That part always makes me chuckle with the fat turret, and the freakin' HUGE one in the background. Godzilla turret.Megacherv said:
Poll: Did Portal 2 surpass it's predecessor?
- Thread starter GrizzlerBorno
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Portal 2 wasn't more of the same, it wasn't better than Portal 1 either.GrizzlerBorno said:
Portal 1 was slow building and intense.
Portal 2 was fucking hilarious.
Portal 3 took the humor from Portal and expanded on that without relying on plot twists and big reveals.
Portal is still a superior game but Portal 2 is very good.
I loved Portal 2. Absolutely loved it. I loved the characters, every single bloomin' one of them (also, I want to marry Stephen Merchant after that performance), I loved the humour (absolutely spot on), gameplay was brilliant, the tests were thought-provoking, I liked the new mechanics a lot, the diversity between testing and... other parts (I won't spoil here) and it surpassed every expectation I had.
But I also love Portal to bits, too. I love GLaDOS, I loved the chambers, I loved the song, ending battle and overall theme.
Therefore, I don't think I like one better than the other. I think they're both amazing and it's some of the best gaming time I've ever ploughed into a couple of games.
But I also love Portal to bits, too. I love GLaDOS, I loved the chambers, I loved the song, ending battle and overall theme.
Therefore, I don't think I like one better than the other. I think they're both amazing and it's some of the best gaming time I've ever ploughed into a couple of games.
Wow, I'm really surprise by how much in the minority I am.
I throughly enjoyed Portal 2, no doubt about it, but it doesn't surpass the original game in my opinion. The brilliance of Portal was directly tied to the unexpected, many people thought they were going to start up a simple puzzle game with a cool mechanic and the joy came from the surprise of the setting. Portal 2 just doesn't have that. It shows you new things and they are interesting in their own right, but they just don't live up to that slow build of mystery and discovery that the first game had.
Oh, and the puzzles were disappointingly easy. Puzzle difficulty is really subjective, but nothing in Portal 2 challenged me for more than a few minutes and everything felt like you were apply 'adventure game logic' until you found the developer's solution. I remember quiting out of Portal a few times because I just couldn't figure out a puzzle after so many attempts only to suddenly have it all come together the next time in a moment of epiphany.
I throughly enjoyed Portal 2, no doubt about it, but it doesn't surpass the original game in my opinion. The brilliance of Portal was directly tied to the unexpected, many people thought they were going to start up a simple puzzle game with a cool mechanic and the joy came from the surprise of the setting. Portal 2 just doesn't have that. It shows you new things and they are interesting in their own right, but they just don't live up to that slow build of mystery and discovery that the first game had.
Oh, and the puzzles were disappointingly easy. Puzzle difficulty is really subjective, but nothing in Portal 2 challenged me for more than a few minutes and everything felt like you were apply 'adventure game logic' until you found the developer's solution. I remember quiting out of Portal a few times because I just couldn't figure out a puzzle after so many attempts only to suddenly have it all come together the next time in a moment of epiphany.
Better, more developed levels and gameplay
Better character development
Better story
Better environments
Better music
Better re-playability (co-op mode)
Yeah. Its better is every way.
also, "Chapter 6: The Fall" may be one of the greatest gaming turnarounds in history, right next to Ravenholm in Half-Life 2.
Better character development
Better story
Better environments
Better music
Better re-playability (co-op mode)
Yeah. Its better is every way.
also, "Chapter 6: The Fall" may be one of the greatest gaming turnarounds in history, right next to Ravenholm in Half-Life 2.
I had to put in 'Other'. Personally, I think Portal 1 and 2 had entirely different approaches, and I wouldn't judge them on a common ground.GrizzlerBorno said:
Portal had a surreal feel to it - the exaggerated buttons, experimenting for the sake of experimenting, the absolute apathy of your and the whole place's context to the outside world, etc. Portal 2 changed that by fleshing out Aperture Science, providing a history to it, making it relevant to the outside world (its connection to Idaho, for example), etc. And while Russ Pitts said it weighed it down, I loved the new direction taken and I think Valve made it work rather nicely (remember how they showed the history of Aperture through the change in environment design as you proceeded through the different lab sections at different timelines in 'The Fall'?). Portal 2 simply isn't a slightly prettier and longer version of Portal 1. It's more than that.
As for mechanics, once again I feel the devs had different challenges. Portal 1's challenge was to implement new ideas and make them accessible. Portal 2's was to complement those with more new ideas (hard light, gels, etc) without making the increase in the number of mechanisms feel perplexing. And they succeeded.
Portal 1 would've been ruined if it was longer. But Portal 2 doesn't feel that way. Simply because, in my opinion, they took different approaches.
Hey, we live in a world where people think 7/10 is a bad score.TheRealCJ said:
Jesus Christ. No I didn't. Why are you so thick?!GrizzlerBorno said:
What I am telling you are my personal emotions and feelings regarding the two games, not a bloody "good/bad" score rating based on what the games are.
I thought Portal 2's advertising campaign was funny, insightful, and effective. I thought the game was fantastic (how many bloody times do I have to say it?!) Being heavily advertised isn't a point against it. Neither is me going into it knowing what to expect.
And I'm not even giving points in the first place. I think arbitrary scores to determine if something is "god" or "bad" is stupid and pointless.
I'm not deducting points from Portal 2 based on "originality", nor am I giving them to Portal for the same. At the end of the day, this is how I felt about the games the first time I played them through. And as such, the first Portal game had a "Wow" factor that I have only experienced once before: When I first played Spyro on my first Playstation at age 8.
Portal 2 was, again, a Bloody great game, in many ways I do think it's a better game than Portal, gameplay- and writing-wise. But what it is is a perfect game that has been polished to a mirror shine. As such, It will never be able to make me feel as giddy playing it as the first Portal did.
But why am I even bothering? You formed your opinion of me as soon as you sarcastically asked "have you even gotten portal two? did you turn your sound off while playing it? did you skip half the game?". Nothing I could say could make you decide I'm not an idiot with no idea of what I'm talking about. Because apparently I'm a professional game reviewer, as opposed to someone unimportant. who has a opinion.
Uhh.... I didn't say that. Someone else said that. You should go back and check.TheRealCJ said:
Other than that. It seems that I had misjudged you're position on the game from what you wrote in your first post. And for that I apologize. I also Apologize for frustrating you. Know that I thank you for contributing in the thread. You're position is clear to me now, so, again, Sorry if I was intrusive. I just wanted a detailed view, which you provided, Thanks.
I'm going to go ahead and agree with Raiyan 1.0. I wouldn't say portal 2 was a better game, it didn't smack me out of left field when i played it like the first one did, however its the small details that really sell this game, its really easy to tell a phenomenal amount of thought and effort went into making it.
i started off thinking it was going to be predictable, new puzzles to solve, new environments, oh and they gave me a stupid, annoying guide. great. but then after a half hour of playing i found myself caring about the characters, which no other game thus far has managed to do. the puzzles were brilliant, the atmosphere was amazing, the story was something i would never have guessed at.
in short, portal 2 was an amazing squeal, they took the original idea, expanded on it, then refined every detail to a mirror shine. if there's any company more deserving of my money, i cannot think of a greater one than valve.
i started off thinking it was going to be predictable, new puzzles to solve, new environments, oh and they gave me a stupid, annoying guide. great. but then after a half hour of playing i found myself caring about the characters, which no other game thus far has managed to do. the puzzles were brilliant, the atmosphere was amazing, the story was something i would never have guessed at.
in short, portal 2 was an amazing squeal, they took the original idea, expanded on it, then refined every detail to a mirror shine. if there's any company more deserving of my money, i cannot think of a greater one than valve.
For the most part yes. It was longer, funnier (apart from the end song that one still goes to portal 1), had more characters, looked better, had better environments (most of portal 1 was just in corridors. It?s nice to see some levels on a grander scale) and had more tools for you to play with. It also managed to keep fresh, didn't just reskin portal 1 puzzles (apart from the begining but that was to show you how everthing works) and didn't just make you feel like you were replaying 1. That was one of my biggest concerns before playing.
It wasn?t very hard but I have yet to play co op which is supposedly harder. Hoping one of my friends will buy portal 2. I really wish it had challenge rooms. That was where the difficulty was with portal 1. It also felt more restricted that portal 1 despite the additions of things like conversion gel. There was only ever one way to complete a puzzle and often only portal surfaces where you actually need to use them. I know portal 1 was pretty dam linear too, I think there was only one puzzle with a alternate answer but for some reason I just have the impression it was less restricted. I don't know why.
It wasn?t very hard but I have yet to play co op which is supposedly harder. Hoping one of my friends will buy portal 2. I really wish it had challenge rooms. That was where the difficulty was with portal 1. It also felt more restricted that portal 1 despite the additions of things like conversion gel. There was only ever one way to complete a puzzle and often only portal surfaces where you actually need to use them. I know portal 1 was pretty dam linear too, I think there was only one puzzle with a alternate answer but for some reason I just have the impression it was less restricted. I don't know why.
