Risen 2 - First Reviews

The IGN review mentioned armor sets only being available from vendors. I couldn't find any comments on that in your review, isn't it possible to find equipment in the world or get it as quest rewards?

Originally Posted by Brother None
Taciragua is…average? Honestly each island is so different. .

Yeah, that is what I was afraid of. Segmenting the world to bite sized pieces is one of my main problems. I was hoping that there would be at least a significantly sized area that would bring something closer to the feeling of exploration freedom found in the gothics (something close to Risen1's island would have done nicely and would be closer keeping to the claims they made pre release about overall size)…

The "different islands" bit is different though from the "reused and same at a glance" other reviewers are saying and is thus very welcome.

Originally Posted by Brother None
Maracai Bay has a dozen places - at least - where you can climb up. It always has a similar approach, with ledges you can climb, which is just how it worked in the Gothics. Sometimes there's something at the top, sometimes it's very little, sometimes you have to climb to make it to hidden treasure, etc. etc.

Not really. You could climb practically everywhere in the Gothics (1-2) and Risen regardless of handplaced loot. (Being a stack of crates or a rock or a rooftop or even a waist height bridge). That is very clearly not possible in risen 2. And I believe it hampers gameplay in ways other than exploration too…

I would say the beta gave a pretty good impression of the game and confirmed many of the stuff I was hearing pre-release… The only thing I was hoping would prove wrong is map size…

Anyway, Thanks Brother None. I am pretty sure I will enjoy playing Risen 2 through at least once. Not sure I want to warmly encourage this sort of direction in the future though as I was saying

Originally Posted by TheSisko
Comparing it to Skyrim.

Yes, and I responded to your comparison.

Character building in New Vegas has a large impact on what options you have available when interacting with NPCs and objects in the world. Character building in Skyrim has an impact on what? Animations you see when you kill things and how fast they die?

There's the enchanting tree, the alchemy tree, and then there's the speech tree. The housing system is somewhat more elaborate, you can get married, you can own and ride a horse - and so on.

As I said, I think they each have their own complexities.

What? Nearly all dungeons in Skyrim are completely linear with a shortcut to the entrance at the end. Gamers might be confused if they have to chose between turning right and left.

I don't agree they're "completely linear" - and Blackreach is a good example.

Even so, they're more elaborate and detailed than they were in Oblivon. I doubt you can find a single person here to agree with you about this, but go ahead and try.

We are? I haven't noticed, honestly…could you list a few good ones? The only recent semi open world RPGs I know of that don't have massive handholding are Divinity 2 and Risen..and they hardly owe their existence to Bethesda.

Why would they need to be good?

But games like Kingdoms of Amalur, New Vegas, Two Worlds 2, Arcania, Dragon's Dogma, Dark Souls are some recent examples.

No one is saying they owe their existence to Bethesda, but rather that games like Skyrim and Oblivion are too successful to ignore as a business.

Recently, Bioware openly stated they'd taken notice of Skyrim and are planning to add some open world aspects to DA3 because of that.

So, a very big AAA developer has already admitted in public to have been influenced.

What more evidence do you want?

Also, Skyrim came out less than 6 months ago. We're not going to see plain evidence of its impact for at least a year.

Let's see if your position holds up come 2014 - shall we?

The cutting up off areas doesn't just have disadvantages, it has advantages too, particularly in resetting and setting you in a wholly new area over and over, so you get that fresh feeling of unknown lands multiple times.

Originally Posted by JonNik
Not really.

Yes really. You couldn't climb sheer cliff faces in Gothic. I very exactly remember the first abandoned mine you run into, and where you can climb some ledges to get up to an area with a scavenger and some gobbos. That mechanic hasn't changed since then, really. And there isn't actually always hand-placed loot above the points you can climb.

You can't climb buildings anymore, no. But the climbing mechanic was always developer-determined. Things were either flagged climbable or not. That hasn't changed, but there's less of it. That doesn't really impact exploration outside of cities and ruins, though. It does do a lot of unclimbable cliff faces so you have to follow a path, though.

Originally Posted by JonNik
I would say the beta gave a pretty good impression of the game

Not really. It's pretty significant that they show no high-level gameplay, or anything from when you have your ship. That was a mistake. PB games always start slowly.

The beta created significantly more badwill than this game deserves.

Ok, I read the whole thread and now I want to play Skyrim again. Thanks D'art and Sisko!

^ ^ I'm hoping whoever was the principle in charge of designing black-reach is given a big role in dungeon design on their DLC.

Originally Posted by Brother None
You can't climb buildings anymore, no. But the climbing mechanic was always developer-determined. Things were either flagged climbable or not. That hasn't changed, but there's less of it. That doesn't really impact exploration outside of cities and ruins, though. It does do a lot of unclimbable cliff faces so you have to follow a path, though.

They sure did a lot of flagging there then. I do not dispute that technically that was the way it was done. But there were so many inconsequential places I could climb like I mentioned (just finished my nth Gothic 1-3 to Risen replay a few months ago) and it made the game seem more realistic freeform and fun too (and could be used in combat or as a shortcut).. Why make something as simple as climbing a waist height piece of bridge suddenly inaccessible ?!

I don't even have to go as far back as G1-2. In Risen (a couple of weeks ago), I could i.e climb on the roof on top of Carasco's warehouse to drop to the little ledge, or on the Wall behind the Don's house, or even on a spire of rock behind the Novice's house in the starting area to shoot at Boars. Why take that bit of flavor and fun gameplay away just to replace it with a dozen static ledges that may or may not hold treasure ?

Anyways, I realize that this may not have been important to you. But there are so many of these little (and bigger) bits taken away that really high level gameplay (which I know will be better as is usual for their games) is not something that was relevant to me for a demo…

Originally Posted by jhwisner
^ ^ I'm hoping whoever was the principle in charge of designing black-reach is given a big role in dungeon design on their DLC.

Me too! What an awesome dungeon.

As far as Risen 2 goes, I need to play Risen first, but I plan on getting both games eventually. I'm not a big PB fan, but the games are acceptable. I just need to be really bored with all my faves first and then Risen will have a better chance at keeping my interest. My favorite game of the franchise was Gothic 3, which I probably played 50%. I think I quit in a desert area after meeting someone named Miles/Myles? Can't remember.

Like Corwin, I play mages. A good magic system is almost mandatory for me, with lots of shiny spells. Voodoo doesn't sound like it's very powerful, so hopefully a patch will address this.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
There's the enchanting tree, the alchemy tree, and then there's the speech tree. The housing system is somewhat more elaborate, you can get married, you can own and ride a horse - and so on.

LARPing you mean? To be honest, I hope Skyrim doesn't influences that type of "features" in other RPGs.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
I don't agree they're "completely linear" - and Blackreach is a good example.
Even so, they're more elaborate and detailed than they were in Oblivon. I doubt you can find a single person here to agree with you about this, but go ahead and try.

I think most people who played both games would agree that Skyrim's dungeons are far more linear.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
Why would they need to be good?

Because if the only influence is the creation of even more "casual" RPG's then I don't see how that is good for the genre.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
But games like Kingdoms of Amalur, New Vegas, Two Worlds 2, Arcania, Dragon's Dogma, Dark Souls are some recent examples.

New Vegas is a sequel to a Bethesda game and Dark Souls comes from a long line of similar games from the same developer. Arcania is a dumbed down Gothic.

Maybe Bethesda influenced the creation of TW and KoA, but I don't consider those games to be complex RPGs.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
No one is saying they owe their existence to Bethesda, but rather that games like Skyrim and Oblivion are too successful to ignore as a business.

And I'm arguing against your point that Bethesdas games can be used to prove that there is a mainstream acceptance for a complex open-world RPGs. Unless things like buying houses and marrying NPCs are what goes for complexity.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
Recently, Bioware openly stated they'd taken notice of Skyrim and are planning to add some open world aspects to DA3 because of that.

Bethesda RPGs have been outselling Bioware RPGs since Morrowind. Oblivion and Fallout 3 were also breaking sales record for RPGs. And nothing stops Bioware from making the most simplified and dumbed down RPG of all time and still place it in an open world.

Originally Posted by TheSisko
LARPing you mean? To be honest, I hope Skyrim doesn't influences that type of "features" in other RPGs.

I'm sure you don't, but the point is that it probably will.

I think most people who played both games would agree that Skyrim's dungeons are far more linear.

Your claim was that they were simplified, and you didn't specify that you were talking about linearity.

Frankly, I can't recall how linear the dungeons were in Oblivion in comparison to Skyrim - but they were certainly a lot simpler in terms of level variety, and unique/flavor content.

Because if the only influence is the creation of even more "casual" RPG's then I don't see how that is good for the genre.

I've never said the influence will exclusively be about added complexity - but simply more of similar designs.

New Vegas is a sequel to a Bethesda game and Dark Souls comes from a long line of similar games from the same developer. Arcania is a dumbed down Gothic.

New Vegas came about because of Fallout 3, for sure, and likely other TES games.

I think Bethesda doing Fallout 3 and the design of Fallout 3 - is a pretty obvious indicator of the TES games having a direct influence of future games in the genre.

Maybe Bethesda influenced the creation of TW and KoA, but I don't consider those games to be complex RPGs.

I didn't say games would fit your criteria for complexity - and once again, I've never claimed that we'd see more complexity exclusively. We'll just be seeing more open world games - and we've seen that added complexity sells through Skyrim.

And I'm arguing against your point that Bethesdas games can be used to prove that there is a mainstream acceptance for a complex open-world RPGs. Unless things like buying houses and marrying NPCs are what goes for complexity.

I haven't said it was proof. I'm saying it's a clear cut example of how added complexity can sell.

Yes, having ever more elaborate housing features and the addition of marriage is added complexity when the alternative is not having those features.

Bethesda RPGs have been outselling Bioware RPGs since Morrowind. Oblivion and Fallout 3 were also breaking sales record for RPGs. And nothing stops Bioware from making the most simplified and dumbed down RPG of all time and still place it in an open world.

Nor have I claimed anything would stop them. I claimed Skyrim will have an impact and that complexity can sell.

This is where I get out of the debate. It's pointless, irrelevant to the topic, and cyclical.

Have fun

Originally Posted by Brother None
… And I do feel the quest design and writing was generally better/more interesting in Risen 2…

Really? Cool - sold, then

Originally Posted by Brother None

… And I do feel the quest design and writing was generally better/more interesting in Risen 2…

Really? Cool - sold, then

Ditto for me. Although, I was sold already.

@Brother None - What difficulty level did you play on, and how challenging was it throughout?

Originally Posted by JDR13
@Brother None - What difficulty level did you play on, and how challenging was it throughout?

I pretty much always play games I review on normal when reviewing them, unless it really is too easy. But late in the game, with guns, it did get kind of easy. If you play on normal, I'd kind of recommend not taking along a follower, because that really changes the balance in a major way. The bits where you're forced into solo on normal are fairly challenging.

A lot of other reviewers found it "punishing" but I dunno, maybe I played too many Piranha Bytes games, but it didn't seem particularly challenging to me, especially not as long as you have a follower.

Thanks for the reply.. that's kind of what I expected, especially the part about the followers.

I played through Risen on hard, and it looks like I'll go that route for Risen 2 as well.

Brother None there's one thing I'm not clear from reviews… Do mobs respawn endlessly just to cover up the bad game design and force you into 40 hours of mindless grinding instead of total 5, or it's designed in a friendly way like in previous PB games where you need to set the foot on the next chapter which triggers some harder mobs to spawn, but even those once killed, they're history for good?

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
This is where I get out of the debate. It's pointless, irrelevant to the topic, and cyclical.

Have fun

I don't think it's cyclical, I just think we have very different opinions on what a "complex" RPG is.

For me, an RPG that is complex, or "not casual", should have combat that requires tactics and strategical planning, quests that offer no hand-holding and can be approached in several ways and choices that the world reacts to.

Since Skyrim has none of these things, I don't consider it to be an influence that prevents the "dumbing down" of these elements in other games.

If a publisher comes to PB and says "make it more like Skyrim", they probably don't mean that they should put in housing and marriages…or even that it should have a larger world. They'll likely just want them to make it simpler and less demanding to play - and if Risen 2 has a smaller world it's probably in part due to PB trying to fulfill the publishers demands of making it simpler without resorting to Bethesda's level of hand holding.

Seriously, if I want interesting combat tactics I stay away from modern RPGs. The last one that was "complex" was NWN 2.

Another question for Brother None - you said it ran poorly, which graphics card and processor do you have?