This sums up my thoughts pretty much word for word.Jordi said:I have concerns, but they are not the same as the OP's. I don't think it is going to be just a cash-in. It seems to me like they are putting a lot of effort into the advertising campaign, and I really like the humor displayed in that.
Also, I really wouldn't mind if it was longer than Portal. The only thing to watch out for when you make a longer game is that it doesn't get too thinly spread.
The thing that I'm concerned about is that it seems really centered on co-op, and I will definitely be playing the game alone.
Well I didnt ever say you saw an issue with it, I was just expressing mine. Personally I really enjoyed the sometimes fast gameplay, it mixed the game up a bit and prevented it from being too...heh...slow.Woodsey said:Fair enough, but:
Like he says, there were only a couple of truly twitch-based puzzles - and in a puzzle game, thinking and logic should take precedent over how fast you can move the crosshair, which is what they're promoting. I don't really see much of an issue.
I see it as just a marketing ploy- co-op is the hot thing right now, so show off your co-op features. I've also heard they're trying to keep the single player fairly under wraps, so that could also factor into it.kurupt87 said:This sums up my thoughts pretty much word for word.Jordi said:I have concerns, but they are not the same as the OP's. I don't think it is going to be just a cash-in. It seems to me like they are putting a lot of effort into the advertising campaign, and I really like the humor displayed in that.
Also, I really wouldn't mind if it was longer than Portal. The only thing to watch out for when you make a longer game is that it doesn't get too thinly spread.
The thing that I'm concerned about is that it seems really centered on co-op, and I will definitely be playing the game alone.
By the way he describes it they're only talking about the stuff that was unfairly fast.tzimize said:Well I didnt ever say you saw an issue with it, I was just expressing mine. Personally I really enjoyed the sometimes fast gameplay, it mixed the game up a bit and prevented it from being too...heh...slow.Woodsey said:Fair enough, but:
Like he says, there were only a couple of truly twitch-based puzzles - and in a puzzle game, thinking and logic should take precedent over how fast you can move the crosshair, which is what they're promoting. I don't really see much of an issue.
It really is just another example of gameplay suffering because the game has to "fit" too many different control schemes. And, it makes me a sad panda :\
Co-op is a separate campaign anyway. And I imagine its to keep the single player story under wraps.Jordi said:The thing that I'm concerned about is that it seems really centered on co-op, and I will definitely be playing the game alone.
[NOTE: The following post is directed at the article that tzimize quoted, not tzimize. Just clearin' that up as to not incur any kind of confrontation.] I'm really surprised this is even an issue. I played the original Portal on the 360 because my PC was a bucket of crap at the time, and I didn't have much trouble with the speed needed even with the sensitivity set low. (Or however low it started at, which seemed fairly low at the time.)tzimize said:Consoles: Valve has already stated that the twitch gaming from the original will not be found anywhere. They say this is because gamers should not be disallowed to finish a game just because they are not fast enough with a mouse/gamepad, or something of the sort. This is just PR speak for: If we make the game as fast as the original only 5% if any of the console crowd will be able to finish it.
tzimize said:Consoles: Valve has already stated that the twitch gaming from the original will not be found anywhere. They say this is because gamers should not be disallowed to finish a game just because they are not fast enough with a mouse/gamepad, or something of the sort. This is just PR speak for: If we make the game as fast as the original only 5% if any of the console crowd will be able to finish it.
my concern isnt that it wont be awsome (it will be!) but more than peopel wont be satisfyed because their expectations are rediculously highANImaniac89 said:I love the original Portal, but I don't think Portal 2 is going to be as good.
In fact I think Portal 2 is going to turn out like Bio-Shock 2 being a mediocre cash in at best.
I don't think it can live up to the original. I'm afraid the humor will be forced and if it is funny it will start another annoying internet meme ("The cake is a lie" is fucking annoying and everyone knows it).
Another concern is about length of the game. Portal 1 was about a 2-4 hours long game which like Yahtzee said is a good length, it prevents it form outstaying its welcome. So How will making Portal longer be to its benefit?
I honestly want to know if others share my concerns. I brought my concerns up to a good friend and he struck me upside the head and told me to NEVER blaspheme against Portal again.
Edited for Spelling, I had just woken up when I first posted this, Sorry.
I agree about the focus on co-opJordi said:I have concerns, but they are not the same as the OP's. I don't think it is going to be just a cash-in. It seems to me like they are putting a lot of effort into the advertising campaign, and I really like the humor displayed in that.
Also, I really wouldn't mind if it was longer than Portal. The only thing to watch out for when you make a longer game is that it doesn't get too thinly spread.
The thing that I'm concerned about is that it seems really centered on co-op, and I will definitely be playing the game alone.