Black & White 2 Review

By John Walker Published 4 October, 2005

Disappointment in liquid form. Except, a computer game instead of liquid.

Version tested: PC

I've been God for quite a while now. It began back in the 80s, and I've been filling the role ever since. Funny thing - I'm used to it. It was special at first - I had the power to raise and lower the ground itself, change the weather, summon forth great changes to the world, and most of all, influence the lives of my subjects to my whim. Meh, that's old news now. Being God is good, yes, and I'm not trying to suggest otherwise. All I'm saying is, I'm past the point where being reminded of my abilities is enough to get me going.

The trouble is, Black & White 2 seems to think otherwise. From the moment you begin, it's unavoidably obvious that Lionhead think you're going to be wowed by the deified position they've put you in, and hope that's enough to blind you to the mediocre game beneath.

Immediately it's beautiful. Gorgeous islands are flown around, detailed to the finest blades of grass, all alive and aware of your godly presence. Sweep your cursor hand across the vegetation and it sways beneath your awesome power. Trees bow their boughs as you stroke them, vast boulders crack in half at your touch. Animals shiver sensing that their creator is amongst them, the sea ripples under your palm. You really are the god of this land. The lavish animations create a living, wonderful world into which you're tasked to impose your kingdom. If only there was five minutes to look at it without the bloody imps springing up and shouting their dreadful script at you.

Beginning at the beginning. Black & White 2 claimed it would not repeat the nightmarish obligatory tutorial of the original. And indeed, at the very beginning you are offered the opportunity to skip the basic movement instructions, should you have remembered them from before. However, if you fancy a refresher, then nothing has changed - rather than briefly explaining that right clicking the ground grabs it, and then moving the mouse pulls you in that direction, it instead forces you to sit through an agonisingly idiotic step-by-step guide, requiring that you learn not only how to move to the left, but also, wait for it, how to move to the right. Anyone who would need such ludicrously slow and patronising guidance would not have been able to manoeuvre the disc into the drive to install the game, let alone put their own trousers on.

'Black & White 2' Screenshot 1

The blessed imps, intended to vie for your bias, but only manage to convince you to act as neutrally as possible, so as to disappoint both of the buggers.

But this is skippable - stop complaining reviewing man. And indeed it is. But unfortunately the tutoring doesn't end there. It continues to explain (almost) every detail of the game in interrupting routines where the impish angel and demon appear for their oh-so hilarious bantering argument-driven explanations. (Hint to those with both their legs in one leg of their trousers - there is some irony in that sentence). Don't complete their task, and they'll shout at you until you bloody well do. Even more unfortunately, not only does the tutoring not end there, but indeed seemingly doesn't end... ever. If it really were possible to skip B&W2's tutorial, you would be immediately facing closing credits. Tutorial: The Game. Presumably intended as your 'guides', the comedyless double-act of floating imps persist in screaming instructions at you no matter how far through the proceeding you persist.

Those sporting a fully zipped and buttoned pair of trousers will have noticed the parentheses "almost" in the previous paragraph. Good work, dressed ones. It exists to ensure that you are warned about how this incessantly fussy game is not nearly as comprehensive as it might appear. Despite telling you in intricate detail how food stores are used for storing food, and that casting water miracles casts miraculous water, it entirely fails to explain vital tactical information, such as how the people of your towns are too stupid to know how to open their own town gate when ordered to leave the walled enclosures, rather relying on their father in heaven to be on door monitor duty. Indeed, the supposedly sentient inhabitants of your towns rely on you for an astonishing number of menial tasks, from giving them permission to breed when they want children, to whether they want to worship you or not. This complete lack of autonomy on their part leaves you not feeling like their god, but their babysitter.

All this negativity! All this anger! It's a Lionhead game - that's like being a Bullfrog game! You've obviously already scrolled to the bottom and seen the score, you already know it's not a complete disaster. So why so cross, Mr Grumpy? Because this is a game that should have been a 9. It could have contended for 10. Expectation doesn't mean that B&W2 gets a rougher treatment. But it does mean it's the job of the review to explain why it didn't live up to it.

'Black & White 2' Screenshot 2

Early islands are entirely guided, decisions essentially made for you, rather than allowing experimentation with early skills.

Perhaps we're rushing ahead. Black & White 2, much like the original, charges you with the job of building towns and cities on small islands, with a view to either wowing the locals so much they want to join you, or defeating them in battle to secure their towns as your own. There's a vague story to justify all this, casting you as the Greeks, attempting to form allegiances with various nations in order to win the ultimate battle with the rival Aztecs. Helping you to achieve this is your representative on earth, your Creature. Chosen from either a lion, monkey, wolf or cow, your Creature begins as a baby, and grows up throughout the course of your adventures. The original Black & White relied on the creature for its brief success - at a time when Tamagotchi was the closest you could get to raising your own digital beast, finding yourself interacting with a playful, naive and gleefully eager to please little pet was a joy. A joy made complete when you realised you could influence his behaviour by how you responded to his actions, and teach him through demonstration. In a parody of parenthood, your influence dictated the sort of personality your Creature possessed, his inclination to be good or bad, his predilection to work or play. Well, that was the idea. For a few levels it felt as though it was working, and Black & White seemed like one of the greatest games of all time. About halfway through, the lie broke down and revealed itself, your Creature's AI admitted its failure, and all but the most pointlessly determined found themselves and their Creature lapsing into Evil no matter how hard they fought to be good.

So in the last seven million years since the first game, the obvious thing to do would be to get all that stuff fixed, and release the game done proper. Which makes it an odd decision by Lionhead to choose to strip out almost all that made it interesting, and put its effort into making everything look very pretty, and implement an entirely broken combat system. There are some important improvements to the Creature. If we forget the astonishingly evocative animations it possesses (because so will you once that pleasant novelty quickly wears off), it does now appear to remember what you've told it. When he ponders eating a villager (now demonstrated through written thoughts in think bubbles above his head), and you slap him with your godly hand until he's well and truly sorry, he will think twice about doing that again. Congratulate him with attentive strokes and belly-rubs when he helps the townspeople build their homes, and he'll seek out to please you with that task in future. As nice as this sounds, it does become obvious pretty quickly that what's actually happening here is you're flicking a switch to either 'on' or 'off'. Don't want him pooing in the food store? Then slap him until that AI option is 'off'. Want him to eat innocent children? Then pat him on the head once he's filled his tummy, and the switch is set to 'on'.

'Black & White 2' Screenshot 3

And of course cutscenes interrupt frequently for more of the astonishingly badly written script.

What's far more disappointing is the complete abandoning of the (admittedly completely broken) teaching system from before. In theory, if you put your Creature on his leash and cast a few fireballs here and there, your Creature would learn from you and attempt to do the same. Now, in a hollow and emotionless design, you buy abilities for your beast from a long, long list of options with the ''tribute' you've earned through play. This is the same way you obtain new buildings for your towns - rather than unlocking new and more advanced features by playing well, you're given everything that the game has to offer from the start, so long as you possess enough tribute to purchase it. Why you want to purchase any of it is another missing feature from the endless tutorial. Certainly they tell you that you can buy them, that variety will please your peoples, and each new building or decoration comes with a description detailing how much more impressive it will make your town. But beyond that, do you actually need a rest home? Does improving the lives of the elderly make a difference to your game? Definitely not in any way that will change your experience.

Tribute is earned through completing the string of tasks silently appointed at the start of each new island. With no ceremony or connection to the story arc, a vast array of what are best described as chores, are given. These vary from the obligatory: take over the island; the vaguely interesting: build a wonder, take over three towns without force; and then in huge numbers the worryingly tedious: deforest the land, build eight fields, collect 8000 ore, make 20 breeders... To understand quite how laborious and un-game-like these are, know that creating a breeder entails picking up a person, and dropping them near another person. Collecting ore involves dropping people near the ore mine. Over and over. And over. That these challenges are so lacking in imagination is an indication of quite how limited B&W2 is. It wouldn't have been possible for Lionhead to come up with more creative tasks, because B&W2 possesses nothing to support such creativity.

The other means of gaining credit is by completing the silver-scroll tasks. These are essentially mini-games scattered about islands, available to play at any time whether you've conquered their location or not. If you played the original, think the singing sailors and their request. And if you're curling up in pain at that memory, stay there. These micro-missions are so wantonly pedestrian as to be an insult. Lionhead clearly couldn't care less about these, dumping in the most obvious and cumbersome time-fillers possible.

'Black & White 2' Screenshot 5

When your creature does something helpful, like a bit of deforestation, it can be very rewarding.

One particularly dreadful example involves catching lambs fired into the air from the apparently pneumatic vagina of a very pregnant sheep. As they come toward you, you're supposed to catch them in your hand. It turned out, clicking pretty much anywhere on the screen, at pretty much any point during their trajectory was enough to count as a catch, and no matter how many were missed, it didn't seem to care. And then after an apparently arbitrary 22 caught lambs, it told me I'd won. It's hard to imagine a less satisfactory victory.

Another is a completely broken game where you're supposed to help a kung-fu student to smash rocks with his fist. Not explaining what you're supposed to do leaves you to fumble about, waggling the mouse until you stumble upon the technique, only to discover that it seemingly only works 50 per cent of the time. Since you have to complete it three times in a row, the broken engine's statistics are against you, and against your even bothering. And anyway, in every other part of the game my powers allow me crack rocks with a mere touch. Why is that suddenly impossible now? Which is to say nothing of the mystery behind the early waterfall-clearing mini-game. There are some rocks blocking the water's flow. But you can't, for some unexplained reason, pick up them up. So you have to clear the fall by, er, picking up some rocks and throwing them at it. Idiotic beyond belief.

Talking of broken, it's time to talk about the combat. Running with the Good/Evil theme, your behaviour defines your alignment, and hence the way you play. Needlessly kill your people, and you're a mean god. Look after them well, and don't drop rocks on their houses, and you're lovely. This also extends to how you go about taking over each island. The angel imp insists that there's no need to go to war, the demon encouraging such violent behaviour enthusiastically. Create an army, and you can march them off to a neutral or enemy town, fight the locals if necessary, and then surround the central hub and take it over. This process is supposed to speed up when there are more men in your army, and when the town's defences are weaker. No evidence of this was apparent. In fact, when one platoon of 75 was reduced to a single solitary soldier by the enemy's Creature, the process continued at the same pace. Enemy platoons appear to work like those battery-driven toy cars you used to get that drove until they hit a wall, turned, and drove off in another direction. Should they stumble upon your army, they might fight it, or they might run about in confused circles. Should there happen to be something so enormously complex as a wall between your army and theirs, then they'll stand there, staring, dreaming crazy AI dreams of what must be on the other side.

'Black & White 2' Screenshot 6

Sprawling cities must be entirely laid out by you, the citizens too insecure to even build their own houses.

It doesn't get better for your own side. The game informs you, on the spinning signposts that offer titbits of bonus tutorial information in every level (which don't work either - finding their hotspot is an ordeal, then the pop-up text disappears at random while you're reading it), that remnants from battered platoons can be combined. Just drag their flag, hover it over the other platoon, and wait for the 'merge' tooltip to appear. I'm still waiting.

Enough. There's more to complain about, there's more that's broken, incomplete, or flawed. But this has to stop somewhere, and it's already run way over the upper word limit. "Why does it get 6, overly verbose reviewing man? All you've done is complain." Because, trouserless reader, as was explained at the start, these are the reasons why Black & White 2 doesn't get the high score a working version would have achieved. There's a damned fine idea for a game here, and all listed above chronicles the failure to be that game. It reduces it to mediocrity, and it's a sour failure. The way you take over cities doesn't begin to make sense, the supposed ability to capture them by good will is nonsense - you merely gain their citizens, the land remaining neutral until you 'evilly' conquer it - but you do get to capture cities. Your Creature's abilities are not borne of a loving relationship with you, but it is enormously satisfying when he starts pulling trees down to help the people build their houses, or gathers them around him to watch him dance.

Much like Sid Meier's recent reinvention of Pirates!, huge numbers of ideas have been included at the sacrifice of any of them being particularly impressive. Jack of far too many trades, apprentice at only a few. If you're going to include RTS ideas such as the armies, then the sad fact is that these features need to be as good as a straight RTS. Raising your own Creature needs to be as agile and believable as Nintendogs. Building working towns needs to compare to Sim City. Because as unfair as that seems, that's where our expectations begin when we recognise such features in a game. Can't do that? Then make a game you can. Lionhead simply wasn't able to make this one.

6 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of John.

About John Walker

Read more articles from John by visiting the John Walker archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (160) Latest comment 6 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Talha #1 6 years ago

    EG, have you thought how much sales would Lionhead lose of their new magnum opus? I mean, a 6-er is not worth buying if there are 9-ers and 8-ers floating about, is it?

    Reading the review, the score should have been 4, since the game is apparently badly broken in so many places. And I hope you were making up that sheep minigame - please, please say so!

  • #2 6 years ago

    Hands up who saw this coming.

    \o.

  • Kingsadist #3 6 years ago

    Quite a shock there, I say. I'm still going to play it, one way or another, but this and the recent let-down that was Fable have lead me to believe that Lionhead, and particularly Molyneux, are bloated beyond belief.

  • Huxley #4 6 years ago

    Nnnnooooooooooooo!

    Please say it aint so.

  • marilena #5 6 years ago

    "Should there happen to be something so enormously complex as a wall between your army and theirs, then they'll stand there, staring, dreaming crazy AI dreams of what must be on the other side."

    :) I liked that.

  • Machiavel #6 6 years ago

    /ominous cloud finally sighs and says "Told you so"

    Very disappointing.

  • #7 6 years ago

    Hopefully Lionhead will be punished with poor sales. It is high time games companies stopped supplying the people with 6/10 rated software.

    It is just not on.

  • Scimarad #8 6 years ago

    "such as how the people of your towns are too stupid to know how to open their own town gate when ordered to leave the walled enclosures, rather relying on their father in heaven to be on door monitor duty"

    To me this describes the flaw at the heart of both these games - You are supposed to be some divine being, not their bloody servant!! You should be the one telling them to do stuff and the stupid mortals can figure out how to do it themselves. They should be serving you, not the other way around!

  • Haver #9 6 years ago

    That's unfortunate.

  • Talha #10 6 years ago

    @cronk: What you said, while true, will ignite the Third World War.

  • Psi #11 6 years ago

    Molyneux will destroy you all with his lazer eye beams and powerfull arm gripping action! RAR!

  • Ciaran #12 6 years ago

    As feared then. Too bad though, I really wanted this to be good.

  • Hicksy #13 6 years ago

    Thank you EG for saving me £35

    /order cancelled

    Might pick it up in a bargain bin one day...

  • doc-yipee #14 6 years ago

    I was enchanted by the hype, curse you Peter Monglelooks!

    /dusts off pessimism suit

  • Razz #15 6 years ago

    :( I really wanted this to be good

    /returns dust cover to pc

  • bootsy_NL_30 #16 6 years ago

    what a crap way to begin my day...I really was hoping that this might be the game that lived up to the hype......thanks for the review

    Black and White 2: 6/10

    Eurogamer : 10/10

    more games sites should be prepared to bury crap like this with criticism ...gamespot used to do it now theyve gone soft , great work guys!

  • Derblington #17 6 years ago

    Harsh review, but fair enough. I wanted it to be great but there you go.

  • Bezzy #18 6 years ago

    Hahahaha!

  • Yossarian #19 6 years ago

    the first B&W did enough to kill my confidence in LH and their offshoots, the lukewarm reception Fable received furthered that, and this sort of thing just amounts to final confirmation.

    less 'revolutionary' ideas, more compelling, coherent gameplay, Pete, thanks.

  • paralipsis #20 6 years ago

    I have wasted far too much of my life playing games that have been highly reviewed thinking to myself "It must turn the corner somewhere, everyone gave it 9/10!". Thankyou EG for saving me both money, and perhaps more importantly, time fighting my way through this worrisome game.

  • Bezzy #21 6 years ago

    Well, revolutionary achievable ideas are what you need.

  • Lost_in_Darkness #22 6 years ago

    This is a sorta kick in the nuts. I was eagerly awaiting this. And it looked to be so good that I was definately gonna buy it, but now i'm not sure. I'll have to try it before i buy.
    Edited by 1 at 04/10/05 @ 09:52

  • bloke #23 6 years ago

    OTOH, I'm hoping that "The Movies" will be genuinely great.

    Fingers crossed, eh? :-(

  • Teeth #24 6 years ago

    :(

    However, signs were clear when Molyneux would continually big up the fantastic feature that B&W2 would search your address book for names... and name your villagers after them! He fucking loved that idea! How innovative!

    I'm unhappy that the reviewer didn't like the game, because it makes me one step further away from getting it, and what I needed was to be many steps closer to getting it. It sounds horrible.

  • mastertigurius #25 6 years ago

    Damn good review. And I'm not surprised in the least - I was expecting this game to botch, since the first one sucked just as much (fun for a few hours, then the flaws quickly appeared).

    \o

  • jellyhead #26 6 years ago

    I was under the impression that the problems got in the way of the gameplay to such an extent that the problems were all that you saw.
    Sad, i was hoping they'd get it right this time.
    If there's a demo, i'll give it a whirl but i'm not hopeful.

  • X #27 6 years ago

    Bought the first one on release and played it for about 30 minutes or so. Won't be making the same mistake again - I wasn't really interested in this before and I certainly aren't now.

  • Darren #28 6 years ago

    Edge gave this game 7/10 in their current issue which was good enough for me to pre-order the game on. I enjoyed the first game so I'm sure I'll enjoy the sequel just as much.

  • teabagger #29 6 years ago

    Damn. Dissapointing. Still going to play the demo just to be sure.

  • Royal Fool #30 6 years ago

    "If you played the original, think the singing sailors and their request. And if you're curling up in pain at that memory, stay there."

    OH GOD, NO!!!

  • davyuk #31 6 years ago

    I thought user interface was the dev tool!

  • Shrimp #32 6 years ago

    Just bring on Spore, that's what I say. From what I've read that seems to resemble the game B&W always should have been, none of the stupid canned set pieces and bloody worse-than-the-MS-Office-paperclip tutorial characters.

  • Teeth #33 6 years ago

    Roll on Spore :)

  • Teeth #34 6 years ago

    Holy shit, great minds think alike.

  • w00t #35 6 years ago

    Anyone got any more info on Spore since it was first announced? I signed up for the newsletter on the official site and haven't heard anything since then...

  • sleepless #36 6 years ago

    Nice one. I think that reviewer spent too much time talking about underwear instead of game itself. Also..In one point reviewer argues about tutorials for everything and in another point doesn't know what to do because he is too smart to go through tutorial. Recently I had a chance to play BaW 2 for few days and I must admit that it isn't 9/10 game, but it isn't 6/10 game either – for avid gamers. For occasional players is BaW 2 something spectacular. Who do you think is BaW 2 target group?

  • Grom #37 6 years ago

    All I wanted to know was if this was better than B&W1, not even how much better. To hear it's actually worse is very sad :(

  • Shrimp #38 6 years ago

    Haha damn right, Teeth! :D

    I was going to write "Roll on Spore" too but decided that sounded like some kind of wrong deodorant, so I changed it.

  • Kami #39 6 years ago

    Deja vu, anyone?

  • #40 6 years ago

    Not even worth the expence of my time to try it!

    /goes back to WoW on the PC, LiB on the DS, and Katamari 1 on the PS2...

  • smelly #41 6 years ago

    The last paragraph sums up my fear about will wrights spore.. trying to be jack of too many trades..

  • Teeth #42 6 years ago

    Yes, except from what I've seen Spore does everything with pride, majestically, while this game appears to just paw at it and knock the pictures off the mantlepiece.

  • burns #43 6 years ago

    no it can't be...


    /ends it all...

  • Hunam85 #44 6 years ago

    i remember the state the first one was in when that was out, im still gonna buy it, ill just consider myself warned

  • Krun #45 6 years ago

    I tend to prefer more information about a game and less of a angry rant from my reviewers. Its obvious that you dont like it.
    But it feels like your talking to us as if we have played the game and are saying "wasnt that bit bad? I hated it, and that other bit was rubbish too. what you havent played it? you dont know whats its about or how it works? well neither do i really i just started playing and found it wasnt a game I liked so I thought id skip the review and go straight to the angry tirade.

    I may well desvere a bad review, but id really like to know more about it.

    I came away from this review with this...
    A creature that you can somehow control or teach, for what reason I have no idea.
    Possibly you also build cities? maybe this creature builds them?
    Armies?
    Good and evil was mentioned too.
    oh and the reviewer didnt like it because it was over simple. So simple that he failed to explain anything except how he hated it.

  • glaeken #46 6 years ago

    Wow some of you guys are very trusting of a EG. There seems to be a few reviews doing the rounds and so far it seems to be averaging in the 8/10 type range so nothing quite as bad as this review. Personally I think it is better to take the veiws of a few different reviewers into account. I am surprised given the contraversey around this title and its predessor that EG did not go the two reviewer approach.

    Not sure if I will get it or not but probably wait for a lot more reviews to go up to get a better overal view of things.

  • kangarootoo #47 6 years ago

    I wish this surprised me. For those saying PM has no design talent, he used to know how to do it, but I personally think he got too far from the process of actually making a game some time ago.

    I might have said before that I personally feel that "great ideas" are two a penny (I don't mean that literally of course, original ideas do have value of their own) and it is the execution of said ideas that makes or breaks a game.

    PM seems to have moved right away from the execution part of the machine and deals solely with having zany ideas. His brain farts then leave his team to execute said zany ideas as best they can.

    p.s. "Anyone who would need such ludicrously slow and patronising guidance would not have been able to manoeuvre the disc into the drive to install the game, let alone put their own trousers on."

    lol, good one.

  • kangarootoo #48 6 years ago

    "Wow some of you guys are very trusting of a EG"

    That is a privaledge earned with results. EG are usually a lot more in the nail (for my gameing tastes anyway) than a lot of other magazines. Plus, they can pretty much all write complete sentences, which is a damn site better than a lot of internet magazines (naming no names Internet Gaming Magazine).

  • krat3r #49 6 years ago

    There will be a patch to really skip the tutorial.
    http://allboards.lionhead .com/showthread.php?s=8bcddf6621ee0669f0f479c831835924&t=977 57

  • glaeken #50 6 years ago

    I dunno I have seen them make a few wrong calls on reviews for games I have played. I think with B&W2 the two reviewer route would have been the one to go for as well as there seems to have been a lot who wanted to hate B&W2 before it came out and this reviewer came across as one of them.

    As I say I am undecided on this one before seeing a lot more reviews and maybe it is total pap I was just surprised so many were coming out with comments saying they had cancelled their order just based on the opinion of one reveiwer.

  • kangarootoo #51 6 years ago

    @glaeken

    I know what you mean. I found myself having to double check my opinion of Farenheit because I think David Cage is a bit of a cock.

    In this case though, I think the reviewer was somewhat justified in his harsh treatment as the hype that accompanied B&W2 suggested something truly epic was coming our way. If a company says "we think our game will be a lot of fun" and then it has some issues, you can be a little more lenient. But Lionhead's history over the last few years has been one of spouting shed loads of "the way games are meant to be made" hype, followed by games ranging from competent to mediocre (sounds a bit like Elyxir, unsurprisingly). In that context I can understand the reviewers take on this.

    A little more info about the game mechanics and a little less humerous attack would have been handy I agree. Personally I read reviews for entertainment as much as anything else. I never buy a game without either playing it or getting the opinion of one of my trusted gamers friends who has played it (I don't mean I don't trust EG, I just don't know enough about their gaming tastes compared to those of my peers).

  • Xerx3s #52 6 years ago

    How come EG's scores are always so much lower than everyone else? (ie: Reader score on ign is 92 with 42 votes).

  • towser #53 6 years ago

    I would have to say because most of its readers who placed reviews are morons who prefer games which are hyped beyond all recognition and as such believe what the hype tells them rather than taking the time to formulate their own opinion... for what its worth :-)

    I could be wrong tho...

    -edit- never trust public opinion mind you.... these are the same people that ring in to GMTV quizes and manage to keep nobody's "famous" by buying shite like Heat and OK magazine.
    Edited by 1 at 04/10/05 @ 14:27

  • Stickman #54 6 years ago

    Read all about it!

    "Lionhead Release Unfinished Pap Shocker!"

  • DNM #55 6 years ago

    "Thank you EG for saving me £35

    /order cancelled"

    You listen to anyone for reviews?! Make your own mind up ffs! If I'm ever to go by reviews I generally wait until there's a good few results in on gamerankings.com and decide from there. A review is merely a personal guideline of that reviewer at the end of the day.

  • glaeken #56 6 years ago

    Sounds fair kangarootoo.

    I do think there is always the chance a person will just not like a particular game that others do like. I for instance would have given Half Life 2 a 6/10 though most think I am totally mad not to rate it as the best game in the universe ever which seems to be the majority view.

  • trevd72 #57 6 years ago

    all of peters games have been gimick over gameplay....hype over substance.

    found this out with populous and populous 2. I admit i played powermonger till the end.

    will you lot ever learn.

  • Artemus #58 6 years ago

    Molyneux bashing, now officially almost as tiresome as EA bashing.

  • Tyronne #59 6 years ago

    So all in all a game that has not changed much since the original aside from updated graphics,I had a feeling this was a game to ignore and now its confirmed.The gaming drought is over and there are way better games coming out to spend my cash on than this.

  • kangarootoo #60 6 years ago

    " Molyneux bashing, now officially almost as tiresome as EA bashing"

    But still kind of fun :)

    Sort of like a bouncy castle. I find those quite tiring, but amusing all the same.

  • botherer #61 6 years ago

    "How come EG's scores are always so much lower than everyone else? (ie: Reader score on ign is 92 with 42 votes)."

    Yeah, you might want to take into account that the game has not been released yet. And then apply this logic to all other reader scores you read anywhere ever.

  • Bezzy #62 6 years ago

    "Molyneux bashing, now officially almost as tiresome as EA bashing. "

    Shut your hole, Peter!

  • DNM #63 6 years ago

    "I for instance would have given Half Life 2 a 6/10 though most think I am totally mad not to rate it as the best game in the universe ever which seems to be the majority view."

    I would've given it a 4/10! Absolute travesty to the original I thought! :)

  • glaeken #64 6 years ago

    Horay!! Another sane individual not proclaiming HL2 as the second coming.

  • saintgermain #65 6 years ago

    This review is shit. It tells nearly nothing about what are the main (though according to this review, supposedly flawed) ideas and things that you can do and have to do, the amount of content, the story, the musical score. Many of the statements are primitive, and a pure figment of the oh-how-obviously opinonated reviewer. I'll attempt to describe my criticisms below:

    1) Tutorial - the reviewer fails to mention that all of the tutorial lessons 1-3, apart the movement tutorial, are in the form bronze scrolls, which you can activate only if you wish to do so yourself; for example, a bronze scroll may be found near a barracks, if you activated it, you would be taught about war, but you can also procceed to build armies without activating the tutorial, if you think you already know how.

    2) The guides (the white bearded guy and the devil guy) - they eaxplain what you have to achieve at the beginning of the each island, and offer minor snippets of information periodically, each no longer than a few minutes (normally 1 or 2), IN A GAME LASTING TENS OF HOURS (several reviewers have mentioned 70). It appears that the reviewer simply lacks the attention span required to play anything that requires more than a few seconds to understand.

    The guides present two drastically different views on how you achieve your objective. Each time you have to make an important decision, they do indeed present the good way of doing it, and the evil way of doing it. They do not MAKE you do it, the choice is yours to make. And if the reviewer prefers a neutral way of doing it, then it is a personal preferrence and should have no place in a review.

    3) The reviewer claims I quote, " the supposedly sentient inhabitants of your towns rely on you for an astonishing number of menial tasks, from giving them permission to breed when they want children, to whether they want to worship you or not. This complete lack of autonomy on their part leaves you not feeling like their god, but their babysitter."

    Rubbish. The inhabitants procreate themselves, and only if you wish to speed up the process sort of "forcibly" do you have to assign breeders. If the inhabitants have free time (between doing their daily routines and tasks) they will worship you automattically, only if you wish to increase the rate at which you gain mana do you need to assign them manually.

    The reviewer says: "If we forget the astonishingly evocative animations it possesses (because so will you once that pleasant novelty quickly wears off)."
    Isn't it astonishing how acquainted this reviewer is with what you as a customer will supposedly like or dislike ? Much like in all of the review, the author expressed entirely biased and ungrounded opinions. By the way, graphics are not a one-shot feature that you enjoy during the course of a few minutes. If you forget about them, that means they're good and that means they're immersive.

    The reviewer says: "As nice as this sounds, it does become obvious pretty quickly that what's actually happening here is you're flicking a switch to either 'on' or 'off'. Don't want him pooing in the food store? Then slap him until that AI option is 'off'. Want him to eat innocent children? Then pat him on the head once he's filled his tummy, and the switch is set to 'on'."
    The only thing that is obvious here is that the guy who played the game used the slider himself as an on-off switch - encouraging the creature to do only the extreme "Always" and "Never". And as I will try to explain, this once more demonstrates the short attention span of the reviewer, who would certainly be far better off reviewing console action games. You have to actually pay attention to what the sentences in those think bubbles say, and pay attention to what the creature is doing and where he is doing it. And if you do that you can truly shape the personality of your creature just how you like. For example, "I will never eat villagers" means that he will not eat villagers EVER, but "I will try not to eat villagers" might mean that he will leave your own villagers alone, but eat enemy villagers when he has the chance. In short, the reviewer once again makes the decision in the stead of the customer and the reader.


    4) "What's far more disappointing is the complete abandoning of the (admittedly completely broken) teaching system from before. In theory, if you put your Creature on his leash and cast a few fireballs here and there, your Creature would learn from you and attempt to do the same."
    Filthy hypocrite. In one place, the reviewer complains about boring and mundane tasks being there (which is not the case) and now he complains that mundane things aren't there. Proof to the limping objectivity of the reviewer. The old system was very monotonous, and required you to do the same thing over and over. And you buy miracles, the rest of the stuff you can teach as you normally did, i.e. if you build buildings, the creature will offer to build buildings.

    "This is the same way you obtain new buildings for your towns - rather than unlocking new and more advanced features by playing well, you're given everything that the game has to offer from the start, so long as you possess enough tribute to purchase it."
    If you've read everything I wrote above, is it really difficult to guess why the author doesn't mention that the tribute IS, in fact, awarded for playing well ? Unless you cheat, you can't possibly unlock all the stuff right from the beginning..there's so much of it that most people won't even get all of it during the whole length of the game.

    "But beyond that, do you actually need a rest home? Does improving the lives of the elderly make a difference to your game? Definitely not in any way that will change your experience."
    Perhaps the reviewer would be so kind as to DEFINE, what exactly is the experience meant to be ? It is about choice, and the idea behind it is that if you are not the person who likes caring for their people, then there is an alternative. It's about who you want to be (and if you do not want to be a good god, why the hell are you trying), and who you can be, and who you will turn out to be, with city-building, RTS, god game and the creature being the main element, accompanied by "emotional attachment".

    "Tribute is earned through completing the string of tasks silently appointed at the start of each new island."
    Also for major accomplishments, such as creating huge cities, armies, winning huge battles, teaching your creature. Once again the reviewer shows how little of the game he actually explored, or how little he chooses to reveal.

    "To understand quite how laborious and un-game-like these are, know that creating a breeder entails picking up a person, and dropping them near another person. Collecting ore involves dropping people near the ore mine. Over and over. And over. That these challenges are so lacking in imagination is an indication of quite how limited B&W2 is. It wouldn't have been possible for Lionhead to come up with more creative tasks, because B&W2 possesses nothing to support such creativity."
    Somebody spoke about people who aren't able to do put the CD in the CD-ROM and install the game. The reviewer appears to be just a little bit better. The author fails to mention that people will get ore from the mine themselves, given time, that you only have to drop a few people at the mine and they will constantly gather ore and bring it to the village store. It seems, again, that the player wanted to get all at once, do all at once, rush through everything as fast as he could. Also, he didn't mention, among other notable features, the easily tribute-unlockable feature that allows you to suck in your hand as much villagers as you like and place them down one by one.


    "One particularly dreadful example involves catching lambs fired into the air from the APPARENTLY pneumatic vagina of a very pregnant sheep. As they come toward you, you're supposed to catch them in your hand. It turned out, clicking pretty much anywhere on the screen, at pretty much any point during their trajectory was enough to count as a catch, and no matter how many were missed, it didn't seem to care. And then after an apparently arbitrary 22 caught lambs, it told me I'd won. It's hard to imagine a less satisfactory victory"
    Note the APPARENTLY. A convenient method for this reviewer to lie about the game and get away with it. In theory, it's what only what he thinks he sees. Is there someone who thinks the other reviews would fail to mention something as atrocious as this ? (links at the bottom of my post)

    "Not explaining what you're supposed to do leaves you to fumble about, waggling the mouse until you stumble upon the technique, only to discover that it seemingly only works 50 per cent of the time."
    At one point, thne reviewer complains about too much guidance, now too little ? Does this guy actually know what he wants from a game (notr that it is his lot to mention it in a review) ?

    "This process is supposed to speed up when there are more men in your army, and when the town's defences are weaker. No evidence of this was apparent. In fact, when one platoon of 75 was reduced to a single solitary soldier by the enemy's Creature, the process continued at the same pace."
    Re-eeee-ally ? Perhaps the reviewer could me more clear about what he actually wants to say ?

    "Enemy platoons APPEAR to work like those battery-driven toy cars you used to get that (1) drove until they hit a wall, turned, and drove off in another direction. Should they stumble upon your army, they might fight it, or they might run about in confused circles. (2) Should there happen to be something so enormously complex as a wall between your army and theirs, then they'll stand there, staring, dreaming crazy AI dreams of what must be on the other side."
    The handy appear makes it's appearance again. Also note that statements 1 and 2 (sentences after the numbers 1 and 2 respectively) are vastly contradictive. Another proof of just how objective this review is.

    "The way you take over cities doesn't begin to make sense, the supposed ability to capture them by good will is nonsense - you merely gain their citizens, the land remaining neutral until you 'evilly' conquer it - but you do get to capture cities. "
    At one point he is a know-it-all, at one point he complains about long tutorials, but now it seems that he could use a bit more tutoring. Probably skipped as much of the tutorials as possible, as well. Territorry means squat here, if their citizens flock to you, you will gain a larger population and a larger population percentage in relation to the enemy, and when the population of the people believing in you reaches about 70% of all the island's population, you win by peace.

    So many opinions, so little facts. The reviewer mentioned a few apparent bugs, and from what I've heard, the first review version that EA sent out to sites was indeed buggy. Consider the following reviews:

    http:// gameswelt.de/artikel/index.php?id=1020 (german) - 82%
    http://p c.ign.com/articles/654/654547p1.html - 8.8 of 10, Editor's Choice
    Swedish Super Play magazine, 7 of 10
    German Gamestar magazine, 75%
    Swedish PC Gamer 92%
    GamesMaster magazine 91%, Gold Award
    UK PC Gamer 75%
    Edited by 1 at 04/10/05 @ 16:20

  • BremXJones #66 6 years ago

    Wow. A string of reviews, most of which only mark it a whole 1/10 higher than John did.

    Got me convinced.

    KG

  • saintgermain #67 6 years ago

    BremXJones:you are wrong in determining what is the most, and you are wrong determining what (and how much) is more and higher.

    Edit:I suppose extreme subjectivism is what this site and many of it's users are all here about.
    Edited by 2 at 04/10/05 @ 16:28

  • BremXJones #68 6 years ago

    You didn't include the Edge or PCG reviews, both of which give it in the 7s too.

    Its the statistical bell-curve, and John's well within in.

    KG

  • Sam81 #69 6 years ago

    Edge: 7/10
    PC ZONE UK: 93%
    PCGAMER UK: 76% (I think)
    Totalvideogames.com: 8/10

  • botherer #70 6 years ago

    "Filthy hypocrite"

    Gosh, I hope everyone else who worked on the game was as lovely as you.

    You accuse me of lying on a number of occasions, and make some astonishing accusations of bias. That's libellous, so you might want to consider how strongly you believe in your claims.

    You clearly missed the bit where I state clearly that too much is over-explained, and too much is entirely unexplained. That doesn't make me a hypocrit or cause contradictions. As for the rest of your peculiar comments, I reported the experience I had when playing the game. That is my job. I wonder what yours is.

    It would be polite if you were to reveal the position that provides your astonishing objectivity.

  • saintgermain #71 6 years ago

    BremXJones:actually, and I edited shortly before you posted, the UK PC Gamer gave it a 76% (just checked, I was erroneous in that last edit in my first post). So we have a few sites and mags who rated it at 7; a few at 7.5; and a few around the 9 mark.

    After this biased, as I explained, eurogamer review, I doubt it can consequently be said whether one will enjoy the game or not, whether the game is good or not.

    And those reviews at least try to sensibly give a reason for why the score is as it is. But you have anything to say against my criticisms, then please speak.

  • glaeken #72 6 years ago

    Well on the score side he might be within the curve but the actual contents of the review if I were to take that opinion at face value (as many in the thread appear to have done) would be a game I would avoid like the plague. Really reading the written review you would have expected the score to be 1/10. The 6 while not that bad has little relation to the written review.

  • saintgermain #73 6 years ago

    botherer: do not mistake me as one who has worked on the game. I have no affiliation to the devs. Please refute me with arguments, not making your conclusions on my arguments.

    I'd suspect a reviewers job would be to inform the reader, firstly, clearly what is the game about, secondly, what can be praised or criticised in the game, and thirdly, leave the reader to their own conclusions, perhaps adding the reviewers opinion as optional. You did only one, you made conclusions with hardly any, or a contradictive basis.

    I will not claim to be objective, but objectivity is an objective for the reviewer, and subjectivity is a luxury for those who comment.

  • O-Fox #74 6 years ago

    LIONHEAD IN GAME NOT LIVING UP TO HYPE SHOCKER

  • botherer #75 6 years ago

    "botherer: do not mistake me as one who has worked on the game. I have no affiliation to the devs. Please refute me with arguments, not making your conclusions on my arguments."

    I'm not going to go through your post, replying to each and every accusation of corruption or lying. After the appalling way you have addressed me, I'm loathed to respond to you at all.

    I think I have already addressed all the points you've made in the review, since your responses mostly consist of insults or "no it isn't". I see little value in going through it all again and saying, "yes it is."

    I think the best thing to do is to go and read the IGN review a few more times, and calm down.

  • saintgermain #76 6 years ago

    O-Fox:a game can not be hyped more than gamers, you included, are willing to hype it.

  • urban #77 6 years ago

    oh dear.

    you guys seem to be enjoying your 6's atm huh.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #78 6 years ago

    I would just like to say that

    "BremXJones:you are wrong in determining what is the most, and you are wrong determining what (and how much) is more and higher."

    is the BEST SENTENCE I HAVE EVER READ EVER.

    Carry on.

  • saintgermain #79 6 years ago

    botherer.
    Wait, right. You have refuted one of the many of my points, fine. Let's ASSUME, that I got all the facts about the game wrong. I still have plenty of points to spare for an argument. Please, carry on. But I doubt you will, and neither you nor I have to. But at least everyone now has two points of view to make conclusions from.

  • gaijin #80 6 years ago

    there is no such thing as 'objectivity'. Discuss objectively.

  • roofles #81 6 years ago

    People cried bloody murder when a few sites scored Black & White 70-80% (Firingsquad and Eurogamer too, I think).

    It's definitely the bell-curve that's happening here. Most of the scores are around 7.

    PC Zone gave Unreal 2 something like 95% - a game so overhyped that the developer went under.

    I'm not familiar with the Swedish PC Gamer.

  • saintgermain #82 6 years ago

    roofles:you pointed out something very important. It shows reviews do not necessarily reflect the game for what it is, and it might be different things for different people, both for good and for bad.

    By the way, strictly speaking, there are two reviews with the score of 7 and two with 7.5. Are the latter more "around 7" or "around 8" ? :D

  • blacksheep242 #83 6 years ago

    Hmm. IGN gave it an 8.8 out of 10 and they are usually right on the mark for me. But a 6. Wow. I'm easy to please so I guess anything between 6 and 8.8 will do for me.

  • kangarootoo #84 6 years ago

    @saintgermain

    What the f*ck is your problem dude.

    You read a review and decide it isn't quite informative enough. So instead of posting something along the lines of "come on EG, how about a few more specific details about gameplay" as any rational human being might, you instead bore us shitless and/or insult the EG staff and readership in equal measure by breaking down the whole review word by word and mixing it up with a heavy dose of playground name calling.

    If you love Black and White and all it stands for, fantastic, I'm happy for you. Buy B&W2 and enjoy playing it, but please try and control your outbursts when someone disagrees with you. Can you really not see how unhinged your huge rant appears to all the sane people reading it?

    Loads of people read EG and enjoy doing so. No site is perfect, and I guarantee no review will please everyone who reads it. If this particular site doesn't give you what you want then I suggest you find another. I'm sure the staff won't miss you and neither will most of the balanced individuals who post here.

    EDIT:
    "It shows reviews do not necessarily reflect the game for what it is, and it might be different things for different people, both for good and for bad."

    Exactly, so chill out for christs sake.
    Edited by 1 at 04/10/05 @ 18:09

  • tiddles #85 6 years ago

    Funnily enough, the review of the original didn't seem to provoke much of a response...

    Comments thread

  • Krun #86 6 years ago

    Thankyou for filling in the gaps in the review saintgermain.
    I found that john walkers review was totaly empty of all information.

    I rate John Walkers review powers 4/10.
    A well below average reviewer; that lacks focus, information and appears to rush his reviews while drinking heavily.

  • botherer #87 6 years ago

    Kangaroo - this person has obviously played B&W2, which isn't available anywhere, and is very shy to explain who s/he is. I would maintain healthy suspicion on this count.

    Krun - You're absolutely right. I'm RUBBISH.
    Edited by 1 at 04/10/05 @ 18:32

  • MightyPenguin #88 6 years ago

    I don't understand why Walker was constantly apologising for marking it so low. From the review (detailed and highly informative review- it covers every aspect of the game, explains how it works and then bemoans the shitness of it all), he would have been perfectly justified in marking as low as a 4, or perhaps even a 3.

  • Stickman #89 6 years ago

    I claim saintgermain! He's my pet tard!

    Come on, dance for me saintgermain! DANCE!!
    Edited by 1 at 04/10/05 @ 18:50

  • Artemus #90 6 years ago

    This is the best comments section eva (read worst).

    Who is Mr Walker anyway? Another PC Gamer freelancer ala Gillen?

  • jiveguy #91 6 years ago

    Jesus christ, its Gillen and his hangers on.

  • MikeD #92 6 years ago

    @tiddles

    That's probably because all unregistered posts have since been removed. :-)

  • Lankyn #93 6 years ago

    "Please refute me with arguments"

    Second best sentence EVAR!

  • Ryuken #94 6 years ago

    It's just 'another' review, hell, I think everyone sometimes has other scores for certain games in mind (f.e. the 10/10 for HL2 and before that, the 8/10 for Far Cry on this site were very, very awkward imo, but that's just me having a different opinion on revolutions in shooters). It's just a matter of taste. Checking gamerankings also won't give a better view if you ask me, there are so many overrated and underrated games there that it is a disgrace.

    And if this thread made you doubt about purchasing B&W2 or not, wait till the demo arrives (or has it been cancelled already?).
    Edited by 1 at 04/10/05 @ 20:40

  • kangarootoo #95 6 years ago

    @botherer

    "I would maintain healthy suspicion on this count. "

    I maintained healthy suspicion from the off. Anyone who gets that angry that quickly is not to be trusted with objectivity (or even a sharp pencil for that matter).

  • Druidblue #96 6 years ago

    Critics are the singular most worthless career in existence. A critic is NO more qualified to comment on an entertainment item than you or I. At no point do his/her comments bear any semblance of "truth" beyond their own personal bias. Therefore, all you should ever do with a critic's review is use it to attempt to gleam hints of game features out of the personal opinion.

    Only your opinion matters in the end, which is why you should ALWAYS form your own. That's why one of the worst trends in society now is the "they say" trend.

    As a random example, Star Wars Ep. III came out this summer- for 2 full days prior to and after it, I did not hear a single negative comment. All I heard was "this is what Star Wars fans have been waiting for all along", and "that was so awesome". Then, as if magically, on the third day you started to hear "THEY SAY it sucks". See, too many people have friend A say "that sucks", then they fall right into line in order to not be deemed "uncool". Next thing you know, the masses are waiting for the word to spread down- is it safe to admit to liking this? Or will I be teased for admitting I do?

    Stand by your own opinions, especially if you are the only one to hold them. And never let anyone begin to tell you they are more qualified to tell you if something is "good" or "bad".

    Save the "Star Wars sucks" comments- that's not any sliver of the point of this education I'm providing you. Form your own opinions only WITH experience, and stand by them regardless of the rest of the world.

    Besides, most people nowadays are so jaded no entertainment product will ever live up to their unachievable expectations.

  • Killerbee #97 6 years ago

    Great review. Disappointing to read, but to be honest, Lionhead killed off any enthusiasm I had for this franchise with the first game, so they needed to work pretty damn hard to persuade me into buying this... and it seems very little has been fixed.

  • The_Bag #98 6 years ago

    "Kangaroo - this person has obviously played B&W2, which isn't available anywhere, and is very shy to explain who s/he is. I would maintain healthy suspicion on this count."

    In the last couple of months there have been a number of events where people could play BW2.
    Edited by 1 at 04/10/05 @ 21:11

  • Stickman #99 6 years ago

    Can I have Druidblue too? Fantastic! Please continue providing me with education, oh wise one. Or, in fact, don't, seeing as your point is complete bollocks.

    Do you suggest that we should read every book, watch every film, play every game in order to see whether we like it or not? Quite pricey I'd imagine. Yes, a review is opinion, but it's informed opinion. It's their job to provide opinion on games, it's what they do, to try and help us decide if we'd like it. If you don't want reviews of games, what exactly are you doing on a games review site?

    "Stand by your own opinions, especially if you are the only one to hold them. And never let anyone begin to tell you they are more qualified to tell you if something is "good" or "bad"."

    My opinion is that bum-rape of experiment monkeys is a great idea, and damn you and your vile lies that my opinion isn't gospel bloody truth!

    Also, if everyone's so jaded, how come they also have high expectations? Bah, you're no good, I don't want you any more. Now where's that saintgermain character....?
    Edited by 1 at 04/10/05 @ 22:55

  • BremXJones #100 6 years ago

    And - y'know - reading a good piece of criticism is good fun in and of itself.

    KG

  • botherer #101 6 years ago

    "Only your opinion matters in the end, which is why you should ALWAYS form your own. That's why one of the worst trends in society now is the "they say" trend."

    I love how people hold this opinion right up until they stop thinking they know everything about a subject. For instance, when buying a new motherboard, it's odd how people aren't so quick to shout, "Oh, you shouldn't accept their opinion that this motherboard is rubbish. You should buy it for yourself and find out."

    "No no, take no notice of what those doctors say about that alternative cancer medicine made from old slippers - it's /your/ opinion that counts."

    I'm a big fan of the "they say" trend. It tends to push me out of thinking I'm the only important person in the universe, and humbles me to accept that I can learn from others.

  • BremXJones #102 6 years ago

    " humbles me to accept that I can learn from others."

    That's crazy talk, John.

    KG

  • Xiphias #103 6 years ago

    I have to say it does seem like an poor review in spots. Take the collect 8000 ore example, that's very similar to missions in, say, warcraft III and age of empire 2 and I'm sure most people would say that have a decent singleplayer. There is no explaination as to why it's particulaly boring in B&W2.

    As to the bugs that's fair enough, all games have bugs. Half life for example took me two broken savegames before I managed to get to the end (and this was recently, a few years after release). It does sound like the ones in B&W2 are worse than most but hopefully they'll be fixed in a patch.

    You need to make clear how much are bugs that may get fixed, how much is bad design and, most importantly, how much worthwhile content it actually has.

  • Druidblue #104 6 years ago

    @botherer & stickman -

    You're failing to comprehend my point. It's up to you to research the entertainment item and make your own purchasing decision using facts (of which critic's reviews have extremely scant few of) not buy, view or read everything first. It's really common sense. Learn about something- value it- purchase the likely items that will please you.

    If, however, you're content with being a sheep of the masses telling you to avoid movie A or game B, and you fall in line and nod your head without deciding on your own... well, hey- enjoy that lifestyle! I personally enjoy being an individual that uses my own mind to decide what's best for me, not letting other's opinions form my own. If I followed the "mass" opinions, I would not have gone to see The Island or Stealth (which I liked both), or the 3rd Star Wars (which was outstanding). I wouldn't own most of the computer games I have (all of which pleased me and provided much entertainment).

    "Also, if everyone's so jaded, how come they also have high expectations?"

    By definition. People experience a "perfect" movie or "perfect" game (to them), then every subsequent entertainment item of this nature that follows is ripped to shreds as inferior... They have set their expectations so high, they expect the newest computer game to cure world cancer, slice bread and have every possible game design consideration supported.

    As to why I was here, I was thrown over on a netwave from a forum, and saw too many people arguing over a review that is as meaningless as anything I were to sit down and write for others to read.

    "It tends to push me out of thinking I'm the only important person in the universe, and humbles me to accept that I can learn from others."

    Those that teach others true wisdom are already aware the first step in being wise is knowing you know nothing. However, it must be pointed out that to be taught, you must have the truth- and the truth is not available in any opinion.

    Wisdom is what remains after we have run out of personal opinions.

    Now, if you don't mind- I'm going to try to surf back to where I was- I'm not about to have a battle of wits against unarmed opponents.





  • Teeth #105 6 years ago

    All this power and they still can't do good grass.

  • BremXJones #106 6 years ago

    "I wouldn't own most of the computer games I have (all of which pleased me and provided much entertainment). "

    Is this some rhetorical fancy or do you actually mean this and are stupendously easy to please?

    KG

  • botherer #107 6 years ago

    "Those that teach others true wisdom are already aware the first step in being wise is knowing you know nothing. However, it must be pointed out that to be taught, you must have the truth- and the truth is not available in any opinion."

    What twaddle. Are you quoting straight out of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance? Turns out, that book's, um, wrong. Sixth formers the worldwide are shattered.

    "Now, if you don't mind- I'm going to try to surf back to where I was- I'm not about to have a battle of wits against unarmed opponents."

    Which of course is here:

    http://allboards.lionhead.com/showthread.php?t=97867

    You can tell those delightful people that yes, the reason why B&W2 has poor AI, a broken interface, dull chores and a paucity of fun is because of the lack of hugs I received as a child. And indeed I am biased. I have this thing about favouring good games over average or bad ones.

  • Sam81 #108 6 years ago

    No botherer it's not that mad don't be such a drama queen, don't give yourself too much credit either. Please! I'd like to say ongratulations on the high prestige review and for actually doing it as it is a lot of trolling possible!

    I don't think it's a good review, you seem to have missed a lot of the beauty of Black&White 2 but I guess not everyone will always like everything.

    Kudos for posting in the comments too, it's always nice when journalists, developers and rarely publishers come out to talk about their work... It's called 'passion'.
    Edited by 1 at 05/10/05 @ 01:09

  • botherer #109 6 years ago

    Thank you Sam for having the courage to reveal your interests in denouncing the review by stating your Lionhead email address.

  • Sam81 #110 6 years ago

    That's not a secret, Watson.

  • botherer #111 6 years ago

    The pointed nature of the comment wasn't aimed at you. I was genuinely thanking you.

  • DocTep #112 6 years ago

    >"But this has to stop somewhere, and it's already run way over the upper word limit."<

    I think that one sentence neatly sums up my personal feelings about this review. I found the review highly entertaining to read, but also came away with the feeling of having read a very well written forum post rather than a particularly informative review. Please understand that i mean no offence by that, simply that whilst i came away from the review with a very clear understanding of John's feelings and issues about the game, i didn't come away with much relatively objective information upon which to begin to decide if i might feel in any way differently than the reviewer. It felt like the reviewer simply ran out of words once he'd finished giving his opinion. You could argue that that's exactly all a review should be - an opinion and nothing else - but that leaves little upon which the reader can decide if their own feelings may mirror those of the reviewer's, short of playing the game for theirself. I guess i'm trying to say in as constructive a way as possible that in the end i felt like it veered perhaps a bit too close to being a rant (albeit a highly entertaining one). Having read several reviews however, i'd say that it does seem that every single criticism of the game mentioned throughout the review was justified.

    I also have to agree with anyone who's already said that the final mark given does not reflect the review - i found little positive comments to justify even an 'average' mark, other than a general statement that there are some good ideas within the game design. But even that was countered with the view that none of these ideas had been implemented well. I know a final mark is always subjective, but reading the review i expected to see a much lower mark at the end (and yes, for once i did actually read the review without skipping to the mark first).

    To be honest i feel a little strange critiquing someone's review like this. I'll openly admit i hold no qualifications above the reviewer, and quite possibly hold less. My only qualification being an avid gamer who's read videogame magazines since the '8bit' days, which i'm sure goes for many readers of Eurogamer. But i appreciate the reviewer being willing to get into a discussion about his review and felt i'd take the opportunity to (hopefully) add to the discussion. Some people in this thread have gone stupidly overboard in criticising this review, but i felt there were some genuine criticisms that were worth taking aside in the hopes that John could consider them for future reviews.

    At the end of the day i appreciate and enjoyed the frank opinion. I just wished there had been a little more information about the game before it.

  • DocTep #113 6 years ago


    Oops, i didn't realise i'd typed so much.

    *Is slightly embarrassed.*

  • Stickman #114 6 years ago

    Druidblue, you're priceless! How do you research a product, whilst at the same time not listening to other's opinions on it? At least turn some of your huge cerebellum mass towards making sense please. Also, look up the definition of the word 'jaded'.

    Much as I like your writing style (really, the whole 'higher lifeform from beyond the stars' thing is really working for me), you'd be better off making sure that you're actually clever enough to pull it off without coming across as a slightly retarded fool with a God-complex.

    Still, keep trying, bless you!

    *edit* - just used botherer's link to visit the lionhead forum. Watch out, they'll be burning the heretic soon! BUUUUUURN THE BAD REVIEWER!!!

    /waves pitchfork
    Edited by 1 at 05/10/05 @ 10:31

  • kangarootoo #115 6 years ago

    Have you ever joined a queue for something, seen the queue grow, and then suddenly found out that there is in fact two lots of people queueing for different things who have accidentally ended up in the same space.

    Thats how this thread is starting to feel. One minute there was a review of B&W2 being commented on by a few EG readers. Next thing a bus turned up outside and 65 angry tourists turned up on a mission to spread education and take photos.

    To all those who have decended, from Lionhead or anywhere else, by all means share your thoughts but try and keep your "education" for those who might benefit from it.

    p.s. I would NEEEEVER comment on a review for a game I had worked on, other to say thanks if the review was positive. To try and attack the reviewer in someway because they are dissing the work of yourself or your peers just makes you look like a stroppy child. I saw an author attacking readers who had dissed her latest novel on Amazon once, and felt nothing but embarrasment on her behalf.

    Anyone who works in any creative industry needs to build a thick skin, because subjectivity is king and someone somewhere is always going to say "thats shit" about something you bled over. If you can't handle that, I feel pity because your working life will be a stressful one.

  • Teeth #116 6 years ago

    Sam just said that he felt that John had missed some of the beauty. It's OK to be proud of something you made, but I do agree that one should stay out of public discussions on one's own work like this. I think I've had problems with this particular reviewer's style before, so I can see why people have become annoyed. I wouldn't call it trolling though, especially as one of the developers.

  • Sam81 #117 6 years ago

    I am saying that people will be commenting on a review of this scale and that some people will troll towards the reviewer.

    I don't see why I wouldn't be allowed to comment as soon as the link to the official Lionhead forums was being posted - seeing as I am responsible for those.

  • zuul #118 6 years ago

    While the review mentions valid points I share and have also read on other sites, the overall tone is too much of a flame to me. Sounds like the reviewer wrote it while still being extremely disappointed and therefore p*ssed off by the game.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the game. But it deserves a less agressive review, even if you don't like it.

  • tincanrocket #119 6 years ago

    Crikey - all got a bit out of hand on here, eh? Thank goodness for Space Rangers ;)

  • kangarootoo #120 6 years ago

    @Sam81

    My comment wasn't aimed specifically at you (if at all). And of course you are "allowed" to post what you like. It was more a case of feeling that being an employee of Lionhead (whether you worked on B&W or not) kind of undermines you somewhat when you post disagreement at a review of one of their products. Its something I personally wouldn't get involved in, regardless of whether I felt the review was unfair.

    This is of course just my own view, and I'm quite aware that until the much lauded "Kangarootoo's big book of life rules" gets published that is how it will stay ;)

    EDIT: I'm not mad keen on the review style either for the record, but in this case it told me enough about a game that I wasn't that interested in anyhow. Of course this won't be the case for everyone.

    EDIT 2: My comment WASN'T aimed specifically at you. Typo there, throwing all true meaning down the stairs.
    Edited by 2 at 05/10/05 @ 16:07

  • George-Roper #121 6 years ago

    Torn.

    Who or what do I dislike more?

    EG, for their obvious attempt to appeal to the Bravo TV, laddish, chavish crowd by releasing this 'review' which is no more than a piss take. As has been said, there's very little content there with which to base an opinion on. As other articles have shown, EG is very much a quick-fire orientated site. First Person Shooters rule, here, or at least have the monopoly.

    Or Lionhead, for releasing what is yet another travesty of a title. By all accounts (and hype) this should have been one of the greatest releases of the year. It hasn't achieved it and yet who could actually say they expected it to? After the farce that was B+W1, B+W2 had a lot of ground to make up. All B+W2 will achieve now is to force even more punters to think twice before paying hard cash for the next PM branded title.

  • Stickman #122 6 years ago

    @George Roper - You've no idea what you're talking about have you? If you came on EG regularly, you'd realise it's anything but a laddy, chavvy site, but in order to give you a moral sense of satisfaction, I'll go down the route you think we take around here by suggesting you fuck off and stay fucked off.

  • Gl3n #123 6 years ago

    "EG is very much a quick-fire orientated site. First Person Shooters rule, here, or at least have the monopoly."

    Didn't Fahrenheit just get 9/10? Unless i'm mistaken that was a higher score than most other reviewers gave.

    EG are one of the few reviews sources i trust these days. Along with Edge, PCG and gamespot, the latter of which have been a bit hit and miss for me recently. Sure EG can sometimes get it wrong (think zookeeper), but on the whole they write great personalised, informative and entertaining articles.

    I can't help but feel ever-so-slightly pessimistic about The Movies, after this. Three games on and they're still not quite hitting the mark. At least the movies doesn't carry the ultimate lionhead family heirloom, 'Good? or Evil?' as that quiz show bloke used to say (probably in block capitals), 'THE CHOICE, IS YOURS!'

    When's spore due?


  • pion17 #124 6 years ago

    I don't know what's wrong with lionhead? They shoot over the rarget.. Sometimes less is more lionhead.. and micromanagment sucks

  • George-Roper #125 6 years ago

    Right back@Stickman.

    In reply to your question and suggestion.

    A) No and
    B) No

    Anyway, back to the point at hand. If in some twisted world you consider this article to be a fair, balanced, 'review' of Black and White 2, you're downing way too much cider. Take a break from knocking about near the local Co Op, go home, don't switch on the battered Xbox, have a shower instead and get some sleep. Then, in the morning, take off the baseball cap, check that your chav bling is still intact and re-read this so called 'review'.

    If it still looks like something other than a snipe at a game/genre the reviewer just doesn't seem to *want* to like and had, in fact, already pre-judged before even laying their hands on the code, get back on the cider. It's for the best.

    In closing, just for the record, i've been visiting EG daily for at least the last 12-18 months. Whilst not every article is tainted with this degree of sarcasm and disdain for a title, most of the more negative reviews follow in the same, regular, boring, vein. Very small amounts of actual, useful, information with which to base a purchase decision on. Very large amounts of pointless 'humour' which amount to zero, aside from attempting to gain cheap laughs, as if it in some way will lift the review up to be 'cool'.

    "Hey guys, look at us! We don't like this game and so we're just gonna take the piss out of it instead! Want a proper, factual, review? Fuck that, lets just have a laff!!"

    See? Chav humour.

    Cheers

  • botherer #126 6 years ago

    Hello George Roper. I love you!

    Just so you know, I was really hoping B&W2 would be great, as I love playing games, and I especially love playing great games. I was really disappointed that it wasn't great, and I think that's reflected in my review.

    I have a fun game I play whenever anyone accuses somewhere of being biased toward FPS games. I ask them to name three FPSs from this year. Not three that were overmarked, but just three at all. Now, obviously with the internet you'll be able to cheat, but in your heart you'll know the truth.

    I'm often bemused why FPS fans, starved of decent examples of their genre, don't accuse sites and magazines of being RTS biased, as these seem to make up about 50% of the games on the market at the moment. But for some reason, people continue to screech about FPSs while stomping their feet and pounding their angry fists up and down.

    I find it sad that you hate poor people so much. You should love all people and stop using derogatory terms against other human beings. It seems odd to be so upset that a game should be spoken of in negative terms, but be so cruel to actual living people.
    Edited by 1 at 06/10/05 @ 00:27

  • Stickman #127 6 years ago

    See what you've done there George, that's funny stuff! You've just taken the chav thing and run with it. It's a bold move and it would have paid off if it hadn't been done to death over and over before. Co-op? Cider? Baseball cap? Did you think of all those jokes on your own? I've never heard people use those things before, so kudos to you on the side-splitting social commentary.

    I think I'll stick with my 'fuck off, George Roper' comment though. You clearly don't like the site, yet you've been coming on daily for a year and a half? What a fantastic waste of your own time you've discovered! Keep up the good work, tard!

  • kangarootoo #128 6 years ago

    @George Roper

    You really like your chav angle don't you? Despite plenty of info to the contrary, I can see you sticking with this one. If it actually turned out that EG was funded by the Vatican I bet you'd still come back with another one of your "excellent chav jokes tm". They might seem funny to your mates as your ride to school on the bus, pointing at chavs out of the window. But to everyone here, you just look like a grumpy kid.

  • Teeth #129 6 years ago

    LOL his name shortens to "groper" mate lol got a light? wicked

    /was born 2 pwnz u at CS lol

  • Furbs #130 6 years ago

    I watch Bravo. It has teh ( o Y o ) ies

  • bootsy_NL_30 #131 6 years ago

    JESUS !!!!!


    ok this is becoming WAY too verbose! I think this has taken over the 8/10 Halo Forum as being the single most annoying read on this site.

    Kanga....your absolutely right , the worst thing you can do as an artist is answer your critics, I work in the creative industry and have friends on both sides of the fence (journo's and artists) journalists are usually fanboys X10 and artists are over sensitive assholes (when it comes to criticising their babies) bottom line is most of these people will drink a beer together at the next trade show, pat each other on the shoulder,make a passing comment about said contraversy and then get on with it.......why? THEY NEED EACH OTHER!

    people from the Lionhead forum ....we dont need your cultural elitism here,if you want to find "the lowest commen denominater" your it.....I'd rather have a beer with a chav from eurogamer than listen to your pointless semi intelectual bullshit.

    working on or playing a game about gods obviously has had a bad effect on your collective personalities, seek chavs,yobs, ordinary people , have a beer watch the football and get off your high horse.

  • bootsy_NL_30 #132 6 years ago

    note the reacurring use of the word beer in my last comment

    its 17:35 and the sun is shining in amsterdam!

    mmmmmmm beer

  • American_Badass #133 6 years ago

    Literally the shittiest review I've ever read in my life. I guess I should have expected as much from a site run by europeans and their small penises
    Edited by 1 at 06/10/05 @ 20:09

  • Furbs #134 6 years ago

    All you people moaning about this review are idiots. Dont you know Eurogamer is biased? They HATE games!!! All of them. They just get in the way of midgetporn surfing which as we all know from the great Billy (RIP dude) is the finest human experience a guy can have.
    But yeah, B&W2. What a crock of shite.

  • Sam81 #135 6 years ago

    I missed Trisha this morning but this is actually ten times better!

  • MrAtheist #136 6 years ago

    B&W2..not as good as:

    Halo
    Half-Life
    Deus Ex
    Plumbers Dont Wear Ties

  • MrAtheist #137 6 years ago

    oh and SNES Pit Fighter

  • Khab #138 6 years ago

    Literally the shittiest review I've ever read in my life. I guess I should have expected as much from a site run by europeans and their small penises

    Urrrrr... you do know that Lionhead is based in Britain (that's in Europe, btw)?

    Also, I don't quite see how small penis=lack of writing skills?

  • botherer #139 6 years ago

    "Literally the shittiest review I've ever read in my life."

    Wow. Literally. That's so awesome! I got poo on you, just by reviewing. And more poo than any review has ever plopped!

    Do I get a trophy too?

  • American_Badass #140 6 years ago

    I never said I liked Black and White 2, or Lionhead for that matter either, just dropping my totally badass comments like deuces on all your heads.

    And good job botherer, you sure showed me with your witty comment. The review was very poorly written, and completely biased. If saintgermain is european, he just broke the rule and raped you guys with his huge ass penis.

  • UncleSam_ #141 6 years ago

    Wow. This truly is a terrible review. It is poorly written and poorly thought out. But I guess I cant expect much more from a european.

  • tincanrocket #142 6 years ago

    Where did these hilarious yanks come from? They are even better than the turkish secks maniacs. More please

  • Darren #143 6 years ago

    I got the game yesterday and it's good if a little "samey". Graphically it is gorgeous provided you don't get TOO close (some of the textures are a little drab and blurry looking). There is a polygon bug though which causes some parts of objects to stretch for infinity (I've got an NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT) but I'm reluctant to use the 81.84 drivers (released to fix this glitch) as they don't work properly with my other games. Hopefully the forthcoming patch will fix it.

    Otherwise it's as playable and addictive as it ever was just lacking in new features given that it's been four years since the first game.

  • #144 6 years ago

    gotta agree with saint germain, the reviews on this site are appalling. Conker's review springs to mind as being very wide of the mark.

    *applauds everyone from lionhead who provided a way more intelligent counterpoint than most round here can manage*

    as you no doubt know by now lionhead, this site panders to a certain type of gamer, and when the staff actually have the time and inclination to get in a flame war in a comments thread, you can't expect much more from the regular tards either!

    no one really gives the reviews from eurogamer much credibility anyway lionhead, save the regulars here that have an almost obsessive belief in EG.

    those characters that were mentioned as not having the smarts to get past a wall in the game? maybe in the sequel you could refer to them as Eurogamer fans ;)
    Edited by 1 at 07/10/05 @ 10:59

  • Stickman #145 6 years ago

    " - Otherwise it's as playable and addictive as it ever was "

    Says all I need to know.

  • #146 6 years ago

    see?

    when the staff are as trolling and urgumentative as botherer, is it surprising that pingu here is like he is?

    reason and informed discussion is not something that is rewarded here ;)

  • Darren #147 6 years ago

    I think EG's review was a little harsh. Personally I think it's a 7 or 8/10 game, solid but offering nothing new.

    I love the way you can see what a creature is thinking now and see precisely what praising and punishing it is doing thanks to the innovative slider that most certainly does NOT work on an off and on principle as the review misleadingly states. It offers a far more subtle way of affecting the creatures personality while allowing you do see exactly what the creature is thinking. Brilliant stuff and that fixes one of the main gripes I had with the first game.

    One thing I did like was that my creature was roaming around "playing" with the villagers - I allowed him to do that - and I was making buildings. A few minutes later my creature was thinking "I want to make buildings" and he did. I think that is a far better system than having to laboriously teach him tasks like you did in the first game.

    I think Edge summed the game up perfectly when they said LIONHEAD *** had made a better game (ignore EG's comments) but in doing so they've made a more ordinary one (i.e. it's lacking in anything really new). They gave it 7/10 which given their harsh reviewing standards is an 8/10 in most other people's books!

    *** Not LionHEART! lol
    Edited by 3 at 07/10/05 @ 11:26

  • tengu #148 6 years ago

    FFS! Do you honestly think no one knows what your agenda for being here is arnie?

    You're the most tedious troll on this whole site, at least UncleSam and American Badass are amusing, you're just a twat.

  • #149 6 years ago

    darren, no doubt your comments will be dismissed by the regulars for erroneously reffering to lionhead as lionheart.

    but i agree with you completely. regardless of the score, the review itself was severely lacking.

    pingu, thank you for repeatedly making me right. :D
    Edited by 1 at 07/10/05 @ 11:21

  • Darren #150 6 years ago

    Ooops! Lionhead/Lionheart it makes no difference who they're called, it's the game that counts surely?

  • tengu #151 6 years ago

    "pingu, thank you for repeatedly making me right. :D"

    Self delusion, cute.

    Please, continue your scattergun attacks on the site and everyone on it, that's a fine way to spend time at work/school, wherever you're posting from at this time of the morning.

  • #152 6 years ago

    i praise and criticise as i see fit, i do neither to the exclusion of the other.

  • tengu #153 6 years ago

    lol

  • MrAtheist #154 6 years ago

    1up.com have given it 5/10. Time for the Yanks to open up a new front for the War on Terror (honest reviews).

    Face it, the game is an average one and deserves an average score. All the reviews are mentioning the same numerous faults, only difference is the final score. Strange that...

  • Darren #155 6 years ago

    There's a very good and detailed review of B&W2 by GameSpot who gave the game 8.2 while admitting it isn't perfect. It goes into far more detail about the game structure than EG's review.

    The average score for the game on Metacritic and GameRankings is around 70-80% with EG's review score sitting at odds with the others simply because it's the lowest so far!!!

  • #156 6 years ago

    yeah you're right, eurogamer is the lowest it appears.

    regardless, i don't think the final score matters as much as the review, and like you, i have no idea how the game plays from the review that was posted, all i see is criticism , which when used in a balanced review is fine, but having never played black and white 1 this review is largely useless to me!

    it definately assumes you've already played the game, as someone previously commented.

  • smelly #157 6 years ago

    Its the words that should convince you whether or not to part with cash, not the score.

  • #158 6 years ago

    you'd get laughed at in every thread unfortunately fellas. your brand of randomly saying 'retard' or 'twat' in every single thread wouldn't get you anywhere, but you're welcome to try and outwit even our youngest members.

    we get a good mixture of members on our multi-format forum by the way, some tv video games presenters, some who run games sites, some who just play, some who work in the industry.

    where did i say i had no interest in buying black and white 2 by the way?

    teamxbox forums are a great source for the latest news, though i wouldn't ever want to comment there, it's full of american kids.

    EDIT:by the way, as this thread is being linked to in forums around the world as an example of how bad eurogamer is getting, and how they're losing even more friends within the industry, i'd just like to thank you for linking to my forum, you're doing our membership numbers proud!

    Edited by 1 at 07/10/05 @ 14:22

  • UncleSam_ #159 6 years ago

    zomgosh u rubez. deletin hour postz? wat iz dis, 1984??? o wate u r ghey. k, dat xplanes it. culdent take our hax intiligense so u destroy teh evidense. GG KKTHXBAI LOLROFLLMAO.

  • #160 6 years ago

    he heh, when i go fishing, i always get a bite ;)

  • UncleSam_ #161 6 years ago

    tengu i dun no u but u sound reetarded. k? ma leetnez givs me da power ovr ur mom cuz ma penor is so big compred 2 urs.

  • #162 6 years ago

    to have beaten you at your own game with absolutely no effort at all?

    yeah i am. :)

  • Jokerr #163 6 years ago

    These last few post make no sense whatsoever.

  • Teeth #164 6 years ago

    That's cos some are missing :) Wait, I'll get rid of some.
    Edited by 1 at 07/10/05 @ 16:20

  • tengu #165 6 years ago

    Thanks for leaving my posts to look like nonsense on their own teeth :(

    He banned then?

  • Teeth #166 6 years ago

    Hey! I even made a proper FAO for you in the forum! Yes he is.

  • Xiphias #167 6 years ago

    Now that I've played the game I thought I'd list the bits the review simply got wrong.

    "the supposedly sentient inhabitants of your towns rely on you for an astonishing number of menial tasks, from giving them permission to breed when they want children, to whether they want to worship you or not"

    Your people will both breed on their own and worship at your alter on their own. If you give them 'permission' then that particular person will do it to the exclusion of all else except sleep.

    "But beyond that, do you actually need a rest home? Does improving the lives of the elderly make a difference to your game? Definitely not in any way that will change your experience."

    According to the spinning signs in game a rest home will house the elderly and free up room in normal houses for more prople.

    "Another is a completely broken game where you're supposed to help a kung-fu student to smash rocks with his fist. Not explaining what you're supposed to do leaves you to fumble about, waggling the mouse until you stumble upon the technique, only to discover that it seemingly only works 50 per cent of the time. Since you have to complete it three times in a row, the broken engine's statistics are against you, and against your even bothering. And anyway, in every other part of the game my powers allow me crack rocks with a mere touch. Why is that suddenly impossible now?"

    The method to do it is a bit obscure, once I'd found out what to do it worked flawlessly though.

    "Which is to say nothing of the mystery behind the early waterfall-clearing mini-game. There are some rocks blocking the water's flow. But you can't, for some unexplained reason, pick up them up. So you have to clear the fall by, er, picking up some rocks and throwing them at it. Idiotic beyond belief."

    You failed to mention that this is a quest on a tutorial island which teaches you to throw rocks.

    "the spinning signposts that offer titbits of bonus tutorial information in every level (which don't work either - finding their hotspot is an ordeal, then the pop-up text disappears at random while you're reading it), "

    Again, I havn't had any real problem with these. They don't stay up long enough to read the long ones but I havn't had problems finding the hotspot and the pop-up text has only dissapeared after a certain time or if I'd moved my mouse off.
    Edited by 1 at 07/10/05 @ 17:29

  • rauper Verified Managing Director, Eurogamer Network #168 6 years ago

    From VE3D:

    "My views on Black & White 2 the other day caused some ruckus. When I read the EuroGamer 6/10 review a couple days before I received my own copy I believed them to be overly harsh for whatever reason - well after playing the game through to land 6 I'd actually have to say I'd score it 5/10 if I were to play till the conclusion and review it (one can't, in my opinion, officially review a game without completing it). As matters stand, I can't bear to play the game any further for it is so repetitive, so tedious, so lacking soul, so unlike Black & White, and yes, as mentioned previously, I've been playing with the patch that was officially released a few hours ago; I also imagine that I would have slated the game even further if I encountered the numerous technical issues plaguing others' experiences."

  • squeakyg #169 6 years ago

    Damn, I missed all the drama. I'm a week late. Does the comments section even enjoy a lifespan a week after the review...?

    Eurogamer reviews are a funny thing. The website seems to have a mandate to describe so many nagatives of gameplay that it sounds unplayable, then give a score between 6 and 9.

    But I kind of like that. Eurogamer reviews are the only ones that really TELL you the niggly little annoyances and stupidities in games. I read IGN and a few others to learn technical details of how the game works, but there's barely any OPINION within that kind of corporate personality-less writing.

    Eurogamer is the only review site I know that isn't afraid to MOAN about the kind of annoying shit that other reviews don't have time for. You're not afraid to come across as a moaning pedant, and expose the little niggles that, actually, make a big difference in determining whether a player will enjoy the game.

    One last point: ANY time the employees argue against a review of their product, they can only come across badly. It can ONLY weaken the position of the developer. I now have an image of Lionhead being staffed by angry losers who can't accept criticism.

    Kind of scary, isn't it -- aren't game developers supposed to use criticism to improve their games, so that their next product doesn't containt he niggly annoyances in question? What are we coming to, when game developers say, "Screw your reports of flaws and badly-implemented ideas, you didn't take time to appreciate the overall TONE!"

    And that's why Lionhead makes pretentious shite.

  • The_Bends #170 6 years ago

    I'm late but I had to sign up to praise this review. Yes there are things wrong with it, a couple of details are wrong but in the end they are minor. The overall impression the reviewer gives of the game is precisely the experience you get from playing the game. I don't want a review to tell me that its and RTS/city building god game with features xy and z. That is lazy reviewing, filling up word space I can easily get from previews or the company that made the game. What I want is one gamers experience with the game which is precisely what I got.

    The game was hyped to be revolutionary, fixing everthing that was wrong with the first game and it simply is not. I still have nightmares about throwing fireball after fireball at villages in Black and White each getting less and less impressive. Now I find that in black and white two the bet meothd to be good is imply to build 10 creature pens in a big ring to impress some village miles away. Oh and suggenly I have to be an evil invader because my peaceful village has run out of ore, fantastic. The tasks are moronic, the RTS is broke and the city building is repetative but its not a bad game its a 6/10 game. it should have been more.

  • Bullshit_Review #171 6 years ago

    I have to say, I love EG for the fact they state the iffies in the game, but I hate them for the fact that they stretch it out so far they make it sound absolutely unplayable and in some spots completely make shit up. Armies don't run around in circles for no reason etc. etc.

    The whole reason BW2 has you city building and doing *not so godly* tasks is because the first 75% of the people that bought Black and white we're not gamers. Peter wanted to change that by adding RTS elements. Sure the game has isn't perfect and had a few minor issues, but hey, name me atleast one game that is, and most of them issues we're fixed with the 1.1 patch that was released the day the game was released. Not to mension the graphics are absolutely gorgeous, if you have a decent pc you're gonna get some sweet eye-candy.

    I am not going to force anyone to buy this game, but FYI you are missing out on a great game.

    To EG: Apply the 1.1 patch, and review the game again... for god's sake.

  • chaoslight #172 6 years ago

    id just like to say........

    BW2 was messed up cause of EA. ALL there conserned with is money......BW2 was only, like 45% done. It wouldv'e needed another 1 year or so. But EA, in normal dumb ass fashion, hurried lionhead along, while there president said, " make less money we will, if come out late it does "

    I believe it would have been groundbreaking....if it came out in a years time. Lionhead coulda done it, if EA hadn't hurried them. They had the ideas, programs and everything......but EA was too consirned with money. Now EA hope modders who are not part of the company, will make the rest of the game for them! How lame!!

  • hitomo #173 6 years ago

    "going to include RTS ideas such as the armies, then the sad fact is that these features need to be as good as a straight RTS. Raising your own Creature needs to be as agile and believable as Nintendogs. Building working towns needs to compare to Sim City. Because as unfair as that seems, that's where our expectations begin when we recognise such features in a game."

    THATS BULLSHIT, ya whole rewiew is bullshit, TRY to see the game AS IT IS and not as a game YOU think of, if you cant get past you expectations while "reviewing" the actual game you are nothing more than a bloody flaming one of a smartASS

    besides all your thoughts about a RTS-cityBuilding-godSim...

    B&W2 is a perfect gameexperience, I LOVE that particular tutor-characters, its good to have them at your side....

    hey mr. reviewer ! ....Simcity my ASS ....NintenDogs my ASS ...its about something different here, a pitty you are unable to perceive that...

    if you refuse to play that game because of that review, you are a victim to some selfish n00b, who wants to pe heard not to judge a piece of software by its qualities

    greetz,
    rest in pieces...


    I didnt playd the first part, cause it never reached the DREAMCAST ( like it was announced)
    I dont give much on peter as a person or as a gamedesigner, everyone can talk about everything all night a day long, so ask yourself if you are a mega-hype-fanboy...
    I hated FABLE because of its designflaws like the mission-quest-table...

    I didnt gave much on the B&W2 but heart peter M. raving about the sequel AND I didnt believe in it cause of fable...

    But when I first launched B&W2 it instantly nailed me onto my chair for the next 4-5 hours

    I will tell you the secret: the game doesnt confronts you with obvious gamemechanics, with a structure of functions you have to know or learn befor start gaming to be able to get the FUN out of the playing, its all ONE process, its a whole GAMINGeXPERIENCE - you have to regard, thies review is like disamble a mechanic watch into parts and than start to complain that the watch isnt displaying the actual time... hope you got that .... have fun :_)

    starting by the nice interactive Lionhead-logo-animation, from the beginning it is clear that the game offers a new way of getting you into it... the game clearly says: I AM MADE FOR YOU - play me - dont beat me - be with me - I have something lovley to offer...
    Edited by 1 at 24/10/05 @ 16:16

  • reality_cheque #174 6 years ago

    Pre-serious question mocking:
    I was really looking forward to picking this up at the weekend, now I'm not unlikely to but that's ok, as all of the amusement I would have got playing has been surpassed by the feeling of superiority I get from reading the comments defending this. Seems weird to me that the most poorly written comments were by people who are obviously paid to say nice things. Come back when you've finished lower school. I don't stoop to insulting people very often, but my god Hitomo you're a bell end and a half. My 3yr old niece could write better than you, although that's probably unfair to her as a 3 month old french child could write a more readable and flowing comment in English than you have. If English isn't your first language, I'd consider practicing before embarrassing yourself like that again. If it is, may the gods have mercy on us. Feel free to post a response so I can mock you a second time.

    Post mocking serious question:
    My reason for resurrecting this comment thread is I'm curious is now it's been out a few months, have any of the issues been fixed in patches?
    Edited by 1 at 10/02/06 @ 11:23