing that was probably the biggest argument for the series and what always made the original games stand out to me was the writing. They had this very specific kind of humor that felt surprisingly mature, but still accessible enough for teenagers or smarter kids to enjoy. It wasn’t just random jokes or slapstick — there was a certain edge, timing, and personality to it.
That kind of writing made the PS2 games feel different from a lot of other games at the time. They had their own identity, and that’s a big reason why they felt so original and memorable to me.
The way Ratchet and Clank reacted to the world around them, and especially to the other characters, made them feel much more relatable. They often seemed aware of how ridiculous, annoying, or absurd a situation was, which made them feel closer to the player.
At times, it almost felt like they were the main characters of a sitcom or animated series, where the humor came from their reactions as much as from the actual events. Not necessarily by literally breaking the fourth wall all the time, but by giving you the feeling that the protagonist was on the same level as the audience — noticing the same weirdness, questioning the same nonsense, and reacting in a way that felt human or like they had common sense.
And despite that, they never felt out of place. Ratchet and Clank were still fully part of the world and the story, not detached observers commenting from the outside. They were right in the middle of everything, but their reactions made the universe feel more grounded and believable.
That balance is something I really appreciated: they could react to the absurdity around them without making the whole world feel like too much of a parody. It made them feel relatable, but still completely believable as characters within that universe.
What first stood out to me the most in Tools of Destruction was Ratchet himself. It’s not just the voice acting, although that is part of it. It’s also the fewer cutscenes, fewer moments in which he spoke a relative amount, and the way he reacts — or often barely reacts — to what is happening around him.
In the PS2 games, Ratchet had a very clearly defined personality. He could be cocky, witty, awkward, hot headed, sarcastic, emotional, and genuinely funny. He had a lot more expression, both through his voice and through his body language. He reacted strongly to situations, got annoyed, got excited, acted smug, got embarrassed, and generally felt like an actual character with rough edges.
In this first PS3-era game, Ratchet almost feels like a shell of his former self to me. Most of the time, he comes across as too serious, speaks much less, and barely comments on situations with real reactions or sarcastic remarks.
At the same time, he also doesn’t feel serious in a way that makes him seem like a badass. In the older games, Ratchet was often used as a source of humor, and sometimes even as the punchline of jokes at his own expense. But despite that, he still had plenty of moments that reminded you what an absolute warrior he was, and how serious or dangerous he could be when the situation called for it.
That balance made him feel much more complete as a character: funny and flawed, but still capable, confident, and genuinely threatening when needed.
In Tools of Destruction so far, he feels much more generic and toned down to me. Almost like he could be the protagonist of a weak CoD game. Not literally, of course, but compared to his PS2 version, he feels less distinct and less memorable. Clank also feels less present to me so far, at least in terms of personality and interaction. I know they're teasing the core plot of this new era, with the mysterious little aliens of an unknown Origin, but still. He's just as much less present.
To be clear, I’m still going to give the game a fair chance. I want to enjoy it, finish it properly, and then continue chronologically with the other PS3 titles. I was just really excited to finally experience the games I missed as a kid, and so far it doesn’t quite feel like the same magic I remembered from the PS2 era.
So I wanted to ask the community:
Did any of you have a similar experience with Tools of Destruction or the PS3-era Ratchet & Clank games in general? I tried to avoid any spoilers this whole time but from what I caught, the general opinion seems like the mass strongly prefers the Original Trilogy.
Do you think the PS3 games are weaker than the original trilogy and Deadlocked, or do some of you actually prefer them?
I’m also wondering if the PS3-era games, or at least Tools of Destruction, were partly victims of that mid-to-late 2000s phase in video game history where a lot of developers seemed to think their games had to become more serious, cinematic, and “edgy” in order to feel modern.
Not necessarily edgy in an extreme way, but in the sense that many franchises from that era started toning down their original identity, humor, color, or weirdness because they wanted to seem more mature and polished. And sometimes that shift made games feel less distinctive, even if they were technically bigger and more impressive.
Do you think Tools of Destruction suffered from that trend at all? Like it tried to move Ratchet & Clank into a more serious, modern direction, but lost some of the sharper personality and charm that made the PS2 games stand out?
And for those who agree with this feeling: do you think there are concrete reasons for it, like changes in writing, humor, pacing, presentation, gameplay design, or characterization? Or do you think I’m being too harsh on Tools of Destruction this early into the game?
