Mafia 2

I just downloaded and played the demo on PC. And I was quite impressed about the general feel of the game, it felt like Mafia all the way. And I liked the details, like smoking, liquor, blood and naked women are there, it's for adult audience. Gameplay wasn't perfect, but definately many times better than in Mafia 1. If the story is even a decent one, the game will sell like anything for sure.

The game also run very well, even with APEX on medium with non-physx card.

How did you like it?

Is it still only available on Steam?

I tried it for a bit, but wasn't too impressed. Also, I didn't think it ran particularly well even though I have a decent setup. That said, I haven't updated drivers in a while, and I didn't mess around with settings too much.

I found the action rather basic - but not bad, really. Decent and functional. I don't like that you can shoot people in the legs several times, without them having a problem with it - for instance. On the upside, the cover system seemed quite responsive and natural - which is pretty huge, when you think about how awful it usually works in this kind of game.

It remains to be seen, but the game is supposed to be even more linear than the first one - where as I would have preferred the opposite direction. I think it's a problem that they go to these HUGE pains to create an authentic open world - and then basically "close it down" by having a rigid mission structure - and what strikes me as limited freedom to do things outside the missions.

Then again, it DOES have a superb 50s feel - and they really hit the nail on the head with the music and general city atmosphere. However, I thought the pedestrians were somewhat limited in their reactions - but I'll need more time to explore.

I'll get it for sure, because I absolutely adored the first Mafia game for its story - and I think this will be the same way. But, as for the gameplay - I'm rather "meh" so far.

Well, about linearity, unfortunately it's Linear vs. Good Story and this time I'd like to pick good story. For RPGs I might rather take the other one.

As I said, the gameplay isn't perfect but for sure much better than in Mafia 1. Cover system felt awkward at first, but then I got used to it.

Most of the performance problems comes from APEX (PhysX shit), if you turn it off I'm sure you can get +50 FPS if you computer is at least decent.

Originally Posted by Ergonpandilus
Well, about linearity, unfortunately it's Linear vs. Good Story and this time I'd like to pick good story. For RPGs I might rather take the other one.

Not necessarily, it's just that developers are rarely competent enough to combine the too

Gothic 2 is a rare example of how to pull it off, and G3 could have been even better - with a slightly different balance and non-crappy combat.

If I absolutely had to choose, then I'd go with story for Mafia 2, though - and that's why I'll be buying this regardless. I adore immersive games that take me into a plausible realm, like this game seems to be doing quite well.

As I said, the gameplay isn't perfect but for sure much better than in Mafia 1. Cover system felt awkward at first, but then I got used to it.

Hmm, I remember the gameplay being pretty damn good in Mafia. Ok, it's an old game by now - but at the time it looked fantastic and felt very good in terms of the combat.

I think Mafia 2 is a significant step down, so far, if we take into consideration the advances in technology and gameplay since the first game was released.

Most of the performance problems comes from APEX (PhysX shit), if you turn it off I'm sure you can get +50 FPS if you computer is at least decent.

Yeah, but I like physics

But I'll mess around with it.

I don't agree with the Gothic 2 example of being particular non-linear.

For one thing it isn't really sandbox at all. Even though you CAN physically go most places right off the bat, you'll be squashed like a tiny meat-bug before you can say: "Yikes, I need more levels". So the sandbox feel is not entirely real since you HAVE to complete large parts of the game in the predefined sequence if you wish to stay alive.

Secondly, the faction choices closes off the other factions which means that the developers didn't have to worry about how the quest sequence from one faction would interact with the quest sequence from another depending on which faction the player decided to go with.

With that being said, I DO agree that the way Gothic 2 implemented "perceived" non-linearity is much better than how most "true" non-linear games do it.

Regarding the original topic, I must confess that I have an absolute loathing towards anything mafia/mob/gangster related, so I'm going to stay far away from this one. (Yes, I find The Godfather to one of the most boring films I've ever seen).

Originally Posted by fatBastard()
I don't agree with the Gothic 2 example of being particular non-linear.

For one thing it isn't really sandbox at all. Even though you CAN physically go most places right off the bat, you'll be squashed like a tiny meat-bug before you can say: "Yikes, I need more levels". So the sandbox feel is not entirely real since you HAVE to complete large parts of the game in the predefined sequence if you wish to stay alive.

Nah, not really - but you're right it's not entirely "real".

You can level up pretty efficiently without doing too much of the story - and you can go explore most of the world at will. Once you're accepted into town and you choose a "profession" - you're free to evolve for a good while and this will get you through tons of areas, especially if you're clever with the system.

This, effectively, means it's sufficiently non-linear. At least to me. I'm not talking extremes, not at all. 100% non-linearity simply can't be combined with a strong narrative, at this point in the industry and with our technology. But you can get MUCH closer than Gothic 2 - true.

Secondly, the faction choices closes off the other factions which means that the developers didn't have to worry about how the quest sequence from one faction would interact with the quest sequence from another depending on which faction the player decided to go with.

With that being said, I DO agree that the way Gothic 2 implemented "perceived" non-linearity is much better than how most "true" non-linear games do it.

Well, we can agree that Gothic 2 doesn't do non-linearity like I would do it. No game has done that, really. Gothic 3 came closer, but was plagued by a plethora of bugs, and the story was rather weak - but it didn't have to be.

Still, Gothic 2 stands - to me - as probably the finest example of a mixture between strong story and non-linearity - without being perfect in any way. Another example would be Baldur's Gate, and Fallout 1-3 are also rather brilliant in this way.

Regarding the original topic, I must confess that I have an absolute loathing towards anything mafia/mob/gangster related, so I'm going to stay far away from this one. (Yes, I find The Godfather to one of the most boring films I've ever seen).

I will refrain from commenting based on my emotions, and just say: to each his own

I have a hate/love affair with the first mafia game, everything but the gameplay in it was fantastic.

To this day I usually have it installed (with a complete save) there´s something about driving those dodgery old cars to the tunes of django and al johnson that I really love escpecially at those times when I come home late with a little bit more under the vest than was really planned for

I´ve held myself clean from all hype (if there is one) but you´re early report sounds comforting and after all it´s still a polish game (I hope) and they aced mafia and the witcher

M

One thing that I hope they still have is the traffic rules/ai
This is the only game of it´s kind that I´ve played where the police starts chasing you if you are speeding or running a red ligth

Another thing I really liked is offcourse the progression through time where you can see the enviroment change and your tools (cars/guns/etc..) getting better

M

I'm a very big fan of Mafia 1 and I really liked the demo. I didn't encounter a single bug by playing it couple of times through.

It felt right from start like Mafia. And I was hugely surprised when I pick up playboy magazine from the table; it was showing fully naked woman. Not that I can't google pictures of naked women, but it added huge amount of realism to the game and made me feel that the game really is made for adults, unlike GTA for teenager.

Try the demo, you'll love it.

PS. Yes, the traffic rules are there and this time you have to pay money to refuel!

Originally Posted by mprod
I have a hate/love affair with the first mafia game, everything but the gameplay in it was fantastic.

I couldnt have said it better. Mafia was a game that I wanted to really get into, it was great tooling around in the old cars n stuff. The atmosphere was great. However, when the action kicked in, that's when the game went south for me. The timed driving sequences were infuriating, and the clunky gunplay was downright awful. Uninstalled it about a quarter of the way thru.

No interest in the sequel

I think Mafia 2 looks quite promising. I'll probably give it a try, even though I didn't think much of the first game.

As far as third-person shooters go, Max Payne 3 is the game I really want.

Originally Posted by JDR13
As far as third-person shooters go, Max Payne 3 is the game I really want.

I take that one with a huge grain of salt and I would have preferred that it didn't happen.

First, the true ending of Max Payne 2 was ok by me. Both endings considered it was an ok ending, a mysterious one that was best left for the players to decide on.

Second, the most memorable feature of the MP series to me was the presentation that I found leveled to that of an artform. MP had an amazing script, one that I actually have downloaded on my harddrive to use as reference. The universal use of methaphors blended with painted comic strips was really great.

Based on Rockstars previous games, I do not see how they are fit to continue this artform. I do not believe they have it in them. They make very different games.

Also, MP1/2 were truthfully noir games, set in cold and snowy cities. The move to a tropical climate is too much for me.

I expect MP3 to be a major insult to MP fans. If it isn't, ok, but as long as I do not expect anything else I will not get insulted.


As far as Mafia 2 goes, I have moral restraints from enjoying such games. I could get through GTA4, but games like Mafia, Godfather, Saints Row etc doesn't seem appealing to me.

Originally Posted by JemyM
First, the true ending of Max Payne 2 was ok by me. Both endings considered it was an ok ending, a mysterious one that was best left for the players to decide on.

Not sure what you mean by "mysterious", there was nothing about the ending of MP2 that would dictate not making a 3rd game.

As far as Rockstar is concerned, they had a hand in both of the previous Max Payne games. I'm not assuming that MP3 will live up to its prequels, but I'm also not going to shoot it down before I even play it. The bigger concern is that the plot isn't being written by Sam Lake, who wrote Max Payne 1&2.

Originally Posted by JDR13
As far as Rockstar is concerned, they had a hand in both of the previous Max Payne games.

I too am extremely skeptical about Rockstar being able to pull off a decent take on Max Payne 3. AFAIK Rockstar only ported the previous games to consoles and published the second game, they had nothing to do with creating them. And if the materials and concepts shown to us so far are any indication we may be in for a true trainwreck. First, rockstar are just not that good at making that kind of a game. They can create awesome asshole simulators like GTA and Bully but dark noir like Max Payne… Let's just say i have my doubts. Also, new Max (if it indeed is Max) looks like some kind of pervert. He looks nothing like Max Payne from previous titles. He basically looks like the main character from Bully grown up. Thirdly replacing the location from the previous games with the subtropical setting is just dumb. There's no other way to put it.

Originally Posted by tolknaz
I too am extremely skeptical about Rockstar being able to pull off a decent take on Max Payne 3. AFAIK Rockstar only ported the previous games to consoles and published the second game, they had nothing to do with creating them.

As I said, they had a hand in them. They've been around the franchise since the beginning, so at least they're familiar with the gameplay and general feel of the series. Of course I realize that doesn't necessarily mean MP3 is going to be good, but at least there's a chance.

Originally Posted by tolknaz
replacing the location from the previous games with the subtropical setting is just dumb. There's no other way to put it.

Sure there is. You can't expect them to just keep using the same setting for every game. The details they've released so far sound perfectly reasonable to me.

Max was booted from the New York Police Department and spent the following 12 years battling his inner demons and addictions, and at some point he moved out to the Brazilian metropolis to escape from his previous life.

Well, I really liked the atmosphere in the Max Payne games, but I never finished either one. To me, they were simply endlessly repetitive action set pieces - and despite being very short, they became boring after a couple of levels.

Same is true for Alan Wake, btw.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Sure there is. You can't expect them to just keep using the same setting for every game. The details they've released so far sound perfectly reasonable to me.

If you look at the presentation, did the story of Max Payne actually need this sequel? Does it sound like anything more than trying to capitalize on the name to boost a completely unrelated new game?

I believe Max Payne 3 will be an excellent and fun game on it's own since Rockstar tend to make really good and fun games. However, I cannot say I appreciate capitalizing on Max Payne like this, nor can I see anything Max Payne about it.

Originally Posted by JemyM
If you look at the presentation, did the story of Max Payne actually need this sequel? Does it sound like anything more than trying to capitalize on the name to boost a completely unrelated new game?

How many games have ever really needed a sequel?

And how do you figure that it's completely unrelated?

Originally Posted by JDR13
How many games have ever really needed a sequel?

Plenty of what I can think of. Baldur's Gate 1 ended with many questions and at 8th level, offering both the ability to increase the level cap and the story of the Bhaalspawn for 2 sequels.

The ending of NWN2 ruined the game for me, if it wasn't for the expansion that redeemed it.

Gothic I ended in a similar manner but was also redeemed by G2.

Final Fantasy X was another WTF ending that was fixed somewhat with FFX-2 (that felt almost like a fanservice).

There are plenty of more i can think of. In general when a game is left with many loose ends it can support a sequel.

Originally Posted by JDR13
And how is it completely unrelated?

Thinking on all the main features of Max Payne and it's story, that short description cuts every possible tie to MP1/2. It leaves the city that made up the games distinct atmosphere, it cuts Max Paynes job, it doesn't mention anything about Valkyre, Mona Sax, Paynes family or anything related to previous storylines. It pretty much makes up an excuse for throwing every possible element or angle of previous games out, just retaining the title to cash in on.