Risen 2 - First Reviews

Originally Posted by crpgnut
Sounds like a pretty short game for the money. To me, Gothic 3 was a step in the right direction. It was flawed, but felt more like a real place than the previous games. 30 hours is too short.

No 30 hour is the norm now. Don't you know the motto of today is don't waste my time. 40 hour games are a thing of the past man.

Just for reference read this article titled -Opinion: Don’t Waste My Time

Link-http://greywardens.com/2012/04/opini…waste-my-time/

Originally Posted by vurt
http://www.rpgfan.com/reviews/Risen_…ers/index.html

58%

I could only take the first 3 paragraphs, and skipped to the end. Bad writing, completely unconvincing, and annoying writing style (bloated, pretentious, overwrought, and facts/word ratio as close to zero as possible).

Risen 2 won't be 30 hours for the completionist types. I usually get at least 10 hours more than the average estimate for games like this.

Originally Posted by HiddenX
http://www.zeitgeistgamereview.com/r…waters-review/

Best review I've seen so far. I highly recommend watching it.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Best review I've seen so far. I highly recommend watching it.

Watched it, and the reviewer is pretty convincing. In fact the game is pretty convincing.
You're not consoles' acrobat to endlessly roll all over the place without getting dizzy? Finally! Now I really can't wait to play it.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Risen 2 won't be 30 hours for the completionist types. I usually get at least 10 hours more than the average estimate for games like this.

My run was fairly completionist, I'd say it topped at about 35 hours. 40 hours including the Pirate Isle, if their claims on it being five hours are accurate.

Originally Posted by Brother None
… including the Pirate Isle, if their claims on it being five hours are accurate.

There are some reports (from the German mags) that the pirate isle is actually only 90 minutes or so

Originally Posted by TheMadGamer
This is an interesting criticism IGN delivers to Risen but is nowhere to be found in their review of Arcania

Because they were reviewed by 2 different people. The guy who reviewed Arcania may not be familiar with the Gothic games.

I'm not very surprised to hear that it's not extremely long. People are seriously overestimating Gothic and Risen due to nostalgia. I replay them quite frequently, and Gothic is a 20 hour game, while Risen is probably in the 30 hour range. Yes, they're that small. Of course, they take quite a bit longer when exploring everything for the first time, but I still doubt they take longer to complete than Risen 2.

Gothic 2 and 3 are different though, especially the latter, as it's a 100 hour game.

Originally Posted by Maylander
People are seriously overestimating Gothic and Risen due to nostalgia. I replay them quite frequently, and Gothic is a 20 hour game, while Risen is probably in the 30 hour range. Yes, they're that small. Of course, they take quite a bit longer when exploring everything for the first time, but I still doubt they take longer to complete than Risen 2.

I disagree. I think you're understating the difference between a first playthrough and subsequent replays.

I probably spent at least 40 hours on Gothic, and I think I finished Risen in about 45. They're going to be *much* shorter after you already know where everything is and what you need to do.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/risen-2-dark-waters

Well, 75% really isn't bad at all for a PB game, especially seeing how there seems to be a North America/Europe divide among reviewers when it comes to Gothic and, to some degree, Risen. For comparison, Gothic I hold an average of 81, Gothic II sits at 79, Gothic III has a 63 and Risen hold a 77.


BTW, as one of the people who absolutely loved Gothic 3 and was surprised to find the hate against it, I think it's mind-blowing that Gothic III and Arcania had the same score on Metacritic.

Originally Posted by himmy
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/risen-2-dark-waters

Well, 75% really isn't bad at all for a PB game, especially seeing how there seems to be a North America/Europe divide among reviewers when it comes to Gothic and, to some degree, Risen. For comparison, Gothic I hold an average of 81, Gothic II sits at 79, Gothic III has a 63 and Risen hold a 77.


BTW, as one of the people who absolutely loved Gothic 3 and was surprised to find the hate against it, I think it's mind-blowing that Gothic III and Arcania had the same score on Metacritic.

I don't think the divide is entirely along geographical lines - most of the NA reviewers I actually look at (and including IGN which I tend to dismiss) gave Risen, and Gothic I & II reviews that were decently above the average scores for those games. These games do tend to produce a split amongst reviewers though each time they come out - though seeing as a lot of the reviewers who liked Risen and Gothic are also split on Risen 2 I'm not sure if it can even be chalked up to some broad mindset among the reviewers. I think PB games just tend to have things that hit a raw nerve with some reviewers and other things which some reviewers end up being really enthusiastic about and the split seems more likely to be more about personal preferences.

Also - many of the publications which have been harshest on past PB games have also been European rather than North American - Italian and Spanish publications for instance.

I've just finished reading Brother None's lengthy and detailed review over at GB and it confirms my earlier opinions. This is the first PB game I won't be buying!!

Originally Posted by HiddenX
http://www.zeitgeistgamereview.com/r…waters-review/

Thanks for posting this. I've watched a few of his reviews before and felt he was a fair reviewer in the past. He had a few complaints, mainly regarding combat, but the game itself sounds pretty solid.

EDIT: Also just read Brother None's review. The game sounds decent, but it doesn't sound like anything outstanding. I'd planned on picking it up during a (possibly summer) sale anyway, so it should be worth the price I eventually pay for it.

Originally Posted by Corwin
I've just finished reading Brother None's lengthy and detailed review over at GB and it confirms my earlier opinions. This is the first PB game I won't be buying!!

Just read it too. You sure you don't want this game:
"The language is salty and strewn with vulgarities, if not outright offensive in the various racist and sexist expressions in language and situation. This lack of niceties fits the setting perfectly well, but it's not made for the politically correct-minded."

C'mon, ain't we had enough of politically correct romantic-wannabee-soap-operas?

Good job Brother None, the most thorough review so far, if not the best one out there.

Just me or it's getting worse scores than Risen 1?

@Corwin Ah, that's an informative review. Followers are in. But no factions to join. Also voodoo magic seems underwhelming…

I hope there are puzzles to solve, like transforming into a snail to get into small areas.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I disagree. I think you're understating the difference between a first playthrough and subsequent replays.

I probably spent at least 40 hours on Gothic, and I think I finished Risen in about 45. They're going to be *much* shorter after you already know where everything is and what you need to do.

+1
Actually my 4th replay of G1 a few months ago took me about 45. Sure I can finish it in say 25 hours If I really tried but why would I (as in where is the fun in that) ?

Risen, much as I love it is just not fun enough after chapter 3 due to the game's generally limited scope (and I guess as an effect of the first round of the then still mild streamlining)… So the game is probably a 50 hour for me as a whole but I got around 30-40 out of my subsequent 2 replays.

Gothic 2 I easily get 60-75 on every replay and 85-95 on every Gothic 3 replay.

Having somewhat seriously compromised (open world)exploration it seems(*), which was my main remaining draw to this game, I wonder how much time I am going to get out of this one…

(*my main fear from the beta that came true it seems, as most of the other negatives were already apparent but I was ready to overlook them)

35 hours for this sort of game (semi semi open world ? ) is way too short. full stop.

Originally Posted by joxer
Just read it too. You sure you don't want this game:
"The language is salty and strewn with vulgarities, if not outright offensive in the various racist and sexist expressions in language and situation. This lack of niceties fits the setting perfectly well, but it's not made for the politically correct-minded."

C'mon, ain't we had enough of politically correct romantic-wannabee-soap-operas?

Good job Brother None, the most thorough review so far, if not the best one out there.

Actually, I'm never politically correct!! That wasn't really the issue for me. Aside from not being a huge Pirate fan (though I loved Monkey Island) it's the totally underwhelming use of magic which is a turn off for me. I don't enjoy shooters and I rarely buy rpg's which don't have magic as a major component. Fallout, for example, was one of the few non-magic rpg's that I like and from BN's review, R2 is not in its class!!

What, 30-40 hours?

They said the game was 50% bigger than Risen - and I got 30-40 hours out of Risen.

This keeps getting worse

The average score at Metacritic is currently at 74%, which usually means that it's a half-decent game. So nothing too bad, especially if you like Piranha Bytes/Gothc/Risen. Not to worry.