[djapekraljina]

Well, i am very very very disappointed. People would think that when you make great game such as Still Life (best adventure game ever), you must be really really "do not want to be profitable" company to ruin quality and glory of the original game. So typical for the sequel. But let me explain.

I bought Still Life game 3,4 years ago (maybe more) by accident. I was on vacation and I wanted to relax with my notebook (i have been working as web designer and 3d artist) so I wanted a game that could be played slowly, with one hand, no shooting or driving. After couple of minutes I was amazed! This was first time I was so excited about the game (and I am playing games since spectrum and commodore 64) that I could not stop playing. Serial killer, suspense, cinematics, great puzzles, murderers outfit (cape, mask, hat = perfect choice), everything was perfect! Graphic details, past and present time, map locations, mouse interface, various characters, and best of all: STORY! I was talking to all my friends about it!

So, what happened with all that crucial elements?

It must be "curse of sequels". I don`t know what happened but beside same names there is nothing similar between Still Life 1 and 2 (by the way, name of the game should be East Coast Killer or something like that because it has nothing in common with original game except few dull moments). I have been waiting so long for the sequel that I was prepared to pay any price (like a junky)! When I finished a game few weeks ago.... i don`t really have words to explain how I felt - best word is "insulted".

First things first:

They needed years to make a game where you have 1 place of action: house in the middle of nowhere where you are walking from A to B for a whole game trying to open 100 doors with a passwords which are, by the way, extremely unimaginative!?! After so much waiting time for the sequel, I thought that they are making the best and longest game ever made! When I saw that game is played in one place (house, i don`t count dull and stupid scenes in gallery), that was boiling point. Even the great cutscene didn`t help. Don`t you think it is better when you have a game map or at least 3,4 different locations in the game instead of running around a small house?

Spoiler:

3 killers!!?!!

They should really fire the writer. Story is predictable.

Spoiler:

After halfway through the game I was aware that killer is one of that 3 characters. But when i saw they are all killers, I began to laugh.

Seriously, what were they thinking?

Puzzles! Oh my god! Did they removed hole stuff from the first game and hired a new crew just to ruin the sequel?

What kind of testers do they have? I don't think these people are experts or somehow competent for adventure games since they gave green light for the sequel. Or they could give green light but to publish game under different name.

etc...etc...etc...(there is so much bad things I could write that would take me 3 hours, but in respect for the original game I will stop now.

Still Life 2 must be made again, from scratch.

Take a look at Still life 2 game review at gamespot.com and you wouldnt beleive what they wrote. They actually think that it`s better then 1st part. OH my god! Let me quote part of review from some guy Brett Todd (?), maybe official reviewer of the site (should be fired for spitting Still Life fans in the face):

Quote:

“Because the original Still Life came out in 2005 and remains memorable today largely for its disappointing nonending and slavish devotion to adventure game cliches, the arrival of a sequel comes as a surprise. Regardless of whether or not the original left you hungry for a sequel, Still Life 2 is actually a better game than its four-year-old predecessor. It remains a strongly traditional adventure loaded with formulaic puzzles that feel a bit clunky in this day and age, but the plot is now at least more emotionally involving and offers a real conclusion.”

Can you beleive this? He probably took money to improve game selling! There is no other explanation.

Conclusion:

Most important rule for the sequel: NEVER CHANGE THE WINNING CONCEPT! For example, Syberia 2 was a great sequel. They changed nothing and that is why they had great success.
So, when you begin to play Still Life 2 you are so excited that you are finally playing new Still Life (who is killer from the 1st part?) but during the game you are realizing that they put no effort in continuing previous story (just a few disappointing conversation scenes).

By the way, as a Still Life fan, I was so insulted with this game that I am posting my review in any adventure site I can find. That is the only way to tell companies NOT to use original game labels just for profit!

One piece of advice for future: When you prepare to make a sequel, CONSULT the fans!!! Before you start the game, do some research! That is only way to have success with a sequel (unless you have Martin Scorsese as a writer)

[orient]

Welcome, djapekraljina

I believe the review you're referring to is from GameSpot, in which Brett Todd claims that Still Life 2 is better than Still Life. But don't worry, you're not alone in disagreeing with him. In fact, I think the vast majority of adventure gamers are on your side. Still Life 2 isn't in the same league as the original and should never have been released as the official sequel.

[djapekraljina]

Originally Posted by orient

Welcome, djapekraljina

I believe the review you're referring to is from GameSpot, in which Brett Todd claims that Still Life 2 is better than Still Life. But don't worry, you're not alone in disagreeing with him. In fact, I think the vast majority of adventure gamers are on your side. Still Life 2 isn't in the same league as the original and should never have been released as the official sequel.

Thx for support! I have never wrote a review for a game but SL2 really tested my patience and tolerance so I had to do something. Otherwise, they would continue to "cheat" adventure gamers with stupid and low quality sequels.

[HansBosch]

I registered just to comment on your review, and agree with what you had to say. Like you, I stumbled on Still Life a few years ago, and was very impressed. I was not an adventure game fanatic, never really expecting to get back into that genre of gaming, but Still Life was a breath of fresh air.

I purchased Still Life 2 as soon as it came available, simply on the strength of the first game. What a fool I was.

Now, let me stop and say that I have yet to finish the game, so my comments are first impressions, and not a complete review. For all I know, the game may get better as it goes along. If so, I may not find out, simply because at this point I have zero enthusiasm to return to it.

These are my chief complaints, so far:

1.) The awful voice acting. At least one of the main characters (Paloma) has terrible, stilted line readings. The others aren't great either.

2. Bad graphics. Now, I don't expect (or need) to have great graphics in an adventure game. But at times this game looks very dated, like it came out almost 10 years ago. Add to that the absolutely ridiculous lack of widescreen support (in this day and age!) and the problems add up.

3. Locations. Or should I say, location. Playing through so far, the vast majority of the game has been in just one house. I started getting the sinking feeling from the game that I was never going to see anywhere else, and reading other comments on people who have played it seem to imply that's exactly the case. Considering Still Life had a wide range of different locations, this is a terrible choice.

4. Puzzles. They are not very puzzling. So far, most of the puzzles have been simple, or involved nothing more than clicking on random items in your inventory until you get something that works. None of it is very intuitive or clever.

5. It ain't Still Life! Or rather, the hunt for the East Coast Killer seems to have nothing to do with the mythology of the previous game, except for a few side mentions. It's like they had a completely different game (maybe it was "Saw: The Game" for all I know) under development, then stuck on the Still Life name just to boost sales. Again, this may change as the game progresses.

There's no way the people who made this game could fail to notice its flaws. I feel ripped off. They have my money, at least I can help warn other people away from it.

[djapekraljina]

HansBosch, I totally agree. And I just want to add this: I have also spent money on this game and I want to stop other adventure gamers from purchasing SL2 (do not believe some major game websites because most of their reviewers are payed to write good review and force you to buy that game). And one piece of advice: The disappointment you now feel is nothing comparing to condition in which you will be if you choose to finish the game. You must finish the game, you will not believe the way story ends! It is 1st class stupidity and I guarantee you that you will laugh out loud!

[Mikekelly]

I just Finished "Still Life 2" a few hours ago. I ran into few bugs where Vic slowed down a little and that was about it.

The game was fun - lots of puzzles to solve - for $19.95 I'm happy. The last four PC games I've bought have been $19.95 and this one was the best of the four by far.

Good news about PC adventure games - lots of good ones released at $19.95.

Bad news is - not many truely stellar ones like "Longest Journey" coming out.

So, I agree with the reviews I've seen posted - an OK game for $19.95.