It would be pretty hard for them to mess it up to be honest. Also, the fact all the bloods been took out and its easier kind of ruins it. Depends what way you look at it really.
Most reviews are now scoring NGS2 higher than NG2. For example, 1up scored NGS2 an A- and NG2 a B-, Eurogamer gave Sigma 2 an 8 and NG2 a seven, **** code central gave Sigma 2 an 88 and NG2 a 84, etc. NGS2 has higher metacritic rating so far (87) compared to NG2's 81, but ng2 has more reviews. PS3 owners got the better game but got it a year later.
All I keep hearing on the review is how they've made the game easier. I'm disappointed at that.
TheLordHimself
Aye, what I've been hearing too. Easier game, less blood, more characters and different boss fights and weapons. Not saying it's a bad version, but everyone is calling it The Definitive Version, and it's not. It's just a different version, both games have their strong points and weak points. I would say they are equal.
Most reviews are now scoring NGS2 higher than NG2. For example, 1up scored NGS2 an A- and NG2 a B-, Eurogamer gave Sigma 2 an 8 and NG2 a seven, **** code central gave Sigma 2 an 88 and NG2 a 84, etc. NGS2 has higher metacritic rating so far (87) compared to NG2's 81, but ng2 has more reviews. PS3 owners got the better game but got it a year later.
jyoung312
Makes you wonder what's happening over at IGN. They seem to be slipping lately.
It's definitely worth playing for PS3 fans. I loved the original, so if you've missed out do yourself a favor and pick this one up. NGS2 has better graphics, better framerate (NG2 was 60fps until one or two parts), and a little added content. NG2 is just more difficult and a lot more gory.
The initial difficulty settings are easier but the added difficulty level is the equivalent of the hardest in the original and the lack of fountains of blood shouldn't turn you off to the game if it does your not a gamer just a sociopath.
Most reviews are now scoring NGS2 higher than NG2. For example, 1up scored NGS2 an A- and NG2 a B-, Eurogamer gave Sigma 2 an 8 and NG2 a seven, **** code central gave Sigma 2 an 88 and NG2 a 84, etc. NGS2 has higher metacritic rating so far (87) compared to NG2's 81, but ng2 has more reviews. PS3 owners got the better game but got it a year later.
Delsage
Makes you wonder what's happening over at IGN. They seem to be slipping lately.
IGN marked down the score only because it was not bloody and gory as the orignal NG 2. It was dumb to do so as the game still does feature blood.
Most reviews are now scoring NGS2 higher than NG2. For example, 1up scored NGS2 an A- and NG2 a B-, Eurogamer gave Sigma 2 an 8 and NG2 a seven, **** code central gave Sigma 2 an 88 and NG2 a 84, etc. NGS2 has higher metacritic rating so far (87) compared to NG2's 81, but ng2 has more reviews. PS3 owners got the better game but got it a year later.
Ninten007
Makes you wonder what's happening over at IGN. They seem to be slipping lately.
IGN marked down the score only because it was not bloody and gory as the orignal NG 2. It was dumb to do so as the game still does feature blood.
different reviewer too. In graphics department they compared it to Uncharted 2 and marked it down instead of comparing to NG2 bc Sigma 2 looks better (better textures, higher resolution, better framerate, less screen tearing)
Log in to comment