Is this game as bad as XIII was?

#1CRtwentyPosted 1/22/2013 9:37:06 PM
Question in topic title. I managed to force myself to beat XIII but damned if I'm ever going to play anything remotely similar to it.
---
"I just came out of a PIE, you swooning harpy! That is totally bat-**** insane!" - Mehrunes Dagon
#2HikewnePosted 1/22/2013 10:22:42 PM
Well, it's not as linear, but the story is one jumbled up mess and the ending was left open so they could release the rest through DLC.
---
No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.
#3YusunnephoPosted 1/22/2013 10:49:55 PM
Depends on what you hated about XIII.

There's a lot more humour, this one actually feels like a game instead of an interactive movie, and I'm thoroughly enjoying the simpler Preemptive Strike system.

On the other hand, it's disconcerting that enemies that would be flattening me badly in XIII are so slow and broadcast their attacks so far in advance that there's barely any challenge. The only reason to fight efficiently/level up is to decrease how long a battle takes, thereby maintaining your sanity levels, IMO, unlike XIII, where a button mispress could be devastating.
#4M13CPosted 1/22/2013 11:05:06 PM
i thought it improved on dam near everything. more customization, more side-quest crap. characters arent whining half the time about being cursed so they are more likeable.

it is hella easier though. i ended up not using a big chunk of my crystarium points just because i wasn't having any trouble with the enemies and would only dump my points in when i start having trouble.

story gets a little confusing but its ez to see the overall direction.
#5xnoelzPosted 1/23/2013 12:19:56 AM
I liked both games but XIII-2 is better
---
Loading Signature...
#6MoonlightJustPosted 1/23/2013 12:37:34 AM
Yes and no. Overall XIII had a better, more comprehensive story. XIII-2 has more fun gameplay overall, and at least gives you a central, main villain to hate. He's terrible, a cut and paste definition of fanfiction villain sue, but at least he gets more screen time then the villains of XIII.

Overall? I'd say its more enjoyable if you are just interested in gameplay, and less if you are interested in story.
#7GenocideHeartPosted 1/23/2013 8:05:49 AM
MoonlightJust posted...
Yes and no. Overall XIII had a better, more comprehensive story. XIII-2 has more fun gameplay overall, and at least gives you a central, main villain to hate. He's terrible, a cut and paste definition of fanfiction villain sue, but at least he gets more screen time then the villains of XIII.

Overall? I'd say its more enjoyable if you are just interested in gameplay, and less if you are interested in story.


I wouldn't call Caius a mary sue. Or a villain, for that matter. He's an antagonist, but not really villainous.

Etro, now... if you had any respect for her this game will make you lose it.
---
**PS3 ID: GenocideHeart - Vita ID: VR-Jaguarandi**
"You forgot to buy Warp Wire, didn't you?" --Nevius
#8lightdragoon88Posted 1/23/2013 12:11:07 PM
Yusunnepho posted...


On the other hand, it's disconcerting that enemies that would be flattening me badly in XIII are so slow and broadcast their attacks so far in advance that there's barely any challenge. The only reason to fight efficiently/level up is to decrease how long a battle takes, thereby maintaining your sanity levels, IMO, unlike XIII, where a button mispress could be devastating.



The DLC enemies like Gilgamesh give a challenge though.
---
LIFE IS A BEAUTY HOWL!
#9YusunnephoPosted 1/23/2013 1:15:52 PM
lightdragoon88 posted...
The DLC enemies like Gilgamesh give a challenge though.


Oh yes, I enjoyed the DLC battles. Not complaining about them, aside for the fact that I didn't like having to pay extra just for a fight, but eh. I did it anyway.

I'm more comparing in-game boss fights. It makes sense to an extent, that they had to be ramped down in difficulty because of the decreased linearity, meaning that depending on the path the player took through the story, they could be arriving at the boss fights at wildly different levels. But if you're a completionist like me who likes to do every single sidequest available as soon as they become available, this can make the bosses a bit boring.

I'm also not a fan of Lightning's shift in attitude towards authority and such.

I like the game otherwise, though! The paradox endings were pretty cool, and occasionally hilarious on the wtf-is-this-crack level. Despite the short story, there was a good amount of endgame content to keep me going, speaking as someone who obsesses during Pokemon games.
#10lightdragoon88Posted 1/23/2013 1:19:43 PM
Yusunnepho posted...
lightdragoon88 posted...
The DLC enemies like Gilgamesh give a challenge though.


Oh yes, I enjoyed the DLC battles. Not complaining about them, aside for the fact that I didn't like having to pay extra just for a fight, but eh. I did it anyway.

I'm more comparing in-game boss fights. It makes sense to an extent, that they had to be ramped down in difficulty because of the decreased linearity, meaning that depending on the path the player took through the story, they could be arriving at the boss fights at wildly different levels. But if you're a completionist like me who likes to do every single sidequest available as soon as they become available, this can make the bosses a bit boring.

I'm also not a fan of Lightning's shift in attitude towards authority and such.

I like the game otherwise, though! The paradox endings were pretty cool, and occasionally hilarious on the wtf-is-this-crack level. Despite the short story, there was a good amount of endgame content to keep me going, speaking as someone who obsesses during Pokemon games.



I do agree with the in game battles being way to easy, but those DLC battles were worth the price IMO.
---
LIFE IS A BEAUTY HOWL!