So I rented portal 2 the other day...

[Dingo John]

I don't remember brown at all.. i mean, yeah there were some rather brown segments in the lower sections of Aperture, but I don't remeber brown being dominant at all.

Besides they have taken the game a step further in all manners since the first game. Every aspect of the game has gotten a new feature or perspective. At least that's how I look at it, a lot of new game functions were introduced, the game was longer, there was more story, more character and there was a spectacular ending !

I think that defines the game as an improvement or further development of the first Portal, no matter how little you liked either of the games. It's not really a discussion you can take, it's an objective fact that the game is a full sequel, and not just an expansion pack or DLC, comsidering the changes and the scale of the game.

BTW yeah, I really liked both games, but I don't consider myself a hype-controlled fanboy.

 

[Fugitive Panda]

Wait, so, if you didn't like Portal, why the hell did you play the sequel? Just so you had something to whine about? I can't really take your complaints seriously when you seem to have went looking for trouble. I mean, would you listen to a hardcore JRPG player who suddenly started playing FPS's for no reason and starts complaining about the lack of metrosexuals?

 

[Hybridwolf]

Steven has a very British style of humor. I personally liked him, but I can see why some people would dislike his over the top delivery. Hell, I've only noticed now he does bank adverts and he does the exact same thing in them.

As for the rest of the review, I agree mostly. The game was overhyped, and the begining was very weak. I found the high point to be the middle though, as it was the most indepth we'll ever get into the past of aperture, and Cave Johnson was damned funny in my opinion. The end of the game however wasn't as good. Just Glados and Wheatly mouthing off at each other.

It was a good game, but I'm very glad I avoided paying full price. As a standalone game, Portal 2 just isn't worth £40, just like it's Predessor. Espically since the only other thing that came with it was a very weak co-op that only existed to show off how four portals can be used. Even the Glados dialoge felt weaker...

Off topic, I'm loving this new Captaca. It can be read clearly, and it's messages make more damn sense then the last one.

 

[Pegghead]

You didn't like it, I liked it.

What more is there that I can say?

 

[SammiYin]

Wait, so, if you didn't like Portal, why the hell did you play the sequel? Just so you had something to whine about? I can't really take your complaints seriously when you seem to have went looking for trouble. I mean, would you listen to a hardcore JRPG player who suddenly started playing FPS's for no reason and starts complaining about the lack of metrosexuals?

I didn't say I didn't like it, I did like the first Portal, all I said was that it was underwhelming, not particularly challenging or complex but still entertaining. Just overhyped.

 

[JWRosser]

The developers literally addressed every single point you made in this post, and explained why playtesters hated it when they tried it.
For example, portal 2 was supposed to be without any portal gun whatsoever. But when shown to playtesters, they basically went "have you lost your god damn mind?" and the idea was scratched. Personally, I'm with the playtesters. I mean, what's the point of calling it "portal" if it's not based around the portal mechanic anymore?

This.
If you listen to the developer commentary (which, granted, you won't do if you didn't enjoy the game and aren't interested) then you'll realise that the developers have covered all this. For example, the

The first few test chambers are copy - pasted from the first one. Ok? Well you know, if I wanted to play the first one [and a slightly less brown version], maybe you know, I would? Instead of playing through it again in a different bloody game?

This was used to show the deterioration from the first game. The developers said that replaying chambers from the first game - now ruined and worn - will show how much has changed at Aperture.

This takes me onto point two, it's not very different at all is it?

It depends really. Generally I do find the game...not easy as such, but not particularly challenging. There were one or two puzzles that stomped me for a bit, but nothing too severe. Different people find different things difficult (try saying that fast), for example one of my friends sucks at Portal...and playing with him is a chore...bless him...is kind of funny though. But then again that was on co op mode which is quite a bit trickier than single player - I recommend giving it a go (though I would suggest playing with someone who is physically in the same room, rather than online, as communication is pretty vital.

EDIT: Sorry, I read that as difficult.
When you say different, I know what you mean. I think in Portal 3, whether it's set in Aperture or not, there should be enemies, because think of all the awesome things you could do with a portal gun!

I really enjoyed the game, but I'm not going to sit here and tell you want you should and shouldn't like - you're opinion is your own blah blah blah. It's like I don't like Halo.

 

[Richardplex]

I'm going to say that the thing that put portal 2 in my top ten was not the single player, but the Co-op. Now that was amazing.

OP: although I didn't agree with everything, that was well written and wasn't tedious to read, well done.

 

[jamesworkshop]

I tend to agree, not so much with your direct points but it had a damp feeling to it that it didn't really want it's new toys to be played with, most of the new elements got kept in seperate boxes and in an effort to squeeze all the dialogue in, had far too many sections of walking down catwalks which led to tedium.

 

[ntw3001]

Hmm. Well the repeated chambers were the initial tutorial segment, and while they could have created a brand new thing with the exact same purpose, I thought it was a rather good decision to repeat the original tutorial while providing a means of direct comparison to establish how the setting has changed, as well as tie into the original game.

Yes, it does just build on basic elements introduced in Portal. When they named it 'Portal 2', it wasn't just a case of throwing a dart at a dictionary. It's a sequel to Portal.

Writing, of course, is subjective. Again, I liked it a lot.

There is one thing you didn't cover though, which I found awful: The long stretches of portal-surface-easter-egg-hunt. When there's only one possible place to put a portal, the mechanic's not exactly being used to great purpose. I guess it was just to establish the scale of the cave area without forcing the player to solve puzzles between puzzles, but it sure was annoying in places. The general scarcity of portal surfaces also meant I found a lot of chambers too leading.

 

[TheYellowCellPhone]

Congratulations, you have an opinion.

*throws confetti*

 

[Smooth Operator]

OK I know you don't see it yourself so let me point it out:
Hype of the first Portal annoyed you so you got it to find it's faults, after that the hype of Portal 2 annoyed you so you got it to find it's faults... can you maybe just maybe spot a problem in your approach?
Clearly you were annoyed by everything the game did or did not do, it offended you just by existing, how could you ever expect to have a fair crack at it?

Anyways Portal 2 was not perfect, but you did not hit a single of it's actual faults.
If you really want us to take you seriously as you trash a game you need some good points, "annoyed cuz not call a duty" doesn't quite cut it.

 

[Ickorus]

Im sorry but I disagree with pretty much all your points, it sounds like you're picking holes in things that aren't really flawed in the first place just for the sake of it. I guess it's cool to hate what is popular.

Just to clarify though:

#1 "The first chambers are copy - pasted!" - Yes, they did use the same chambers at the start, this was because the first game had good tutorial chambers already, as an added bonus they could also tell some story with the environment by showing how much it has aged and changed since the events of the first game. Very well done in my opinion, saves money and tells story.

#2 "It uses the same weapon and location!" - Are you serious? You didn't expect the sequel to Portal to use a Portal gun? The location is also fine as you only really scratch the surface of the Aperture Science facility in the first game and this one really expands on it a lot with mostly new chambers and content.

#3 "Wheatley is annoying!" - No shit, the character was written to be garrulous and stupid; no surprise that some people found him annoying.

#4 "Writing is not beautiful!" - No not really, but it is clever and humourous and I really can't fault that.

#5 "Subtitles are bad!" - I didn't use subtitles, no comment.

#6 "it's all brown!" - I found plenty of colour in it to be honest, particularly near the beginning with all the foliage, the middle section was duller in colour to show age and the final section was starkly contrasting clean colours to represent a lab environment.

Also have you ever actually played Call of Duty? Please, google it and tell me what colour dominates all the screenshots.

#7 "It's too short!" - I clocked 13 hours on the game including co-op. Longer than any modern Call of Duty games.

 

[SammiYin]

Im sorry but I disagree with pretty much all your points, it sounds like you're picking holes in things that aren't really flawed in the first place just for the sake of it. I guess it's cool to hate what is popular.

Just to clarify though:

#1 "The first chambers are copy - pasted!" - Yes, they did use the same chambers at the start, this was because the first game had good tutorial chambers already, as an added bonus they could also tell some story with the environment by showing how much it has aged and changed since the events of the first game. Very well done in my opinion, saves money and tells story.

OK this is a fair point
#2 "It uses the same weapon and location!" - Are you serious? You didn't expect the sequel to Portal to use a Portal gun? The location is also fine as you only really scratch the surface of the Aperture Science facility in the first game and this one really expands on it a lot with mostly new chambers and content.
Already covered this in a following comment. Next
#3 "Wheatley is annoying!" - No shit, the character was written to be garrulous and stupid; no surprise that some people found him annoying.
Annoying characters are you know...still annoying.
#4 "Writing is not beautiful!" - No not really, but it is clever and humourous and I really can't fault that.
This wasn't a gripe about the game more about the average fanboy description
#5 "Subtitles are bad!" - I didn't use subtitles, no comment.
Ditto
#6 "it's all brown!" - I found plenty of colour in it to be honest, particularly near the beginning with all the foliage, the middle section was duller in colour to show age and the final section was starkly contrasting clean colours to represent a lab environment.
Again not so much a problem with the game, more a blasting of people who think that all shooters are shit because they are brown, except Portal is allowed to be. I'm sorry if that went over anyone's heads
Also have you ever actually played Call of Duty? Please, google it and tell me what colour dominates all the screenshots.
Cod4 has a ship level, underground nuclear base level, last stand on a bridge, fights in mountains, and see also my point above.
#7 "It's too short!" - I clocked 13 hours on the game including co-op. Longer than any modern Call of Duty games.
I tried co op and got shouted at by someone who had done it all before, so I though screw it, I don't want to be hassled by someone else in a puzzle solving game.

Who's next? Ah yes.

OK I know you don't see it yourself so let me point it out:
Hype of the first Portal annoyed you so you got it to find it's faults, after that the hype of Portal 2 annoyed you so you got it to find it's faults... can you maybe just maybe spot a problem in your approach?
Clearly you were annoyed by everything the game did or did not do, it offended you just by existing, how could you ever expect to have a fair crack at it?

Anyways Portal 2 was not perfect, but you did not hit a single of it's actual faults.
If you really want us to take you seriously as you trash a game you need some good points, "annoyed cuz not call a duty" doesn't quite cut it.

Woohoo, blinded by fanboy rage you've clearly missed the several instances where I say that I liked both games, this whole thread was made to point out how hype is a terrible thing. But I'm sorry if you can't read through those tears.

Congratulations, you have an opinion.

*throws confetti*

And you can ignore my first sentence, and still post inane things that do nothing to advance the thread, what a special little boy you are.

 

[Binerexis]

Get abusive much?

 

[Ickorus]

Im sorry but I disagree with pretty much all your points, it sounds like you're picking holes in things that aren't really flawed in the first place just for the sake of it. I guess it's cool to hate what is popular.

Just to clarify though:

#1 "The first chambers are copy - pasted!" - Yes, they did use the same chambers at the start, this was because the first game had good tutorial chambers already, as an added bonus they could also tell some story with the environment by showing how much it has aged and changed since the events of the first game. Very well done in my opinion, saves money and tells story.

OK this is a fair point
#2 "It uses the same weapon and location!" - Are you serious? You didn't expect the sequel to Portal to use a Portal gun? The location is also fine as you only really scratch the surface of the Aperture Science facility in the first game and this one really expands on it a lot with mostly new chambers and content.
Already covered this in a following comment. Next
#3 "Wheatley is annoying!" - No shit, the character was written to be garrulous and stupid; no surprise that some people found him annoying.
Annoying characters are you know...still annoying.
#4 "Writing is not beautiful!" - No not really, but it is clever and humourous and I really can't fault that.
This wasn't a gripe about the game more about the average fanboy description
#5 "Subtitles are bad!" - I didn't use subtitles, no comment.
Ditto
#6 "it's all brown!" - I found plenty of colour in it to be honest, particularly near the beginning with all the foliage, the middle section was duller in colour to show age and the final section was starkly contrasting clean colours to represent a lab environment.
Again not so much a problem with the game, more a blasting of people who think that all shooters are shit because they are brown, except Portal is allowed to be. I'm sorry if that went over anyone's heads
Also have you ever actually played Call of Duty? Please, google it and tell me what colour dominates all the screenshots.
Cod4 has a ship level, underground nuclear base level, last stand on a bridge, fights in mountains, and see also my point above.
#7 "It's too short!" - I clocked 13 hours on the game including co-op. Longer than any modern Call of Duty games.
I tried co op and got shouted at by someone who had done it all before, so I though screw it, I don't want to be hassled by someone else in a puzzle solving game.

Who's next? Ah yes.

All fair points, i'll admit.

I love the game but it really doesn't have much replayability, the person who shouted at you is a bloody moron for playing the co-op and expecting his partner to be perfect at it, most people who finished the co-op probably haven't bothered with it since then.

 

[TheLastSamurai14]

"He trollin man"

just kidding.

Its called opinion. You didn't like the game, and you aren't forced to like the game; thats YOUR opinion that you are allowed to have. People may not agree, but bugger to them (Unless you really are a troll; then you're just plain annoying/stupid)

Just like its my opinion that i thought FFXIII was a good game, or that i don't enjoy COD games.

We have the same opinions in both of those regards. I feel really special having the FFXIII one, to be honest.

OT: Okay, you don't like the game, just like I don't like a lot of modern shooters because they all look the same to me, or I don't like a lot of Blizzard games because I never grew up with them. We all have our preferences when it comes to gaming. That is all.

 

[Wolfram23]

I waited and waited and finally bought the game as it was 50% off on Steam. $25? Not bad.

I played the entire thing start to finish on my last day of holidays.

I mostly agree with you. Basically the game was very, very samey for the first large chunk. After you get to the retro test places with the slime, then it was fun(ish) for a while.

On the whole I thought it was fairly bland and I'm glad I only paid $25 for it.

To address the script issue, I thought Wheatley was annoying too, but I think that was the point... On the other hand, I mostly liked Glados's lines, as well as Cave Johnson.

In the end, it's a good puzzle game. Probably as good as a puzzle game can be. But I'm not into puzzle games, hence waiting for a big sale to buy it

 

[Ace of Spades]

Oh wonderful, another overrated game thread. Can't say that's very interesting, but at least you had the decency to elaborate on the specifics of your dislike.

 

[neonsword13-ops]

...It was fun. That's what matters, right? It. IS. A. Game. It's suppose to be fun. (What I constantly yell at BLOPS players that rage. Oh, the joy!)