Portal 2 ReviewBy Locke on May 9th, 2011
Gameplay has improved, both in fun and in creativity. In the first Portal there were many puzzles that involved quick, precise shooting. While the difficulty hasn’t dropped, these puzzles don’t rely on skill as much as they do thinking. Valve manages to incorporate many new mechanics to refresh the Portal formula of puzzle solving. The balance between exploration and testing is great as well, you never get the feeling that you are wasting time. Every step either challenges your intellect as a player, or sates your hunger for more story. I’m reminded of the story progression of Bioshock for some reason; it is the element of exploration that really tells the story. Don’t expect for these sections to skimp on the puzzles either, the game still manages to challenge you during these sections of the game. I’m truly astounded by this game. The graphics, the music, the writing…everything has been perfected, tightened and trimmed. It is truly a captivating experience. The only disappointment I can express is that I will now have to wait until Valve puts out another brilliant story for me to consume. |
See I think if we’re talking gameplay Portal had it down better than Portal 2 does.
Where you can shoot and where you can’t is clearly set out, and you can shoot a hell of a lot of places. That’s the main difference. Ever wondered why there’s no actual speed challenges except for that one achievement? Why there are no “least steps” or “least portals”? That’s because the game design is completely different, Portal gave you a room where you had to figure out how to do things via momentum and thinking puzzles, you can usually place a portal on most of the surfaces. Portal 2 on the other hand gives you a larger puzzle with many animated sequences and voice over elements but only one way to solve the puzzle.
Thinking with portals” is no longer a mind*&$%. Portal 2 is solved by going “Where is the only place I can shoot a portal to continue this interactive cutscene?”
That’s why I think I enjoyed the puzzle design for co-op more than I did for sp; co-op is designed more for a thinking mind and the scenes don’t interfere. Glados’ whining is kept in the background and doesn’t affect your playthrough at all.
Portal 2 steps forward in every other aspect, but the things that made Portal a great (potential) puzzle game are almost completely lost on the singleplayer campaign.
Yeah, flaws :D, still a brilliant game.
I fully agree with this.
@fluffypancakes
I disagree with what you see as a “flaw”. The fact that the first game had multiple solutions kind of bothered me. A puzzle with lots of solutions is a poor puzzle much like a lock that opens with all kinds of keys is a poor lock. It was kinda disappointing to see other players dink around long enough for the puzzle to be solved by chance, rather than using spatial thinking to solve the puzzles. The first game is an exploration of technology, and the second game is refinement of the technology to make a game. Compared to first game, there are far fewer “white” surfaces to use the portals on, discouraging the tinkering that is encouraged in a sand-box game, but toxic in a story-based game. Also, the first game was never about fewer steps, or speed runs, I think that’s a certain meta established by people who beat the game and wanted a way to beat the game again with a new challenge, much like Nuzlocke. To be honest, the first Portal was an experiment, a successful one, but one that covered up its length issue with re-playability substitutes like fewest steps and time. This is how game developers can get you to replay the same puzzles over and over, even if you know the solution. It’s the reason why you still play with a Rubik’s Cube with a timer despite knowing full well how to solve it.
You see, its the difference between linear gameplay and dynamic gameplay you’re referencing. With more linear game-play you’re focused on delivering an experience. With more dynamic gameplay, you’re focused on delivering a Challenge. But because the game is essentially a set of challenges anyway, it was beneficial for Valve to create a game that would benefit to the most people by delivering a ground-breaking experience for people to talk about.
If a person told you that a game was fun and had a great story, you would be more inclined to play it compared to a game you were told was challenging and fun. The game still surprised me with how portals could be used to progress through the game, despite there only being one answer. It delivered everything it set out to do; it delivered a better story, it created new ways to interact with the environment, and it lengthened the enjoyment past the experience of the first game.
Well put Locke, you said what I was thinking.
I liked the game a lot and I liked Co-Op mode the most. While I was playing it with my friend it seemed like either I was saying you shoot here and here and I’ll shoot here and here or vice versa. Basically it’s a competition to find out who can solve the puzzle the fastest, it’s like PvP lol.