But do you really think that the small combat problem makes it a whole 1.5 less than the first one? I can understand your problems, but I really don't think they're that big of a deal, especially since they added so many new powers and the UGC.Cheesehead9099

First of all, the combat problems are not small. It sounds like the changes were great -- more powers and enemy types! -- but they only lead to frustration and boredom. Second, combat is just one of the issues in the new game. I think pacing was ultimately a bigger problem for me. I loved the flow of the first. The powers are doled out in a slow and tantalizing way which gives you time to learn and appreciate every move. The blacked out parts of the city are death traps, and traveling through them is tense. Restoring power is a huge deal because of that. And then when you do turn the tables and unlesah your fury, it feels great, because you fought for those powers. You earned the ability to kick butt. Coat all that in a great origin story, and you have a classic game.

Infamous 2 just sets you lose in a city with tons of powers and lets you go nuts. Kind of cool and kind of boring. I think some people will like the change, but I found it pretty inconsisent. I started replaying Infamous again yesterday but I have no interesting in revisiting the new one, now that I'm done. It's still good, but it's just a typical open-world action game.

Small design choices have a cumulative effect on the entire game.

Enemies are now harder and more plentiful than in the first game. Subsequently, fights last longer. These elements on their own are neither good nor bad. The problems, and why I ultimately dislike this change, are twofold. First, many fights, especially in the last third of the game, are in confined places where your mobility is severely limited. The chance of being hit skyrockets, which leads to annoying knockbacks (complete with busted camera) and the dreaded black-and-white screen. Second, because of the frequency of your low-health state, you use up easily accessible generators quickly. And finding new power sources is really tough since you can't see a darn thing and the enemies relentlessly attack.

Infamous 2 is has more powers and larger scale fights compared to the first, but they're poorly balanced. It's much more fun fighting a few enemies in the first, even with limited moves, than the exhausting battles in the new game.

It goes away from Infamous' strengths and makes for a less enjoyable game, at least to me. I think people who crave raw action will prefer the sequel. But anyone who loved having a tangible impact in the city, who appreciated the deliberate pacing, and adored turning from an average guy to a superhero will be disappointed with how the sequel turned out. Infamous may be the best open-world action game I've ever played, and that hasn't changed because its sequel has better graphics and more powers.

How does a game like this get a 9 but Amnesia:The Dark Descent only gets an 8.5? I don't understand these reviewers sometimes. DragonfireXZ95

Different games, different reviewers, different genres. Their respective review texts go into more detail (beyond the numbers) if you want to know why they scored what they did. Also, why are you even comparing Outland to Amnesia?

To the person who asked, I played half the game on Guarded (that's the default difficulty, right?) and the rest bouncing between them to see how they differed. The AI is really lousy, but I enjoyed it. Who wants to kill smart people?

Good review, interesting though as you praised the single player over the multiplayer with most of the other reviews doing the opposite, any thoughts on that?WreckEm711

The multiplayer certainly isn't bad, it's just very typical. Like I said, it hits the points you would expect, but doesn't do anything new or interesting. I wish they would have gone the route of Timesplitters so the multiplayer matched the wacky vibe of the single player.

I'm surprised it got a good score,especially after how much the first one sucked...:x Man I remember being so hyped for it and then it just came down crashing. Oh well, not getting it but great for the folks that want it.) *Stares awkwardly at Legato*:Psanim02

Yeah, I'm equally surprised/impressed with Conduit 2. I had a really good time playing it. I'm actually looking forward to Conduit 3 now. If they model their multiplayer on Timesplitters and keep the silly vibe in single player, it could be really awesome.

I have read the reviews and if this game was on another platform it would be a 6 tops. Are the standards on the wii really that low where a game like goldeneye gets a 8.5 on gamespot ??pimpog

As the guy who reviewed this for GameSpot, I can say with confidence that you're wrong.

Well to be fair there are a lot of games that don't evolve in gameplay but yet they get high scores (I'm looking at you COD!) but I think the score is ok to notice that.kuraimen

That's a great point that makes it difficult to evaluate certain games. For me, part of the reason I love God of War is because of the amazing surprises that it offers. I love the huge boss fights and ridiculous enviroments. But Sparta lacks those "holy crap!" moments. Just playing through the first level of Chains of Olympus an hour ago reminded me of what I was missing in Sparta. Having to fight that huge monster three times during the course of the level was incredible, and the way you kill him is just so satisfying.

So, yeah, Sparta is still a great game, but because it's so predictable and doesn't offer those "oh snap" moments, it couldn't rise up to the other games in the series.

To sum up the review: This game is every bit as good as the God of War games that we give AAAs to, and plays just like them. But the PSP's screen is small, which is the game's fault, I don't like tapping the shoulder buttons and I'm tired of GOW games.

Reminds me a bit of the Twilight Princess review.SakusEnvoy

I like how you're trying to twist this as a negative review even though I said the game was great. There are now five real God of War games (I don't count Betrayal), and this one doesn't offer anything new until the last section. It's still beautiful and fun, but you can't just expect a game that doesn't evolve the formula at all to score as high as its predecessors. And it's not the game's fault that the PSP has a small screen, but the developers didn't build around this limitation. That is an issue.

And I'm not tired of GoW games at all. I'm playing through Chains of Olympus this weekend for fun.

Looks fun I guess. Can't help but being a bit peeved that this gets a video review while games like Amnesia or Patrician IV don't. Seems like you need to release your game for a console if you want exposition.Filthybastrd

Nah, it's just the difference between in-house and freelance reviews. We're only able to do video reviews when GameSpot employees write them up, since reviewerers have to write and record a script as well.