Risen 2 - Preview Roundup # 2

More previews for this game has appeared. I'll quote from one of them and list the rest:

First up is RPGSite

It goes without saying that the developers of Risen 2 heard all the complaints that their first game received and quickly set to work completely overhauling each and every single issue that they could find that fans had problems with. Even the guy demoing the game for us admitted that even they thought that the "characters looked like shit" along with the animations and graphics. Instead of suffering from bland and muddy environments, the living, breathable world is bursting with vibrant colors, big bright skies, deep oceans, and and extremely lush vegetation thanks to the inclusion of tone mapping that makes everything pop. The game even includes dynamic lighting, weather, and creeping shadows.

And then others:
GameFront
GamerTagRadio
Spong
More information.

Sounds like these people only played the Console version and don't care that the pc release was a very good game (for at least the first half - then it degraded to mediocre dungeon hacking).

Originally Posted by coboney
Sounds like these people only played the Console version and don't care that the pc release was a very good game (for at least the first half - then it degraded to mediocre dungeon hacking).

I agree, to me the PC version was surprisingly good. I just felt the game was a little too short.

I'm glad that Pirahna Bytes split from JoWood to carry on making cool RPGs. I'm sure Risen 2 will be a good game.

The game even includes dynamic lighting, weather, and creeping shadows.

Why do reviewers always say stuff like this? Almost every modern RPG has this! It's not some kind of awesome new feature!

Originally Posted by spiraling69
I agree, to me the PC version was surprisingly good. I just felt the game was a little too short.

I'm glad that Pirahna Bytes split from JoWood to carry on making cool RPGs. I'm sure Risen 2 will be a good game.

Actually my issue with the game was the same that some of the other Gothics had - the ending was pretty bad. IMO Chapter 1/2 were very well done… chapter 3/4 mediocre at best. I wouldn't say it was a surprise though that it was good.

Originally Posted by spiraling69
I agree, to me the PC version was surprisingly good. I just felt the game was a little too short.

I've seen a lot of people say that, but I actually thought Risen was close to the perfect length for that type of game. To be honest, I think it would have started to drag on if it was any longer.

Originally Posted by Thaurin
Why do reviewers always say stuff like this? Almost every modern RPG has this!

Not really, you can count out any Bioware game for example, they dont have dynamic weather or even day/night cycles with its dynamic/creeping shadows..

There's Bethesda's RPG's and a few of the Piranha Bytes RPG's + maybe something more that i dont know about, that's not "almost every modern RPG".

I think Risen had a good length too, i just wish it had less dungeon crawling in the end, the exterior world could've been maybe 30% bigger and i would've enjoyed it a lot more. Excellent game though, can't wait for Risen2, i think im more hyped for this than Skyrim.

Originally Posted by vurt
i just wish it had less dungeon crawling in the end

The part I quoted out of context comes up quite often … and I find it slightly unfair. How often do we read something like "the dungeon crawling in the good old times was great, I wish more modern games offered it"? Even many Gothic fans wanted much bigger dungeons, at least as big as the final dungeon in Gothic.
Risen delivered this. PB listened to their fans and built enormous dungeons, all by hand. They were of high quality, far better than all the generated crap. And what do they get?
"It was too much!" - Really? But many vocal RPG fans claimed they wanted this. Maybe they once again didn't actually know what they really want?
"There was nothing left to do in the outside world" - Maybe, but nobody forced you to finish everything outside before you enter the mountain.

So I guess the lesson to learn is that no matter what RPG fans say, what they really want is faked dungeons they can finish within 30 minutes.

I'm the only one who liked the dungeon crawl part in Risen 1 ?

Originally Posted by HiddenX
I'm the only one who liked the dungeon crawl part in Risen 1 ?

No, actually I liked it too. It wasn't in the same league with chapter 1&2, that for sure, but it was pretty fun hacking through Saurians with the game's enjoyable and somewhat addictive ( although a bit consolized and click-fest ) combat system. I enjoyed it more than peak of some other games I played.

The dungeon quality wasn't that high, which was the problem. The dungeon environment and the puzzles started out great - but there was a severe lack of variety, and it became a chore because of that. I remember getting down into the first dungeon and thinking: "This is going to be so great" - only to get increasingly tired of samey approaches to the puzzles, and the endless wave of identical enemies.

When people are asking for more of that kind of thing, they don't mean a couple of visual environments with a small handful of repeating puzzles and enemies. The most important feature, and most alluring aspect of dungeons is…. exploration. Exploration = variety, rewards, and surprises. It's that simple.

As much as I respect and admire PB, they were never good at dungeons.

Look at the classics like Dungeon Master, Ultima Underworld, or Eye of the Beholder for how to do dungeon variety. Even the much maligned Ultima IX understood dungeons.

You need variety, rewards, and surprises…. That's it.

Originally Posted by Gorath
"It was too much!" - Really? But many vocal RPG fans claimed they wanted this. Maybe they once again didn't actually know what they really want?

And how do you know that those who "claimed they wanted this" were the same who then went with "It was too much!"?
(though going from "I want this!" to "Too much!" isnīt necessarily contradictory)

Originally Posted by Gorath
"There was nothing left to do in the outside world" - Maybe, but nobody forced you to finish everything outside before you enter the mountain.

Not maybe, thatīs exactly the major problem with Risenīs dungeons.
You may engineer your playthrough to leave some earlier content for later chapters, but that doesnīt change the fact that pretty much the only new content in the later stages are these dungeons, which for most of the players resulted in going through them one after the other.
I was really glad PB implemented them and really welcomed the puzzle elements, but they werenīt as varied to not start feeling stale after a while (same enemies, similar environments, no backstories).
I think the game would work better if most of the dungeons were accessible from the get go and there were no chapters.

Anyway, Iīm pretty sure most people had problems more with the pacing/spacing than with the dungeons themselves and from what Iīve read in one of the interviews Piranha Bytes got that.

I disagree that the dungeons were poor quality, but I agree wholeheartedly about the lack of enemy variety. To me, the problem wasn't the dungeons themselves, it was what was inside them.

A thousand Lizard Men and a few of those dinosaur creatures got old real fast. It was bad enough that all the Lizard Men had the same equipment. I'm hoping the bestiary is something PB has really worked on in terms of variety for Risen 2.

I didn't mean to say they were poor. They just didn't have enough variety in terms of environments and puzzles.

The best kind of dungeon is one that tells a story. It's the dungeon that represents an experience in itself.

Fallout 3, for instance, handles this very well.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
The best kind of dungeon is one that tells a story. It's the dungeon that represents an experience in itself.

Fallout 3, for instance, handles this very well.

I agree, FO3 did have some great buildings and underground areas in that regard. Although ironically a lot of them were very samey in terms of visuals. It was the placement of miscellaneous items (bodies, notes, etc.) that gave them a nice touch.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I agree, FO3 did have some great buildings and underground areas in that regard. Although ironically a lot of them were very samey in terms of visuals. It was the placement of miscellaneous items (bodies, notes, etc.) that gave them a nice touch.

Given the setting, I found it pretty natural with a limited variety of environments. I wouldn't say it was the placement of such things as much as it was the existence of them.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
Given the setting, I found it pretty natural with a limited variety of environments. I wouldn't say it was the placement of such things as much as it was the existence of them.

The placement makes a huge difference to me. It breaks the immersion if items, weapons, etc., are placed in a way that's too unrealistic, or just doesn't make sense.

As far as the setting goes, Risen takes place on a small volcanic island, so I found the limited variety of environments completely fitting.

I'm not a huge fan of dungeons in general, and I'm not among the ones who feel that Gothic 1-2 should've had more dungeons. I like the G1-2 recipe - a few interesting dungeons here and there, like the orc cemetery, but that's all.

Originally Posted by JDR13
The placement makes a huge difference to me. It breaks the immersion if items, weapons, etc., are placed in a way that's too unrealistic, or just doesn't make sense.

The point was that I'd rather have these items placed in an illogical way, than not have them at all.

Obviously, smart placement means a lot as well.

As far as the setting goes, Risen takes place on a small volcanic island, so I found the limited variety of environments completely fitting.

I didn't really mean fitting in the "plausible" way. I just think Fallout 3 is all about experiencing a destroyed world - and giving the player this feeling of hopelessness with all the rubble. That's why it's fitting.

It's easily explained why a volcanic island only has 1-2 underground environments, but I don't think it helps the experience at all. I think a lot more variety was called for. It certainly would have made me more keen to explore.

Originally Posted by Maylander
I'm not a huge fan of dungeons in general, and I'm not among the ones who feel that Gothic 1-2 should've had more dungeons. I like the G1-2 recipe - a few interesting dungeons here and there, like the orc cemetery, but that's all.

Didn't you just enjoy Dungeon Siege 3 a lot?