A
Anonymous10/16/26, 08:50No.12880821
What a steep downgrade from the first game, what were they thinking?
44
Replies
A
Anon10/16/26, 08:54No.12880826
>time to filter the kiddies!
A
Anon10/16/26, 19:38No.12881818
WINSTON I TURNED MYSELF INTO A HAND
IM HAND DANNY WINSTON!
A
Anon10/16/26, 19:57No.12881902
AFAIK the developers weren't the same as the first one
A
Anon10/16/26, 20:00No.12881913
I wasn’t to impressed with either.
A
Anon10/16/26, 21:10No.12882115
I remember thinking it was ok until I got to a part where the camera kept forcing a massive camera shift while I was jumping over a pit. And made it so you had to shift the stick along with the camera or your jump would curve with the camera
A
Anon10/17/26, 05:48No.12882863
The first game was good.
A
Anon10/17/26, 09:07No.12882973
The endings were so stupid. The bad ending is the one where you and the mummy girl return to resting in peace together, meanwhile the supposedly good ending if you 100% the game is one where you and the girl go to the past together, for some reason, and end up getting eaten by the final boss of the first game. What the fuck?
A
Anon10/17/26, 09:07No.12882974
I blame the setting or not using the setting properly, I mean XIX century could have been handle better.
A
Anon10/17/26, 12:44No.12883228
Those games live off their presentation. Combat is serviceable at best, and the camera angles are atrocious. It's a 3D game and from times to times they put the camera in a normal spot but most of the time it's this awkward tops down point of view because it's so much fun looking at ants in a 3D game. The only reason I can think of why the camera is like this is so it becomes less obvious that the hit detection is shit and the animations awkward.With that said 2 isn't that bad. If you people are so mad at getting trolled, why do you keep responding to obvious bait on /vr/ all the time?
A
Anon10/17/26, 12:49No.12883234
The first game is like Nier, a perfect 10 across the board for everything except the actual gameplay. The second is what happens when you take away the charm and humour of the first and make the gameplay even more frustrating and tedious.
A
Anon10/18/26, 22:40No.12885469
I doubt its as bad as you say. I want to play this one day. I greatly enjoyed the first I think its one of the more underrated PS1 games.
A
Anon10/20/26, 23:36No.12889179
>What were they thinking?
Sony being greedy and forcing Cambridge Studio to make a sequel (plus what
A
Anon10/21/26, 00:40No.12889263
would you rather play 2 or the remake?
A
Anon10/21/26, 23:15No.12889380
How much better would this have been if they just waited to release it on the PS2?
A
Anon10/22/26, 17:41No.12890759
Thanks for reminding me to replay the original this month
A
Anon10/24/26, 11:45No.12893650
It's worse than the original, but not that bad.
A
Anon10/24/26, 11:46No.12893651
A
Anon10/24/26, 11:46No.12893652
A
Anon10/24/26, 19:18No.12894227
I like the atmosphere and characters in ME2 more and don't mind the linear sequence of levels because the map in the first one let you sometimes finish a level but you didn't get some item you needed so you have to replay etc.But ME2 has some strange design choices like fall damage (having to climb up is enough punishment for failing a jump), limited health fountains (even tho money is limitless if you replay) and levels heavily depending on you getting the "optional" chalice every time because the next level always uses the weapon you would get as a reward. You can play without but it's pretty weird to do it like that.
A
Anon10/24/26, 19:22No.12894236
the first game wasnt that good either.