Too Human 1UP review C-

Well I guess I'll talk a little about the game since I picked it up today. I'm over 3 hours into it and really enjoying it. Sure the right analog stick combat isn't the best but it's ok and can be fun. Had the occassional awkward camera moment but only maybe twice and wasn't real horrible. Story seems pretty interesting so far. There is tons of loot which is awesome and the customisation seems like it should decent. The AI is pretty dense though and your teammates are quick to die but I haven't found it to much of a problem yet since they'll revive when you get to the next area. The graphics look good and I haven't run into any technical problems. Even though I'm still real early in the game I think this will end up being a 7.5 or 8 at least for me.Archangel3371

[QUOTE="Archangel3371"]Well I guess I'll talk a little about the game since I picked it up today. I'm over 3 hours into it and really enjoying it. Sure the right analog stick combat isn't the best but it's ok and can be fun. Had the occassional awkward camera moment but only maybe twice and wasn't real horrible. Story seems pretty interesting so far. There is tons of loot which is awesome and the customisation seems like it should decent. The AI is pretty dense though and your teammates are quick to die but I haven't found it to much of a problem yet since they'll revive when you get to the next area. The graphics look good and I haven't run into any technical problems. Even though I'm still real early in the game I think this will end up being a 7.5 or 8 at least for me.GodModeEnabled

From what I've heard the second part (out of four) is the worst one.

I'd love to see 4 player co-op added in the future but I doubt that will happen.

From what I've heard the second part (out of four) is the worst one.

I'd love to see 4 player co-op added in the future but I doubt that will happen.

inoperativeRS

I honestly don't have a problem with the elongated death sequence. You died, and what's the worst punishment possible? Not playing. If you don't want to see the death animation, then stop sucking at videogames.Oilers99

I didn't die once in the demo and it was still a piece of crap. But I do believe it's a bad idea to make the player sit through a 30 second death sequence, that's like making the player watch a loading screen after dying, it's just stupid when you're spawned basically near where you died and it should require much loading to begin with. Drop the player at a spawn point, make him play through that bit of the scenario again with enemies having all their health back should be punishment enough. Somebody obviously thought that valkyrie animation was cool and decided the player needed to watch this every single time.

I don't really get the whole "oh it's not so bad" rationale, the right stick combat is crap but it's "functional", you get loot even though the pacing of the loot drops is kind of crappy, the camera doesn't work too well but you can live with it, this was hailed as the glorious beginning of some great, epic trilogy, it's clearly not. I think one can have "fun" with just about any game if one sits down long enough with it but there are better games out there that can be much more fun than this. I'm not sure why on the 360 anyone would have nothing else to play that they would pony up 60 bucks for this game.

I honestly don't have a problem with the elongated death sequence. You died, and what's the worst punishment possible? Not playing. If you don't want to see the death animation, then stop sucking at videogames.Oilers99

Personally, I am opposed to the concept of "punishment" in video games.

If one wants to beat up GS for its bad reviews/reviewers (such as the reviews/reviewers of Bionic Commando and PJ Eden) fine and good, but every multiperson review source's reviews are inconsistent, be it Game Informer, Edge, IGN or Gamespot. Inconsistency theoretically shouldn't be there (some sort of editor should enforce uniform standards) but it always has been and probably always will be.

Also, getting caught up in a numbers game is silly. Numbers on reviews are always going to be arbitrary. Whether one is reading the review of Kung Fu Panda, Too Human or Operation Darkness its abundantly clear from the reviews themselves that the reviewers don't think much of the game they are evaluating. Arguing which game is actually worse is like arguing which pile of dog crap stinks less.

The fact that there are reviewers willing to defend Dennis Dyack's bug riddled, poorly thought out (watching a guy slide around cycling through attacks just isn't fun and the clunkiness of the menu system is high idiocy given how much time one has to spend there), unfinished game is really problematic. 'All the problems are nothing a 3 GB patch wouldn't fix, just pretend they aren't there' is an acceptable but not understandable stance for a gamer to take but its an insane stance for a reviewer to take.

CarnageHeart

When you have 1UP, Gamespot, IGN's cousin Gamespy, Eurogamer AND GAMEINFORMER (known to be soft on crappy games) giving the game 6s and even 5s, that's a CONSISTENT theme indicating that the game just isn't all that good, so I'm not sure why Kevin is all up in arms about it, he basically outlined all the problems that made the game such crap while trying to defend the game by saying how the game makes the player a badass, not sure how a game having a character who's supposed to be a badass automatically makes the game good but hey.

[QUOTE="Oilers99"]I honestly don't have a problem with the elongated death sequence. You died, and what's the worst punishment possible? Not playing. If you don't want to see the death animation, then stop sucking at videogames.UpInFlames

Personally, I am opposed to the concept of "punishment" in video games.

One would have thought making the player play Too Human would be punishment enough.

[QUOTE="Oilers99"]I honestly don't have a problem with the elongated death sequence. You died, and what's the worst punishment possible? Not playing. If you don't want to see the death animation, then stop sucking at videogames.UpInFlames

Personally, I am opposed to the concept of "punishment" in video games.

Thats why they have the "Very Easy" difficulty modes in games, for people who are "against the concept of punishment" and That's exactly why GOD invented the Wii.

:| ......... Really?

[QUOTE="UpInFlames"]

[QUOTE="Oilers99"]I honestly don't have a problem with the elongated death sequence. You died, and what's the worst punishment possible? Not playing. If you don't want to see the death animation, then stop sucking at videogames.S0lidSnake

Personally, I am opposed to the concept of "punishment" in video games.

Thats why they have the "Very Easy" difficulty modes in games, for people who are "against the concept of punishment" and That's exactly why GOD invented the Wii.

:| ......... Really?

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"][QUOTE="UpInFlames"]

[QUOTE="Oilers99"]I honestly don't have a problem with the elongated death sequence. You died, and what's the worst punishment possible? Not playing. If you don't want to see the death animation, then stop sucking at videogames.Skylock00

Personally, I am opposed to the concept of "punishment" in video games.

Thats why they have the "Very Easy" difficulty modes in games, for people who are "against the concept of punishment" and That's exactly why GOD invented the Wii.

:| ......... Really?

You have to have some consequences/punishment for sucking at a game, that's where the skill part comes in.

You have to have some consequences/punishment for sucking at a game, that's where the skill part comes in.

S0lidSnake

That's just me guessing based on what I know of UIF's feelings on things. ;)

You have to have some consequences/punishment for sucking at a game, that's where the skill part comes in.S0lidSnake

There's a difference between tough-but-fair games that reward player prowess and games that punish players for just playing the game. Design choices such as unskippable death animations are ridiculous. Punishing players and making them feel they suck will only drive people away. I think there should be rewards for people that play really good, but those who don't should never be punished. It's supposed to be entertainment, right?

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]You have to have some consequences/punishment for sucking at a game, that's where the skill part comes in.UpInFlames

There's a difference between tough games and games that punish players for just playing the game. Design choices such as unskippable death animations are ridiculous. Punishing players and making them feel they suck will only drive people away. I think there should be rewards for people that play really good, but those who don't should never be punished. It's supposed to be entertainment, right?

I knew my truthiness would prevail regarding what you meant. ;)

I knew my truthiness would prevail regarding what you meant. ;)Skylock00

:lol: You read me like an open book!

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]You have to have some consequences/punishment for sucking at a game, that's where the skill part comes in.UpInFlames

There's a difference between tough-but-fair games that reward player prowess and games that punish players for just playing the game. Design choices such as unskippable death animations are ridiculous. Punishing players and making them feel they suck will only drive people away. I think there should be rewards for people that play really good, but those who don't should never be punished. It's supposed to be entertainment, right?

"GAME OVER, YOU SUCK. NOW DELETING HARD DRIVE...0%"

I dunno, I think it could work! :P

[QUOTE="UpInFlames"]

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]You have to have some consequences/punishment for sucking at a game, that's where the skill part comes in.Teufelhuhn

There's a difference between tough-but-fair games that reward player prowess and games that punish players for just playing the game. Design choices such as unskippable death animations are ridiculous. Punishing players and making them feel they suck will only drive people away. I think there should be rewards for people that play really good, but those who don't should never be punished. It's supposed to be entertainment, right?

"GAME OVER, YOU SUCK. NOW DELETING HARD DRIVE...0%"

I dunno, I think it could work! :P

Is that you, Hideo?

:P

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]You have to have some consequences/punishment for sucking at a game, that's where the skill part comes in.UpInFlames

There's a difference between tough-but-fair games that reward player prowess and games that punish players for just playing the game. Design choices such as unskippable death animations are ridiculous. Punishing players and making them feel they suck will only drive people away. I think there should be rewards for people that play really good, but those who don't should never be punished. It's supposed to be entertainment, right?

So I take it that you're more of a theory Y type of guy then.

"GAME OVER, YOU SUCK. NOW DELETING HARD DRIVE...0%"

I dunno, I think it could work! :PTeufelhuhn

:lol:

It all began with that damn dog in Duck Hunt. Yay, I'm stupid and have two left hands. Now this is what I pay good money for!

So I take it that you're more of a theory Y type of guy then.BladesOfAthena

I had to look up what on Earth are you talking about, but yeah definitely. :wink:

[QUOTE="UpInFlames"]

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]You have to have some consequences/punishment for sucking at a game, that's where the skill part comes in.Teufelhuhn

There's a difference between tough-but-fair games that reward player prowess and games that punish players for just playing the game. Design choices such as unskippable death animations are ridiculous. Punishing players and making them feel they suck will only drive people away. I think there should be rewards for people that play really good, but those who don't should never be punished. It's supposed to be entertainment, right?

"GAME OVER, YOU SUCK. NOW DELETING HARD DRIVE...0%"

I dunno, I think it could work! :P

/thread.

:P

[QUOTE="Oilers99"]I honestly don't have a problem with the elongated death sequence. You died, and what's the worst punishment possible? Not playing. If you don't want to see the death animation, then stop sucking at videogames.EvilTaru

I didn't die once in the demo and it was still a piece of crap. But I do believe it's a bad idea to make the player sit through a 30 second death sequence, that's like making the player watch a loading screen after dying, it's just stupid when you're spawned basically near where you died and it should require much loading to begin with. Drop the player at a spawn point, make him play through that bit of the scenario again with enemies having all their health back should be punishment enough. Somebody obviously thought that valkyrie animation was cool and decided the player needed to watch this every single time.

I don't really get the whole "oh it's not so bad" rationale, the right stick combat is crap but it's "functional", you get loot even though the pacing of the loot drops is kind of crappy, the camera doesn't work too well but you can live with it, this was hailed as the glorious beginning of some great, epic trilogy, it's clearly not. I think one can have "fun" with just about any game if one sits down long enough with it but there are better games out there that can be much more fun than this. I'm not sure why on the 360 anyone would have nothing else to play that they would pony up 60 bucks for this game.

[QUOTE="Oilers99"]I honestly don't have a problem with the elongated death sequence. You died, and what's the worst punishment possible? Not playing. If you don't want to see the death animation, then stop sucking at videogames.UpInFlames

Personally, I am opposed to the concept of "punishment" in video games.

That's because you're not as awesome as me at videogames, and are jealous. :)

Well, I died a few times... but I just was letting the boss monster win. I felt sorry for him, given how little chance he had against my insane game skills. >_>

I'm not trying to defend Too Human at large, by the way. Haven't played it enough to form much of an opinion. I just personally don't have a problem giving death a dire consequence without actually forcing you to replay portions of the game.

And let's not forget Too Human is hardly the first videogame to force you to wait as punishment for death. Team Fortress 2, for instance. The period of waiting is a lot shorter, but then again, so is your life-span.

"GAME OVER, YOU SUCK. NOW DELETING HARD DRIVE...0%"

I dunno, I think it could work! :P

Teufelhuhn

Man, that brought back some harsh memories from one of Dyack's past successes, Eternal Darkness.

Gametrailers gave it a 6.5, holy smoke.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/38913.html

OUCH.

Gametrailers gave it a 6.5, holy smoke.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/38913.html

OUCH.

EvilTaru

Not a good streak at all. His challenge is seriously (and I do mean 'seriously') biting him in the ass.

If one enjoyed the demo, digs the Norse mythology, and enjoyed games like Diablo I say it's not a horrible way to spend $60.Archangel3371

This is what I've been hearing and that should mean I'll like it. I don't understand this "You can't like this game it's crap" rationale.

Gametrailers gave it a 6.5, holy smoke.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/38913.html

OUCH.

EvilTaru

"The enemies scale with the loot drops" part is all I really needed to hear to not even bother with a rental or later used pickup. Thats just poor gameplay design. Scaling needs to die a quick and painful death in gaming as a whole. I'd also have to say I agree with the consensus in here that punishment =/= challenge, the two are very different. I'm fine with being challenged. But you have to keep the player in a groove, he needs to quickly get back to, you know, playing. Resident Evil 4 did a fantastic job providing a challenge, but keeping the game flowing. Even Ninja Gaiden 2, tough as it is, implemented a checkpoint and quick saving system to keep you in the game. Getting the player back into the game as quickly as possible is just good gameplay design, the opposite is simply bad gameplay design.

Taking my money and then literally punishing me for playing your game and failing as is natural when playing a new game? No thanks, Denis. Blood Omen: LoK over the PSN as a PSone cIassic will be my next, and very likely last, Silicon Knights game purchase.

[QUOTE="Archangel3371"]If one enjoyed the demo, digs the Norse mythology, and enjoyed games like Diablo I say it's not a horrible way to spend $60.inoperativeRS

This is what I've been hearing and that should mean I'll like it. I don't understand this "You can't like this game it's crap" rationale.

It's reasonable rationale if the game is really that bad. I'm not sure it is, though it certainly could be. I'll probably rent it at some point and find out.

Team Fortress 2, for instance. The period of waiting is a lot shorter, but then again, so is your life-span.Oilers99

That really depends on your skill, the cIass you're playing and most importantly, your team.

Also, there are plenty of servers with immediate spawns so if that's your thing, go ahead. However, there is good reasoning behind respawn times. If you die, then the other team needs to feel that advantage. That advantage is somewhat nullified if you're there right away. Team Fortress 2 is all about balance and that's just one aspect of that balance. There's no reasoning behind it whatsoever in single-player games. Also, you can use the respawn time to catch a look at the different areas of the battlefield, catch a glimpse of your enemy as well as your own team's positioning so it's definitely not wasting your time as watching the same sequence over and over again.

So no, it's not even comparable.

[QUOTE="Oilers99"]Team Fortress 2, for instance. The period of waiting is a lot shorter, but then again, so is your life-span.UpInFlames

That really depends on your skill, the cIass you're playing and most importantly, your team.

Also, there are plenty of servers with immediate spawns so if that's your thing, go ahead. However, there is good reasoning behind respawn times. If you die, then the other team needs to feel that advantage. That advantage is somewhat nullified if you're there right away. Team Fortress 2 is all about balance and that's just one aspect of that balance. There's no reasoning behind it whatsoever in single-player games. Also, you can use the respawn time to catch a look at the different areas of the battlefield, catch a glimpse of your enemy as well as your own team's positioning so it's definitely not wasting your time as watching the same sequence over and over again.

So no, it's not even comparable.

Practically speaking, it wouldn't be too hard to go fifteen minutes to half an hour at a time without dying in Too Human. I don't care how skilled you are, that's not going to happen in Team Fortress 2. Your life-span varies with skill in both games, but on average, it's much shorter in Team Fortress 2.

It's comparable in the sense that if you can tolerate being punished by inactivity in one game, you can in another. Yes, Team Fortress gives you more to do while you're down, but that suits the hectic pacing. I don't think it would for Too Human.

And keep in mind that we've been losing time in single-player videogames for ages. Only it usually comes in the form of forcing the player to replay sections of the game. The benefit is the player gets right back into things right away, but the downside is that you run the risk of making the player really sick of that particular section. With the pure waiting time involved in Too Human, you're giving essentially the same penalty we've become used to, only instead of redoing something we've already done, we just have to start from where we left off. I think it's a better form of punishment. I might have shortened it by about three seconds, but then again, I might have lengthened it under a different set. And let's not forget that the whole thing is consistent with the in-game universe, which is something few death scenarios have.

However, on a more fundamental level, it's a little odd. Punishment is watching a non-interactive cut-scene, when we're supposed to eagerly play through the game to see the next scene of Baldur taken out of our hands, and interacting with other characters in a non-interactive cut-scene?

Of course, that's no uncommon sin. But alas, videogame developers have yet to discover that videogames are an interactive medium.

Yes, Team Fortress gives you more to do while you're down, but that suits the hectic pacing. I don't think it would for Too Human.

And keep in mind that we've been losing time in single-player videogames for ages. Only it usually comes in the form of forcing the player to replay sections of the game. The benefit is the player gets right back into things right away, but the downside is that you run the risk of making the player really sick of that particular section. With the pure waiting time involved in Too Human, you're giving essentially the same penalty we've become used to, only instead of redoing something we've already done, we just have to start from where we left off. I think it's a better form of punishment. I might have shortened it by about three seconds, but then again, I might have lengthened it under a different set. And let's not forget that the whole thing is consistent with the in-game universe, which is something few death scenarios have.Oilers99

I am saying that the two concepts are not comparable, not offering Team Fortress 2's system as a replacement for Too Human's.

Oh, I am very much aware that replaying setpieces has been with us since the dawn of video games. I am very much opposed to that concept as well as I find it archaic - and coupled with crap design choices such as cheap AI for example, ultimately boring and potentially frustrating (which is a serious offence, in my opinion). I hope developers will try to find new ways to make players feel the consequence of not playing well, but I think the focus should always be on rewarding good players rather than "punishing" not-so-good ones. Maybe Molyneux is on to something with Fable II.

[QUOTE="Oilers99"]Yes, Team Fortress gives you more to do while you're down, but that suits the hectic pacing. I don't think it would for Too Human.

And keep in mind that we've been losing time in single-player videogames for ages. Only it usually comes in the form of forcing the player to replay sections of the game. The benefit is the player gets right back into things right away, but the downside is that you run the risk of making the player really sick of that particular section. With the pure waiting time involved in Too Human, you're giving essentially the same penalty we've become used to, only instead of redoing something we've already done, we just have to start from where we left off. I think it's a better form of punishment. I might have shortened it by about three seconds, but then again, I might have lengthened it under a different set. And let's not forget that the whole thing is consistent with the in-game universe, which is something few death scenarios have.UpInFlames

I am saying that the two concepts are not comparable, not offering Team Fortress 2's system as a replacement for Too Human's.

Oh, I am very much aware that replaying setpieces has been with us since the dawn of video games. I am very much opposed to that concept as well as I find it archaic - and coupled with crap design choices such as cheap AI for example, ultimately boring and potentially frustrating (which is a serious offence, in my opinion). I hope developers will try to find new ways to make players feel the consequence of not playing well, but I think the focus should always be on rewarding good players rather than "punishing" not-so-good ones. Maybe Molyneux is on to something with Fable II.

Ditto they are not comparable, nor is Too Human's approach really acceptable, it wasn't when Prey made you shoot down spirit birds with arrows and it is also not now.

This discussion about penalties reminds of a section in Gears of War, where I kept dying and over and over again in the same spot. When I'd come back, they'd make go through the whole "slow walk while they talk" bit which lasted a good 30 seconds. By the 10th time I heard the Cole Train say "look at all that juice!" I wanted to reach into the game and strangle him. Teufelhuhn

Apparently you should have paid more attention to the juice.

Ditto they are not comparable, nor is Too Human's approach really acceptable, it wasn't when Prey made you shoot down spirit birds with arrows and it is also not now.HiResDes

Although at the very least, I would give Prey the props for trying out something new instead of the boring 'you died, now replay the last 15 minutes of the game' formula.

This discussion about penalties reminds of a section in Gears of War, where I kept dying and over and over again in the same spot. When I'd come back, they'd make me go through the whole "slow walk while they talk" bit which lasted a good 30 seconds. By the 10th time I heard the Cole Train say "look at all that juice!" I wanted to reach into the game and strangle him.Teufelhuhn

Yeah, I honestly don't see the rationale behind such concepts. These aren't the arcades anymore. What's the point? It's really no wonder that statistics show that the vast majority of gamers never actually finish games. At least in strategy games, RPG's and other open-world games like Grand Theft Auto you can just opt to do something else for a while and come back to that particular task some other time (or never at all), but replaying the same bit over and over again (just thinking about it causes me to have God of War platforming section flashbacks which significantly downgraded my opinion on the overall game) is just lame and in the end, a waste of my time.

This discussion about penalties reminds of a section in Gears of War, where I kept dying and over and over again in the same spot. When I'd come back, they'd make me go through the whole "slow walk while they talk" bit which lasted a good 30 seconds. By the 10th time I heard the Cole Train say "look at all that juice!" I wanted to reach into the game and strangle him. Teufelhuhn

Words can't express how much I hated that part. I was so tired looking at juice.

Too Human is a very good game. It's just fun to play. I also like the story and characters. The game has some flaws, but enough to justify a 5.5 score? I don't think so. I'm on the last level right now, and I'd give it an 8.0, knocking points for a wonking camera and projectile targeting.

I know there is a ton of controversy over this, but I would just like to say that all in all reviews don't matter, get an opinion on the game after YOU play it yourself....

From what I've gathered here on the Internet, it's a love hate game.

Too Human is a very good game. It's just fun to play. I also like the story and characters. The game has some flaws, but enough to justify a 5.5 score? I don't think so. I'm on the last level right now, and I'd give it an 8.0, knocking points for a wonking camera and projectile targeting.

BioShockOwnz

I don't know I just feel like the combat really keeps this game from being an 8 level game...Maybe its just me, but I'm so over button mashers nowadays, and I think that game developers should be over them also. Too Human's combat felt even more simple than most button mashers as the character seems to basically home in on enemies, and I don't think a comparison to geometry is at all accurate. In Too Human, you are not going to be doing the same amount of strafing and dogding as the enemy ai is pretty braindead, and neither the shooting nor the melee combat is as dead on accurate and satisfying as say a traditional shooter or a traditional brawler. I just feel like with Fable 2 and Fallout 3 right around the corner, why most time and money on mediocre games like thsi one.

I think this game is great. I'm loving it right now on my second playthrough with the same character. Now that I'm more adept with the control mechanics I think this style suits the game quit well and is quite enjoyable. You could either tap a button or two to juggle an enemy or tap the right stick a couple of times towards that particular enemy. I don't think there is any difference really aside of maybe just getting use to it.Archangel3371

The difference is with face buttons the controls are more responsive, allowing you to time your moves, thus allowing combos to have more depth. The problem with the combat is that there is no depth, collision detection isn't really there most of the time, and enemies don't always respond to being hit with the right animations and physics, it's FUNCTIONAL but just because you can play it, it doesn't make it great, I guess that depends on the kind of standard we're judging the game on.

With the whole dieing thing I actually never had a problem with it. It is actually pretty brief and takes less time then seeing a game over screen, loading up your saved game, and then heading back to wherever you were at. I like just jumping back into the fray like this and continuing the fight. There are still penalties for dieing. I guess they could have had you start an area completely over again but they certainly would have needed to change things like have fewer enemies and make them weaker. I kind like the it is now though I think. I'm also impressed that there are no loading times. Everything seems to move along quite seemlessly.

Why would it even make sense in this day and age to go to a game over screen and then having to load up a save? MANY games have checkpoints where you can respawn WITHOUT loadtimes, for a linear game like Too Human it shouldn't be much more difficult to stream the levels, not to mention when you're spawning near where you die, it makes no sense that the player has to watch the same stupid animations over and over without being able to skip it, it's not like the game needs to load anything that isn't already in memory.

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]

Too Human is a very good game. It's just fun to play. I also like the story and characters. The game has some flaws, but enough to justify a 5.5 score? I don't think so. I'm on the last level right now, and I'd give it an 8.0, knocking points for a wonking camera and projectile targeting.

HiResDes

I don't know I just feel like the combat really keeps this game from being an 8 level game...Maybe its just me, but I'm so over button mashers nowadays, and I think that game developers should be over them also. Too Human's combat felt even more simple than most button mashers as the character seems to basically home in on enemies, and I don't think a comparison to geometry is at all accurate. In Too Human, you are not going to be doing the same amount of strafing and dogding as the enemy ai is pretty braindead, and neither the shooting nor the melee combat is as dead on accurate and satisfying as say a traditional shooter or a traditional brawler. I just feel like with Fable 2 and Fallout 3 right around the corner, why most time and money on mediocre games like thsi one.

I'm actually a huge fan of the right stick analog combat. Tbh, while Fallout 3 looks exceptional in a lot of ways, it still is being turned into Oblivion with guns, which has a lot of fans up in arms. I'd take Too Human over it anyday, even though I'll still get it at launch. I'm really excited for Fable 2, so I won't say anything negative about that, except that I hope Peter Molyneux can deliver this time. If not, much like Dyack's vision didn't fully deliver on what people wanted, I'll still enjoy what Molyneux tried to do, much like the first Fable. Now, back to Too Human. I'm a huge fan of dungeon crawler hack n' slash games, which aren't known for having deep combat or very good combat, it's the sum of the parts that matter, and I see Too human much the same way. Nothing is perfect, and there are flaws present, which I pointed out already, but the game comes together to create something that feels epic and fresh, imo. I hate button mashers. I skip anything Koei makes because of that, but Too Human is so much more, and deserves more appreciation.