Hmm, I have mixed feelings about this. R2 is a very fine shooter, and the multiplayer is superb, but it's true that the weapons options are limiting in single-player. True, the level designers always put the most helpful gun in the right location, so I found myself backtracking, getting a secondary weapon, using it, going back for the original. I think MGS4 got this right, by giving you five weapon slots - enough to give you flexibility while making sure you always have enough firepower.
I'm not a huge fan of the original health meter. The problem is, in a visceral shooter game, I don't want to constantly glance down at the bottom of the screen to check my health. Again, this is something which could've been addressed by health packs.
As for the difficulty level - I'm absolutely dreadful at FPS games, though I do enjoy the good ones, so I honestly can't tell if this was harder than R1. What do other people think?
The one thing I did like about R2 was the desperation of its storyline, the sense of advancing, unalterable doom. Because what the Chimera did to humanity is basically what Portuguese, Spanish, and English colonialism did to the indigenous peoples of the Americas - it's estimated that out of a year 1500 population of 15-30 million (we don't know the exact number) maybe 3 million survived by the year 1700 or so, killed mostly by disease (they had no immunity to European illnesses). I thought it was very clever that the penultimate stage of the story opened at a particular place in America which has indisputable links with the history of slavery and colonialism in the Americas - I won't reveal the location, because it is sort of a spoiler. Most FPS games give the imperialist version of this history - brave Space Marines defending Earth colonies, etc. R2 dared to give us a taste of the price tag humanity paid to create a world-market.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
