Alright i just came back from a 9 hr Los 2 marathon. Been playing pretty much since the game released on Steam. Lord of Shadow difficulty, completionist playstyle; i try to collect and explore as much as possible. I left the game at the
.
All i have to say is that some of these so called "reviewers" have to be held accountable. It's past the "it's just an opinion" territory. Some of the things written about the game are straight up lies and i am baffled as to what kind of profession is this when there are no consequences when you fail to do your job.
A couple of examples if i may.
Quoting Edge (4/10):
"This thoroughly botched yet endlessly reused system is far from Lords Of Shadows 2s only failing. Theres the banal and unfailable linear platforming, your next destination shown by a noisy cloud of bats, which kills stone dead the prospect of any meaningful exploration."
While it's true that the cloud of bats shows a point where you can grapple, there are many areas that are not marked by it and you'll have to be really observant to your surroundings. Moreover you will have to go back to some areas when you unlock a new power since that will open a path or two.
"Theres the dialogue, voiced by a cast headlined by the returning Patrick Stewart as the shady Zobek and Robert Carlyle as Dracula. The former does his best with a hokey script that asks little more of him than gravitas; the latter doesnt so much phone in his lines as fax them to an intern and have them do it instead. You get the sense hed rather be somewhere else, and youll soon be inclined to agree with him. "
I won't talk about the script since i haven't finished the game but are we playing the same game here? Carlyle gives an, at least, above average performance. He's going through a wide array of emotions and that becomes even more evident later on
.
"Even more shocking than the unimaginative visual design is how rough it all looks. Running at 720p, but seemingly rendered some way south of that, this is a jagged mess, with texture work that at times wouldnt look out of place in a PS2 game. Its compounded by the fact this is arriving at the fag end of a generation, when expectations are that much higher. Theres a bizarre, excessively shallow depth-of-field effect thats clearly being used to disguise poor level of detail on distant objects, frequently kicking in before the focal point of the scene is even onscreen. Even more brazen is the way the frequent, lengthy loading times are hidden behind endless elevators, decontamination showers and supernatural airlocks. Its tempting to think that the frequent text popups reminding you that you can view unlocked concept art in the Extras menu were put there to appease artists aggrieved at the treatment their work received."
I don't know which version he played but maxed out on the pc this game looks breathtaking. To me it's one of the most visually impressive games in recent memory alongside Metro Last Light. I am well aware that on a technical level it may not be even close but the art design combined with the fluidity on the animations and the visual fidelity made my eyes pop. Also the game performs really well on my system with no loading times or texture pop-ins. Moreover, there is no framecap and that adds to the smoothness on a 144 hz monitor.
"The presence of a weapon that refills your health as you land attacks tends to whiff of a flawed system, and the Void Sword, activated with a tap of L1, does just that. R1 activates the Chaos Claws, which sacrifice the range of Belmonts signature whip for attack power great enough to break enemy shields. Use of each is regulated by screen-corner Void and Chaos meters, recharged by absorbing orbs dropped by fallen enemies or infuriatingly spaced-out magical fonts. Youll generate a lot more orbs if you can keep a combo going long enough to fill another meter, but this is a rare event. Youre going to get hit a lot."
Nowhere does the reviewer explain why this system is flawed in his opinion. I'd like to read another line of horse-shit (not really) since i'm sure it'd make a fun read. Next up about that "you're going to get hit a lot" part. You will if you are not familiar with the combat system. Dracula feels more powerful than LoS1 Gabriel if memory serves me right since: a) he can keep air combos up indefinitely and he can counter in mid air and b) magic weapons don't drain while activated but only when they hit enemies. Taking into account that the parry window is pretty big and the fact that all attacks are pretty much telegraphed and adding the fact that parries and counters give you invincibility frames as a cherry on top should show you why you should have little trouble dealing with enemies without getting hit.
"Its genre-standard stuff thats complicated needlessly by that unblockable sound effect being exactly the same for every single enemy in the game. Combine that with a wayward camera and youve got a recipe for trouble, with the mix further soured by the absence of block- or hit-stun. You can be merrily wailing away on an enemy only for them to start up, and execute, an attack in the middle of your combo. "
Did he just say that you can't block or stun enemies on hit? I might be misinterpreting him but if he really said that it's false since you can both block and stun-lock enemies. Or did he say that you can't block-stun as in stun enemies with a properly timed block? Because you can do that as well. Maybe he meant stunning enemies that are blocking maybe? Either way you can do that too with the Chaos Claws. Parrying stun-locks even the heavy guys and normal hits from any weapon will stagger lesser enemies for at least a couple of hits. If you wanted to button mash though you won't be able to do that obviously since after 2-3 hits in, they will wake up and retaliate. Combat is a give and take relationship in this game and while it's not super duper ninja gaiden hard it's not mash X to win.
There are more things in that "review" and a couple of others that i glanced hastily like PCGamer's (if you can call 2 paragraphs that i, or any of my classmates, could write back in the 4th grade a good 20 or so years back a review) that really rubbed me the wrong way and i would further explain why i find them to be insultingly inaccurate but at the moment i'm just gonna go to sleep.
P.S: Apologies if the post is in the wrong section. I don't know if it'd be more suitable to post this in the review thread rather than the OT.
antidote room part
All i have to say is that some of these so called "reviewers" have to be held accountable. It's past the "it's just an opinion" territory. Some of the things written about the game are straight up lies and i am baffled as to what kind of profession is this when there are no consequences when you fail to do your job.
A couple of examples if i may.
Quoting Edge (4/10):
"This thoroughly botched yet endlessly reused system is far from Lords Of Shadows 2s only failing. Theres the banal and unfailable linear platforming, your next destination shown by a noisy cloud of bats, which kills stone dead the prospect of any meaningful exploration."
While it's true that the cloud of bats shows a point where you can grapple, there are many areas that are not marked by it and you'll have to be really observant to your surroundings. Moreover you will have to go back to some areas when you unlock a new power since that will open a path or two.
"Theres the dialogue, voiced by a cast headlined by the returning Patrick Stewart as the shady Zobek and Robert Carlyle as Dracula. The former does his best with a hokey script that asks little more of him than gravitas; the latter doesnt so much phone in his lines as fax them to an intern and have them do it instead. You get the sense hed rather be somewhere else, and youll soon be inclined to agree with him. "
I won't talk about the script since i haven't finished the game but are we playing the same game here? Carlyle gives an, at least, above average performance. He's going through a wide array of emotions and that becomes even more evident later on
when he meets Marie
"Even more shocking than the unimaginative visual design is how rough it all looks. Running at 720p, but seemingly rendered some way south of that, this is a jagged mess, with texture work that at times wouldnt look out of place in a PS2 game. Its compounded by the fact this is arriving at the fag end of a generation, when expectations are that much higher. Theres a bizarre, excessively shallow depth-of-field effect thats clearly being used to disguise poor level of detail on distant objects, frequently kicking in before the focal point of the scene is even onscreen. Even more brazen is the way the frequent, lengthy loading times are hidden behind endless elevators, decontamination showers and supernatural airlocks. Its tempting to think that the frequent text popups reminding you that you can view unlocked concept art in the Extras menu were put there to appease artists aggrieved at the treatment their work received."
I don't know which version he played but maxed out on the pc this game looks breathtaking. To me it's one of the most visually impressive games in recent memory alongside Metro Last Light. I am well aware that on a technical level it may not be even close but the art design combined with the fluidity on the animations and the visual fidelity made my eyes pop. Also the game performs really well on my system with no loading times or texture pop-ins. Moreover, there is no framecap and that adds to the smoothness on a 144 hz monitor.
"The presence of a weapon that refills your health as you land attacks tends to whiff of a flawed system, and the Void Sword, activated with a tap of L1, does just that. R1 activates the Chaos Claws, which sacrifice the range of Belmonts signature whip for attack power great enough to break enemy shields. Use of each is regulated by screen-corner Void and Chaos meters, recharged by absorbing orbs dropped by fallen enemies or infuriatingly spaced-out magical fonts. Youll generate a lot more orbs if you can keep a combo going long enough to fill another meter, but this is a rare event. Youre going to get hit a lot."
Nowhere does the reviewer explain why this system is flawed in his opinion. I'd like to read another line of horse-shit (not really) since i'm sure it'd make a fun read. Next up about that "you're going to get hit a lot" part. You will if you are not familiar with the combat system. Dracula feels more powerful than LoS1 Gabriel if memory serves me right since: a) he can keep air combos up indefinitely and he can counter in mid air and b) magic weapons don't drain while activated but only when they hit enemies. Taking into account that the parry window is pretty big and the fact that all attacks are pretty much telegraphed and adding the fact that parries and counters give you invincibility frames as a cherry on top should show you why you should have little trouble dealing with enemies without getting hit.
"Its genre-standard stuff thats complicated needlessly by that unblockable sound effect being exactly the same for every single enemy in the game. Combine that with a wayward camera and youve got a recipe for trouble, with the mix further soured by the absence of block- or hit-stun. You can be merrily wailing away on an enemy only for them to start up, and execute, an attack in the middle of your combo. "
Did he just say that you can't block or stun enemies on hit? I might be misinterpreting him but if he really said that it's false since you can both block and stun-lock enemies. Or did he say that you can't block-stun as in stun enemies with a properly timed block? Because you can do that as well. Maybe he meant stunning enemies that are blocking maybe? Either way you can do that too with the Chaos Claws. Parrying stun-locks even the heavy guys and normal hits from any weapon will stagger lesser enemies for at least a couple of hits. If you wanted to button mash though you won't be able to do that obviously since after 2-3 hits in, they will wake up and retaliate. Combat is a give and take relationship in this game and while it's not super duper ninja gaiden hard it's not mash X to win.
There are more things in that "review" and a couple of others that i glanced hastily like PCGamer's (if you can call 2 paragraphs that i, or any of my classmates, could write back in the 4th grade a good 20 or so years back a review) that really rubbed me the wrong way and i would further explain why i find them to be insultingly inaccurate but at the moment i'm just gonna go to sleep.
P.S: Apologies if the post is in the wrong section. I don't know if it'd be more suitable to post this in the review thread rather than the OT.
