Support NeoGAF

[HiVision]

That's interesting because I play Shooter 1 now and *in comparison* it feels slow and not as exciting as 2. It's still a great game to learn the systems with of course, but Shooter 2 is where we made it all come together in an exciting climax.

From reading some reactions it feels to me that we overloaded people with new stuff a bit too much (most of the reactions are to new things and there are a lot of subtle new things in there). I bet if those people were to come back to Shooter 2 in a year they will suddenly understand it and enjoy it.

For all the complaints would you really recommend people NOT to buy it?

 

[Acquiesc3]

Just downloaded this today. I enjoyed PJS1 both single player and co-op even going so far to 100% it. I'll only be playing this co-op though.

I'm hoping it's just as good as the first if not better.

 

[conman]

That's interesting because I play Shooter 1 now and *in comparison* it feels slow and not as exciting as 2. It's still a great game to learn the systems with of course, but Shooter 2 is where we made it all come together in an exciting climax.

It feels to me much less like Shooter 2 is a "sequel" and much more like a "continuation" or a "part 2." It seems to assume that you know the basic mechanics from Shooter 1 and then takes off running from there.

As for some of the above complaints, I wouldn't quite go that far. Despite some issues, I had fun with it and continue to play it after I've beaten it. PJ games are never lacking for vision or style, and that's enough to hook me.

But Shooter 2 is overall a lot "busier" than Shooter 1. Some mechanics (like the light levels and the dirt-munching levels) seem less integral to the overall game. And the levels do get too long. What Shooter 1 got right was keeping things simple in concept, while still letting things get complex in execution. Shooter 2 gets a bit more muddled in concept and IMO could use some scaling back and overall editing. The basics are dead on, but the extras are kind of distracting (and for me make the game seem more tedious and frustrating than the first).

 

[edgefusion]

I loved playing through the single player so I thought I'd give the multiplayer a shot. Wow, what a complete and total piece of shit that is. In my very first match I was inexplicably assigned against someone of the "veteran" rank who totally out-matched me in experience and had far superior items. I didn't even get a chance to figure out wtf was going on and get my bearings, I was just annihilated every couple of seconds until I was declared the loser.

Seriously, fuck that. Talk about leaving a sour taste. I'll stick with the single player.

 

[HiVision]

Sorry to hear you had that happen, but the matching system is skill based... unfortunately during weekdays the no. of users can be a bit low and it falls back to matching anyone after an initial search.

The multiplayer is excellent fun (no honestly it is!) and even if you lose you earn money so please give it another go.

We will implement a few things in a patch to try and stop this happening until you are used to the game and the rules though.

 

[patsu]

I like PJ2. Finally found precious time to play it late last night. Only completed stage 2 but it's quite a bit more interesting than the first game. ^_^

 

[Clear]

I just have to say that I think Shooter 2 is wonderfully crafted. Such a nice piece of work in every aspect. I do think it'd get a lot more love if the presentation/checkpointing of the stages in the adventure mode were changed to emphasize each "screen" as an independent challenge.

Its not so much about difficulty, more about parcelling-up the gameplay so that the player feels rewarded more frequently. Just the presence of some kind of interstitial animation, progress message, "breather" moment... whatever would really help in my opinion.

I understand the rationale is to keep people playing, arcade-style, but I honestly believe that it'd play better psychologically-speaking in today's market if the level flow embraced its "per screen" structure more overtly.

Sorry if I sound like a marketing-douche, or a no-room-for-challenge-in gaming apologist, as I'm neither. Honest.

I just think that the amount of time needed to do a full "clear" of a level (and Eden -another game I love- uffered from this too) is a bit offputting.

 

[HiVision]

I just have to say that I think Shooter 2 is wonderfully crafted. Such a nice piece of work in every aspect. I do think it'd get a lot more love if the presentation/checkpointing of the stages in the adventure mode were changed to emphasize each "screen" as an independent challenge.

Its not so much about difficulty, more about parcelling-up the gameplay so that the player feels rewarded more frequently. Just the presence of some kind of interstitial animation, progress message, "breather" moment... whatever would really help in my opinion.

I understand the rationale is to keep people playing, arcade-style, but I honestly believe that it'd play better psychologically-speaking in today's market if the level flow embraced its "per screen" structure more overtly.

Sorry if I sound like a marketing-douche, or a no-room-for-challenge-in gaming apologist, as I'm neither. Honest.

I just think that the amount of time needed to do a full "clear" of a level (and Eden -another game I love- uffered from this too) is a bit offputting.

We *are* going to address this somewhat in a patch, to be honest we didn't realise it was taking some people 30 mins to play a single stage!
We will add an option that lets you take a rest and come back.

I also believe in keeping game experiences "bite-size" at about 10-20 mins (for example in PixelJunk Monsters the stages are designed specifically to have you play for 15-20 mins)
In Eden it was the reason for the one Spectra at a time design although people mistakenly thought we did that just to extend the length of the game (not the case at all although I can see how it might seem that way and we did address this to some extent in a later patch with the continue feature).

 

[BobTheFork]

Still can't get into a MP game. I wasn't on board during ep 4 but I have to say that after that, all my complaints seem to melt. I loved ep 5 and 6 and they didn't seem too long to drawn out like 4 did to me. Whatever took me 45 minutes in ep 4 seems to take me half the time after that fact. I liked the dynamics of being in that monster but it took so long it drove me crazy.

 

[duckroll]

In Eden it was the reason for the one Spectra at a time design although people mistakenly thought we did that just to extend the length of the game (not the case at all although I can see how it might seem that way and we did address this to some extent in a later patch with the continue feature).

What reason is that? It's honestly the one thing which I really dislike about Eden, and some of my friends gave up on the game really early on because that design decision made it so annoying to play. Pretty curious as to what the design purpose was, and whether you feel it met the objective. If it did, was that objective worth the cost of making the game feel as repetitive as it did?

 

[HiVision]

No, it's a shame but the intention was for you to get a Spectra in one level and then go and get another Spectra in another level but some people just kept going again and again into the same level to get all the Spectra. This would definitely seem repetitive and we should have implemented some kind of system to prevent this unfortunate side-effect. We just didn't think people would play like that!

For Eden, the distorted adage "One Spectra a Day Keeps the Doctor Away" is the rule of thumb and we should have worked out a way to lead the player into this style of play (Farmville is ultra-repetitive compared to Eden and yet 100 million people(!) played it at one point, because they force the hourly/daily play-style on you). As a result the people who naturally found that style of play absolutely *love* the game, and the people that didn't don't

If we made an Eden 2 I would switch it all around a bit now knowing what I do about all the ways different people play.

 

[duckroll]

No, it's a shame but the intention was for you to get a Spectra in one level and then go and get another Spectra in another level but some people just kept going again and again into the same level to get all the Spectra. This would definitely seem repetitive and we should have implemented some kind of system to prevent this unfortunate side-effect. We just didn't think people would play like that!

For Eden, the distorted adage "One Spectra a Day Keeps the Doctor Away" is the rule of thumb and we should have worked out a way to lead the player into this style of play (Farmville is ultra-repetitive compared to Eden and yet 100 million people(!) played it at one point, because they force the hourly/daily play-style on you). As a result the people who naturally found that style of play absolutely *love* the game, and the people that didn't don't

If we made an Eden 2 I would switch it all around a bit now knowing what I do about all the ways different people play.

That's an interesting design goal, and I guess that does make sense now that I think about it. That was how I played it when I first bought Eden. I would try for one Spectra in one garden, then one in another, etc. But even then the problem became that when I eventually returned to a previous garden to get the next Spectra, I found that I have to get both to clear it. And then 3. And then 4. Etc.

I really liked Eden's concept and design. It's definitely Pixeljunk's most original game out of all the ones you've released, but I didn't complete it because towards the end it got a bit too hard, and because the way the system was set up, it became pretty grindy at the end when you have the last 3 gardens or so left, and you have to keep doing them over and over to progress. :/

Pixeljunk Shooter on the other hand, is the Pixeljunk game which I have found the most fun. The first game was a big on the easy side, but the sequel is basically everything I could have asked for in terms of improvements over the original.

I think something which mixes the originality and pure creativity of Eden, with the more balanced game design and challenge of Shooter 2 could be a really, really spectacular game.

 

[conman]

No, it's a shame but the intention was for you to get a Spectra in one level and then go and get another Spectra in another level but some people just kept going again and again into the same level to get all the Spectra. This would definitely seem repetitive and we should have implemented some kind of system to prevent this unfortunate side-effect. We just didn't think people would play like that!

Well, this explains a lot--both about Eden and Shooter 2. If you foreground item collection as a primary goal (spectra, survivors, etc.), you're setting a specific tone and set of expectations. But if you want people to just relax and keep moving through the game, don't make item collection such a central part of the game.

It's like creating a football/soccer field, putting a scoreboard in the center of the field, and then telling people to just play a friendly game and not to worry so much about keeping score. You're sending a mixed message. Perhaps don't show item totals until after completing a full area or the full game?

EDIT: BTW thanks for being so open about your design goals and philosophy. This is really great and eye opening for those of us who rarely get a peek behind the scenes.

 

[Audioboxer]

Still need to pick this up, it's at such a good price on the UK store (I was expecting £9.99). Me and the other half loved playing through PS1 in Co-Op.

 

[HiVision]

Well, this explains a lot--both about Eden and Shooter 2. If you foreground item collection as a primary goal (spectra, survivors, etc.), you're setting a specific tone and set of expectations. But if you want people to just relax and keep moving through the game, don't make item collection such a central part of the game.

It's like creating a football/soccer field, putting a scoreboard in the center of the field, and then telling people to just play a friendly game and not to worry so much about keeping score. You're sending a mixed message. Perhaps don't show item totals until after completing a full area or the full game?

EDIT: BTW thanks for being so open about your design goals and philosophy. This is really great and eye opening for those of us who rarely get a peek behind the scenes.

Exactly, and this is mostly what I do as a game designer, I try to give the player a sense of freedom while at the same time guiding them with one hand and actually restricting them with the other (without them noticing too much). However there are so many paths to control that occasionally the odd one slips through in order to preserve the experience for the person who is playing it the "way it's intended" (if you see what I mean there - ie. sometimes the solutions contradict each-other and then you have to choose one or the other if you can't find a clean perfect solution for everybody).

Both Shooter 1 and 2 are the same basic design, but Shooter 2 simply has a lot more content (it has all the liquids and enemies from Shooter 1 AND a bunch more for Shooter 2) and even though they are all separated and edited it still means that stages are longer than in the original. The stages are richer and more complex in design I think too - well, it is a sequel that continues on right from the original.

However we will be addressing this stage length issue in the next patch. Even though we did blind monitor tests in Santa Monica with people who hadn't even played the game before they didn't report any complaint like this (and unanimously loved the game of course) so I think it must be something that fairly experienced gamers want.

 

[Tntnnbltn]

However we will be addressing this stage length issue in the next patch. Even though we did blind monitor tests in Santa Monica with people who hadn't even played the game before they didn't report any complaint like this (and unanimously loved the game of course) so I think it must be something that fairly experienced gamers want.

Well speaking from personal experience, I wouldn't complete a level without perfect survivor count. If one of my survivors got hit by a wayward missle or lava shooting enemy, I would kill myself so I could replay. It was a concious thing, but I didn't want to put in 40 minutes into a level, lose one survivor on the last screen, and then have to replay the whole thing for perfect survivors. Especially because (unlike collecting diamonds) that would mean having to collect every survivor from every screen if I started again (as opposed to just having to pick up a single diamond on the way past in a replay).

 

[HiVision]

Maybe the trophies are a bad thing then because they force you to strive for perfection?
Although restarting a "scene" within a stage when a survivor dies isn't that much of a problem for the player, but it does extend the length of a level. I just fly through not giving a shit if the survivors die or if I collect them so maybe this bugs the more OCD players out there :-
)

 

[Clear]

Although restarting a "scene" within a stage when a survivor dies isn't that much of a problem for the player, but it does extend the length of a level. I just fly through not giving a shit if the survivors die or if I collect them so maybe this bugs the more OCD players out there

That was me on Shooter #1! I somehow got it into my head that getting every survivor was absolutely crucial and as a result I spent a lot of time restarting levels after whacking one of the little dudes with a stray shot.

On Shooter 2 I'm more focussed on collecting jewels, which as it requires every nook and cranny to be thoroughly checked is probably taking even longer!

I think maybe the reason the focus groups failed to pick up on the time aspect as being problematic to some people is that by definition it places Shooter in isolation, whereas "in the wild" playing several different games over the course of evening/gaming session is more likely.

In that circumstance, time usage per-game is an issue - or at least a possible issue.

Don't get me wrong, the minute by-minute gameplay is totally fun and rewarding, but, with checkpoints being spaced out so far -especially when you're learning the ropes for a particular level- there's a concern that sometimes you won't have time to make the amount of progress you'd like to in a short sitting.

 

[challen]

Hi Dylan,

I'm glad you are here. I just completed the first level on stage 6, and so far, I think shooter 2 is awesome. Compared to Shooter 1, I like all the additional stuff, i am having more fun each stage and the bosses are great!

I haven't tried multiplayer yet, but I do have a comment on difficulty. I loved Monsters and Eden. I also thought Monsters and Eden were hard games. I thought Shooter 1 was too easy, but I still enjoyed it, and I was happy I bought it. However, I also liked Demon's Souls, and I really enjoy a fun, difficult, almost masochistic challenge. The challenge is very important to me for enjoying the game. For example, I find uncharted on crushing almost boring. But I don't think most people like games as challenging as I do.

I think different difficulty levels (like what you did with the PJMonsters patch) is the way to go. Have people start the game on easy by default, and let those who enjoy the challenge up their own difficulty. You could start this by changing the amount of damage the ship can take.

Also, everyone here on GAF will have played the first game, and they will compare Shooter 2 with Shooter 1. GAF is picky. I'm not surprised no one in the blind monitor tests mentioned some complaints listed here.

Anyways, thank you for such a great set of games. I love Shooter 2. I want everyone to be able to enjoy the games, and my $.02 is to allow for various difficulties.

 

[RobertM]

Oh wow, I just realized you can kill those star shooting things; I dodged them for the first 4 levels :/

 

[conman]

I just fly through not giving a shit if the survivors die or if I collect them so maybe this bugs the more OCD players out there

Sure enough! And for me, it isn't so much the trophies that drive me crazy as it is the treasure and survivor tallies for each stage.

 

[.GqueB.]

We *are* going to address this somewhat in a patch, to be honest we didn't realise it was taking some people 30 mins to play a single stage!
We will add an option that lets you take a rest and come back.

I also believe in keeping game experiences "bite-size" at about 10-20 mins (for example in PixelJunk Monsters the stages are designed specifically to have you play for 15-20 mins)
In Eden it was the reason for the one Spectra at a time design although people mistakenly thought we did that just to extend the length of the game (not the case at all although I can see how it might seem that way and we did address this to some extent in a later patch with the continue feature).

Lies. I still havent finished that game.

 

[/XX/]

We *are* going to address this somewhat in a patch, to be honest we didn't realise it was taking some people 30 mins to play a single stage!
We will add an option that lets you take a rest and come back.

If what you are suggesting is some kind of user selectable mid game saving option, I think it would be better implemented if it is possible to restrict its use for different, and newly introduced, levels of difficulty. I like (and I suppose other players like it too) the tension derived from the game mechanics and lengthy stages as is, without additional support and without the possibility to restart the game from a saved position at any given time, as this decreases the player's caution and awareness.

In the case you are talking about additional checkpoints within a stage, I think this wouldn't affect much the experience if they are spaced enough, but I still suggest introducing this possible changes for new difficulty levels to keep the current game the same for those who like it as it is now.

 

[RustyO]

Finished this on the weekend, just got a couple (3 or 4?) jewels to find on chapter 6 so I can 100% it.

Also, need to do those multiplayer acheivements at some point in time... but can't ever find a game.

I'm 50/50 on which I prefer of PJS1 vs PJS2... definitely some cool bits in PJS2, but also some parts that I just didn't dig much (like the hungry suit), ah well.

 

[HiVision]

Well you don't have to prefer either as long as they were both fun right!

 

[patsu]

I finished it after midnight yesterday. Yay !

The last attack of the last boss was difficult but I prevailed after 30 minutes or more. ^_^

I like PJ2 *much* better than PJ1. PJ1 should have been like this (I like both games regardless).

I like the hungry suit because it has the most strategy elements. They also introduced new mechanics (darkness) in PJ2. The levels demand more wits this time round. Great work ! If there's a PJ3, I'd buy it without hesitation too.

 

[BeeDog]

So how do you gather points in the multiplayer aside from winning? I'm only meeting legends who own the shit out of me, so I can't progress at all (stuck at 57% towards Saturn). I mean, if the only way to progress anywhere is by winning, then I'll lay off the MP completely, since it's not fun if you get raped everywhere you turn.

 

[Cesar]

However we will be addressing this stage length issue in the next patch. Even though we did blind monitor tests in Santa Monica with people who hadn't even played the game before they didn't report any complaint like this (and unanimously loved the game of course) so I think it must be something that fairly experienced gamers want.

What's Santa Monica's relation with Q-games anyway? Is it just testing?

 

[HiVision]

Yes, and translating/distribution in the US/EU, dealing with PEGI, that kind of thing.

 

[Cesar]

Ok, thanks for the info. I love the game btw! It's great fun to play with it my little cousin.

 

[Oppo]

I've noticed that the PJ games tend to annoy the more OCD/obsessive players (I mean that in the friendliest way possible) who like to be a bit completionist and "grind" the game, in order if possible.

If you are ok letting the occasional astronaut or gem go, to collect them later (or not at all) then it all feels great, in my opinion. But I think when a guy dies or you see that gem disappear under an unmovable lava wall or whatever, with no immediate recourse/close checkpoint-retry, it sends a certain personality type around the bend. Just a casual observation.

 

[Nakiro]

I had fun with both games.
I found the first one more fun personally because I had more freedom.

The light levels restricts you quite a bit and the "Hungry Suit" does as well as your movement is mapped to a grid. Otherwise I had tons of fun.

Managed to get to the Sun.
Would love to play the game against other people without going into the ranked. (I know there are Friend matched but it's not the same.)Think it would also make it better for beginners to get accustomed to the multiplayer.

 

[HiVision]

I don't think there are enough players online yet to introduce another separation like that, however newbies are matched with other newbies as much as possible. We use an internal skill matching system to try and match like with like.

Congrats on getting to the sun!!

 

[Massa]

I've noticed that the PJ games tend to annoy the more OCD/obsessive players (I mean that in the friendliest way possible) who like to be a bit completionist and "grind" the game, in order if possible.

If you are ok letting the occasional astronaut or gem go, to collect them later (or not at all) then it all feels great, in my opinion. But I think when a guy dies or you see that gem disappear under an unmovable lava wall or whatever, with no immediate recourse/close checkpoint-retry, it sends a certain personality type around the bend. Just a casual observation.

I don't really care about losing a gem or person, but all the cheap deaths in this game have seriously turned me off. And the two new mechanics I've seen so far - the hungry suit and the purple gas that takes control over your ship - are just awful. I always thought they completely nailed the ship physics in this game, and then they introduce these mechanics that just botch that up completely.

I played the original PixelJunk Shooter to relax between the multiplayer games I was playing at the time - naturally more stressful games. I loved it, one of my favorite games that year.

This one has been the complete opposite. I've beaten 4 levels so far in the 5 or 6 times I sat down to play the game, and each and every time I quit it I was frustrated. I've just now beaten another level and then uninstalled it from my hard drive just so I'm not tempted to go through with this again.

 

[conman]

I've noticed that the PJ games tend to annoy the more OCD/obsessive players (I mean that in the friendliest way possible) who like to be a bit completionist and "grind" the game, in order if possible.

Definitely true of Eden, Monsters, and Shooter 2. Like the above poster, I had to uninstall Eden to keep myself from obsessing over getting everything in the final level. By the time they added the update for continues, I'd already gotten too pissed at the game to ever go back.

But Shooter 1 is the exception (which is also why it's my favorite of the bunch). Much chiller. No controller-throwing moments. Took everything I liked about their other games (great style and brilliant mechanics), but took away the horrible frustration for us OCD gamers.

It's strange, though, that a game like Super Meat Boy doesn't have the same effect on me. I never get frustrated even though it's organized by the same obsessive design structures. It's magic, I guess.

 

[Fodder76]

Just finished this up tonight.

I loved the heck out of it, though it was not without its problems. The ending (after defeating the last boss) was very unsatisfying. I understand that if I collect all of the treasure I'll actually get an ending, but the thought of going back to get everything I've missed makes my heart cry.

I do hope with the patch that's being worked on, we are not only allowed to go into the individual segments of each level, but we are also told how many diamonds remain in each level chunk.

I was fine with not having this info on the initial playthrough, but now that I've finished it, it would save a lot of precious time. I normally wouldn't even care about getting all of this, but since its the only way I can see the real ending...

 

[OfWhiteSkinOnRedLeather]

I cannot find any fucking opponents in multiplayer. This sucks.

 

[conman]

I cannot find any fucking opponents in multiplayer. This sucks.

Judging by the low leaderboard numbers for singleplayer, it's not surprising. Seems weird to include multiplayer in a game like this when you know full well that the numbers won't be there to support a large online community. A game of this size audience, you need to put multiplayer front and center rather than as an added extra. Multiplayer was doomed out of the gates.

 

[xxracerxx]

I understand that if I collect all of the treasure I'll actually get an ending, but the thought of going back to get everything I've missed makes my heart cry.

What? I didn't get a satisfying ending and I had all the gems collected, all you get is an extra play mode in the credits (accessed through the Options menu).

To the best of my knowledge, you do not get a different ending if you have all the gems.

 

[conman]

What? I didn't get a satisfying ending and I had all the gems collected, all you get is an extra play mode in the credits (accessed through the Options menu).

To the best of my knowledge, you do not get a different ending if you have all the gems.

Wait. Seriously? If true, I can't even begin to think what they're trying to accomplish. That can't be good.

 

[Tntnnbltn]

What? I didn't get a satisfying ending and I had all the gems collected, all you get is an extra play mode in the credits (accessed through the Options menu).

To the best of my knowledge, you do not get a different ending if you have all the gems.

Uh, and the extra level in Adventure Mode...

 

[Frogfucious]

I finished up Adventure mode last night with 100%. Got all diamonds and survivors on the last level in my first go at it I've read mixed reviews in this forum but I have to say this game was extremely enjoyable for me.

Especially the multiplayer, where I've managed to reach the sun.

Spoiler

(cool little modification when you get there)

It's great when you think in advance, and trick others with moves like stopping short when being chased, or hiding around corners to dodge your seeker, only to show up behind them and take em out, it all blends together into a fun and rewarding challenge. My personal favorite move is hiding by the lava bubbles, then when your seeker creeps by, you shoot it open and cover him in lava, and he never knew you were there.

Does Q games plan on adding any additional DLC content?

Spoiler

I noticed the sun has a constant percentage of 0%.

Would love to see more planets or even a PJS3 in the near future.

Great work Q-Games.

 

[HiVision]

Thanks frogfucious, I passed your comment on to the team and it put a smile on their faces!

 

[HiVision]

There are three days left: http://playforjapan.org/2011/04/05/auction-autographed-pixeljunk-shooter-t-shirt/

We all got together and signed one of these cool ThinkGeek Shooter 2 t-shirts to put it up for auction. If you want to donate money to help Japan recover from the huge wave of destruction that hit it (it has to be seen to be believed you know... the extent is mind-blowing) then consider upping the offer on this t-shirt and then you'll get a t-shirt in return!

People had their normal daily lives destroyed in just a few minutes: http://www.google.co.jp/images?q=ja...source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1903&bih=1111

 

[colinp]

Hey kids, I'm new to the PSN and am thinking about picking up PixelJunk Shooter 1 (it sounds like I should buy that before 2, right?) and eventually 2...

My question is does the Japanese PSN version have full English support?

 

[HiVision]

Yes, the Japanese version has full english support, all the PixelJunk games do actually.

The charity t-shirt sold for over $300, great to know people out there are willing to shell out for a good cause!

 

[Strawman]

Love PJS2, especially the boss battles and the "secret" last level. Doesnt replace Eden as my favourite PJ game though, gotta love those shrimp
Thanks for posting Dylan, been really interesting reading your insights.

 

[MrPliskin]

I'm really disliking the "Eye" boss. Just seems seriously frustrating to dodge all these fluid particles that kill me =\

Edit: Oh yea,

Spoiler

killing the lava turtle was sad

 

[Atruvius]

I'm really disliking the "Eye" boss. Just seems seriously frustrating to dodge all these fluid particles that kill me =\

If you haven't beaten it yet you should try to stay at the lower left part of the boss. Just stay as far away of it as you can. That's how I beat it.

This game really needs mid-boss-checkpoints. Would cut a lot of frustration off this game.

 

[MalboroRed]

Finally going to start this game, after 100%ing the first one, hope to see more PJ games on the PS3.