User Reviews (51 - 61 of 144)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Looks like a victim of snobbism

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 2 / 4
Date: August 09, 2004
Author: Amazon User

The plus:
+ Nice areas (good textures, particle effects, lightning and shadowing, overall nice graphic engine).
+ Good sound and music.

The minus:

- I dislike the character design. It's too colorful, too synthetic, just not realistic. The monsters are anything but scaring.

- While playing I'm getting more and more annoyed by the intermission sequences: There's too much of them, I cannot switch them off, and I'm not willing to play the game again because I will see then all these clips again.

- Overall the game is too 'stiff': The storyline is not even slightly interactive, for example it's not possible to kill your team mates or to destroy things where I'd find that appropriate. Although the maps are beautiful I miss those exiting secret areas where you can go in just for fun. So here again, I'm extremely forced into the progress of the game.

As a result I can't get just a little into Unreal 2. Neighter I develop feelings towards Aida, Isaak or Neban (which is what should happen if Unreal2 was a good game), nor does the atmosphere of the game only slightly effect my mood.
Playing Unreal 2 I more and more get the impression that the developers of the game wanted to present an 'awesome' technology with all the graphic and sound bombast and all the weapon effects and so on. The result is that the games misses anything what makes an Ego-Shooter interesting: the excitement, the affection of your mood, the ability to draw you inside.
It's not half as good as the original Unreal, and it's honestly the most boring Ego-Shooter I've ever played.

-

I liked it a lot, but it could have had more

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 2 / 4
Date: March 11, 2003
Author: Amazon User

This is going to sound like a lot of the other reviews, but it's how I saw the game. Graphics are indeed awesome, but weaker systems will be struggling. The gameplay is good, despite how some other people describe it. Some missions have you trying to defend your positions with force fields and auto-turrets, and sometimes they throw in Marines you can order around. All around neat and fun.

Going back to your own ship between (most) levels is a cool feature too, but it could have had more. It helps to flesh out the game background more, but not nearly enough. I was hoping for some kind of timeline-connection to the original Unreal. The ship's crew are entertaining, but only the first time; though sometimes I go back to hear Issak describe my weapons. I wanted more interaction, more options, more you could do with having your own room on the ship. In short: could have had more.

What will really disappoint people is the lack of connection to Unreal. The Prisoner character from the last game never makes a return, nor is ever mentioned. His antagonists, the Skaarj, appear a few times in the game, but it's not explained at all. Sad as it is for me to say this, Unreal 2 seems to have less to do with Unreal than Quake 2 and 3 had to do with each other (that's an insult, for you non-gamers). I'm still giving it four stars because I had a blast playing it, but it still lacked the elements we Unreal fans wanted.

...

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 2 / 4
Date: March 15, 2003
Author: Amazon User

if you loved unreal tournament,don't buy this game. thay have taken a first class deathmatch game and turned it into a ... duke nukem type game. when will these nurds learn to stop messing up a good thing?

Unreal 1:Good. Unreal 2:Bad

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 2 / 4
Date: October 15, 2005
Author: Amazon User

Back in the old days when the original Unreal came out, there was nothing else I would play. The graphics (for that time) were great, the enemies were fresh and original, and there was no stupid dialogue to bore you to the extent of not wanting to play the game. And it had a wide open door for a sequel, so I was excited about this. Then along comes a digital blob of sacrelige. The graphics are fantastic, but it's not fun killing a bunch of boring space marines, and killing the Skaarj that now look like elephants crossed with a giant T-Rex. The dialogue is bad, folks, and I mean BAD. I just don't want to talk to an alien that looks like a 50's jukebox and full or radioactive semen, or a grungy mechanic who tells you who to use a pistol and smokes incessantly, or the world's greatest strategist who looks like some sort of whore. All in all, the game sucks. If they make an Unreal 3, it better be like the original: fresh, new, and exciting.

Look out Halo!

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 7 / 31
Date: July 09, 2002
Author: Amazon User

... It's a sequel to the original Unreal. Although it will be about five times better. It has great graphics from the screenshots I've seen and it just looks overall awesome. I can't wait. Also, the name is NOT Unreal Episode 2. The official name is Unreal II: The Awakening.

Yawn.

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 4 / 16
Date: June 20, 2003
Author: Amazon User

Oooh, a three-dimensional, first-person shooter with RPG elements. There's an idea.

Twats.

Almost Perfect - (revised after I finished the game)

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: February 09, 2003
Author: Amazon User

I got this game yesterday and I have to say that my expectations for it were pretty high. Although I still don't have too much time with it, I can generally say that those expectations were met.

So, how does it compare to (what I humbly believe to be the king of all FPS games), Halo? It exceeds Halo in some respects, but falls short in others, although it is a pretty close call. Even though the two games are on different platforms, they are both similar--epic-scope games, each featuring a main character who is essentially a tank.

Graphics: U2 beats Halo (and anything else out there) hands down. The graphics in U2 are simply amazing and soundly trounce HAlo's very good (although now somewhat dated) graphics. The downside, however, is that these graphics chew up a lot of memory, and even on my machine (2.4 GHz P4, 512 MB, 128 GE 4 card) there is some slow-down during particularly hairy moments.

Storyline: Halo soundly beats U2 here. Halo actually has a good storyline, whereas the U2 one is riddled with holes and exceptionally short. The main character is also not the brightest bulb in the closet, which is always a point of frustration for me. I was also dismayed at how quickly I beat the game...

Weapons: U2 trounces Halo in this department. Not only are the weapon effects much better in U2, but there is more variety as well. The flame thrower alone is enough to put U2 over Halo, but some of the other baddies lurking in your arsenal are positively wicked.

Enemies: Here again U2 beats Halo with a wider array of enemies, all of which must be defeated with (fairly) different tactics. The Skaarj are back, and there are some new foes out there that are very interesting. Additionally, U2 has something I haven't seen forever: enemy bosses! These add are a refreshing addition to FPS games, although they feel a little formulaic. U2's enemies only have one problem...

Enemy AI: Here Halo wins. Easily. The enemies in U2, although quite varied, simply don't seem to exhibit a whole lot of intelligence. Halo's enemies would fall back and regroup whereas the U2 bad guys just keep on coming. And they only come after you. You can stand right in front of explosive canisters and they won't shoot the canisters...

Mission types: Tie. It must be said that Halo's missions are longer and more satisfying to play. Most of the U2 missions are a little bit too short. Both have the same kinds of missions--search and destroy, search and destroy, destroy and search, sometimes protect something. Also, U2's missions are fairly simple in that the only way to complete them is to go in guns blazing and blow everything to kingdom come... Fans of sniping or military games with realistic damage will be disappointed here. It's a FPS though. The whole point is to blow stuff up. ::)

Level design: U2's levels are more creative and varied as you hop from planet to planet. One bad thing is that there is quite a bit of in-level loading, whereas Halo has none.

Multiplayer: Halo wins easily. U2 unfortunately, does not have multiplayer support, which is a shame because it would be awesome to play the missions in co-op.

Winner: Halo. The multiplayer support is important, and it's what keeps me and my friends going back to Halo even a year after its launch. The story mode is also superior in Halo, which is what keeps that game fresh and hamstrings U2. U2 is an awesome game, and on the PC among the best (if not the best) shooters out there. I recommend this title if you have a powerful PC and are looking to get away from online FPS tournament games.

Okay FPS from Atari

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: March 31, 2003
Author: Amazon User

On the surface, this uninspired first person shooter has everything that makes up a great game...
1) Futuristic, save the universe plot with a hard-boiled, iconoclastic ex-marine trying, against monumental odds, to set things right
2) Decent array of weapons
3) Relatively large mix of foes
4) Intuitive user interface
5) Pretty good, but at times irrelevant, scenery

But the whole thing just never really comes together. I think the biggest problem with Unreal 2 is that everything in the game has been done before -- and done before by better and more creative programmers (e.g. Halo, Jedi Outcast, Doom). Given the above, I am somewhat suprised by the high marks from some of the other reviewers -- maybe they've never played an FPS before?

Net/net:
1) Tired rework of FPS format with no significant differentiator from other FPS's already on the market
2) Suprisingly high system requirements (Atari recommended system requirements: 384MB RAM, 64MB Video RAM, Pentium 1.2 Ghz or higher)
3) Worth borrowing/renting but not worth buying due to limited replay value

Feh.

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: September 21, 2003
Author: Amazon User

They tried real hard. Maybe too hard. Over-written commentary, over-polished graphics, and an occasionnal feeling that they forgot how incredible the first game was. It's pretty, and it has some wonderful elements. But, it just doesn't jump out at you and knock you over like the original did. I did have some fun with the game. It was just too formulaic. No replay value at all for me.

dissapointing: zero replay value

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: September 25, 2003
Author: Amazon User

After playing the game all the way through, all puzzles are solved, all mysteries are revealed, all AI opponents strategies are cracked and countered. Pretty game, but ZERO replay value. Buy Unreal Tournament 2003 instead: when patched up to the most current patch level, it's a blast of a game with infinite replayability.

Review Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next 

Actions