Dying Light 2

+
Hey, I'm glad to see you again here, and thank you for the review.
One question from me: How scary is night play? IIRC about five years or so ago, some dev of Techland said that the previous game was too scary at night, so this time would be less scary, and in fact, some of the pre-release reviews (like IGN) said that lurking at night was not as scary as the previous one. Personally, I'm disappointed if that's true, and I'm already not looking forward to that part of the game, but I'd be happy to know what you think.

I know you asked for @Sild opinion specifically but here is my take on it anyway.

It's both more scary and less scary.

The atmosphere and graphics are just miles ahead of the original's. As such the environment is a whole lot more "scary" at night. It's just much more convincing and immersive. Which, as far as I'm concerned, will be the defining factor between whether a game manages to genuinely make me afraid or not.

Yet, it's not perfect. Like @Sild mentioned, there doesn't seem to be volatiles everywhere at night like in the original. Howlers are mostly on ground level and as such pose very little risk unless you miss a jump and end up at street level. In other words, night feels less dangerous than in the original. I want to re-iterate that I'm very early into the game, and so is @Sild at 15 hours if the game is as big as they say, so this might change.

So that's a bit of a mixed bag depending on how you felt about the original's nighttime. Personally, I would prefer nighttime to be much more deadly and I'm genuinely hoping it does get deadlier as I progress.

Ultimately, I feel like that the game's nighttime is much better at instilling a sense of danger but worse at actually making it happen.
 
One question from me: How scary is night play?

There are a lot more things to do at night this time around but it's not that scary, tbh.

It's less dangerous. Howlers can start chases comparable to the ones in the first game but they're much easier to evade than the volatiles, so unless you're not paying attention it shouldn't be hard to survive multiple nights in a row with no major issues. When the chases do start they build up over time through 4 stages of severity, but i've never had one reach past stage 2 (and that was only once and for a few seconds so i couldn't tell the difference between the stages). Maybe at stage 4 something really bad comes after you but right now i can't say.
 
4 stages of severity, but i've never had one reach past stage 2 (and that was only once and for a few seconds so i couldn't tell the difference between the stages). Maybe at stage 4 something really bad comes after you but right now i can't say.

So I saw your post an had a half hour free. Thought I'd try out maxing a chase.

1-3 is just runners coming at you in greater numbers as you the chase level goes up. Level 4 is where shit hits the fan and the volatiles come out. Basically replace every runner with a volatile. They come out of every nook and cranny and they pack a much more potent wallop than in the original. If they catch you, it's game over. On hard anyway, I can't speak for lower difficulties but I suspect level 4 is meant as a run or die situation regardless of difficulty.

With that said, it is far too easy to avoid the chase level raising to 4 and once you reach that level, it's still fairly easy to end the chase as there are plenty of UV lights/safe houses.

Basically reinforces my belief that the game is great at pushing this atmosphere and sense of danger but doesn't really follow through.
 
Last edited:
I was a big fan back when DL 1 came out. I played it so much I loved the gameplay and everything. Until a quest made me attach bombs to pillars in a horde of zombies. I never made it and quit playing because it was so frustrating. DL 2 looks similar so yeah, no thanks. Also the constant dark... Not a fan (anymore).
 
@GrimReaper801 and @Sild

Thank you both!
I played the first game for over 1000 hours, and every time I played it, the first part where we have to escape from the volatiles scared the crap out of me, but I was addicted to that scary feeling on DL1 (Escaping from volatiles chasing me to the ends of hell was insanely fun!). So I'm disappointed to see your post "less scary is true" tbh, but I'll just enjoy this game for what it is.
Seeing your reviews, it seems that the atmosphere and parkour action of the game has been definitely improved. Personally, I'm also looking forward to the narrative of DL2, which some of the former REDs like Karolina Stachyra, Arkadiusz Borowik, and Stanisław Święcicki get involved with iirc, though I've seen some reviews saying not to expect too much from the story.
Anyway, can't wait to be chased by maxed-out level4 volatiles. (even if their relentless pursuit is not enough for me :p) <3
 
@GrimReaper801 and @Sild

Thank you both!
I played the first game for over 1000 hours, and every time I played it, the first part where we have to escape from the volatiles scared the crap out of me, but I was addicted to that scary feeling on DL1 (Escaping from volatiles chasing me to the ends of hell was insanely fun!). So I'm disappointed to see your post "less scary is true" tbh, but I'll just enjoy this game for what it is.
Seeing your reviews, it seems that the atmosphere and parkour action of the game has been definitely improved. Personally, I'm also looking forward to the narrative of DL2, which some of the former REDs like Karolina Stachyra, Arkadiusz Borowik, and Stanisław Święcicki get involved with iirc, though I've seen some reviews saying not to expect too much from the story.
Anyway, can't wait to be chased by maxed-out level4 volatiles. (even if their relentless pursuit is not enough for me :p) <3

For what it's worth, the narrative is fine if you come in with decent expectations.

The original game's narrative wasn't it's strongest point either. I'm not certain how people got their expectations up about it. It's Techland, story and writing has never been their strongest suit. I didn't expect this to change with DL2 personally but I think it is better than the original game's. By a longshot. Aiden isn't a great protagonist, neither was Krane. The story is essentially the same "humans are the real problem" in both games. Yet, there are far more choices to be made in thus one. Some with immediate consequences, some with long term ramifications. I've noticed a few minor incoherences and some occurences of mediocre writing here and there but I also remember the first game having a few of those as well.

The game isn't winning an award for it's narrative and writing but I truly don't understand why anyone would expect Techland to deliver a great story and narrative.
 
I don't know, it seems to lack a bit of quality:
  • Why does this guy not care about that crystal? He should be recommending a dealer, suggesting to share the earnings, or something like that.

There is a reason. Everything Hakon does eventually makes sense.


Simple free folks vs. Peacekeepers rhetoric. Both sides talk as if the other is the single worse thing for humanity. Both sides are shitty. It's up to you to figure out which one you consider to be less shitty.

I'm not certain if you're serious with this one. If so, you haven't played any of the games and are going solely from that video, right?

The really dangerous infected are damaged by UV radiation. Thus, UV lights are installed to protect certain areas. Also why you only find the "shambler" type of infected out during the day.

  • "There's no time!" Nice try, but since there's no other dialogue option that lets me try to complete the chapter in a different way, it makes me believe that there is in fact plenty of time, and only one way to proceed. When I fail, I just need to try a couple of times, which is pretty boring.
This one I genuinely don't understand.

There is no time. You stay there, you die. If you die you have to start the chase over. If that's boring then I'm assuming you find the vast majority of games very boring as this is a pretty standard way of doing this. Do X or fail, fail = start over.
 
Last edited:
There is a reason. Everything Hakon does eventually makes sense.
Simple free folks vs. Peacekeepers rhetoric. Both sides talk as if the other is the single worse thing for humanity. Both sides are shitty. It's up to you to figure out which one you consider to be less shitty.
I'm not certain if you're serious with this one. If so, you haven't played any of the games and are going solely from that video, right?
The really dangerous infected are damaged by UV radiation. Thus, UV lights are installed to protect certain areas. Also why you only find the "shambler" type of infected out during the day.
This one I genuinely don't understand.
There is no time. You stay there, you die. If you die you have to start the chase over. If that's boring then I'm assuming you find the vast majority of games very boring as this is a pretty standard way of doing this. Do X or fail, fail = start over.
I apologize, I haven't played Dying Light 2, yet. It's a very short video that I've linked, so I'm not to judge.
That being said, when watching the video, I probably expected to see more choices e.g. dialogue options that have genuine consequences in the game itself. Choices that make me fail, and make me want to choose a different dialogue option after reloading a save, in oder to avoid that fail. When there's no other option with a dedicated consequence, it implements that it's in fact impossible to fail: I just need to try a couple of times. Anyway, I should actually play the game before judging it...
 
I apologize, I haven't played Dying Light 2, yet. It's a very short video that I've linked, so I'm not to judge.
That being said, when watching the video, I probably expected to see more choices e.g. dialogue options that have genuine consequences in the game itself. Choices that make me fail, and make me want to choose a different dialogue option after reloading a save, in oder to avoid that fail. When there's no other option with a dedicated consequence, it implements that it's in fact impossible to fail: I just need to try a couple of times. Anyway, I should actually play the game before judging it...

While I agree that you should probably play the game before judging it, videos are not a bad way of getting an impression either.

It's just a pretty bad video to form an opinion from. Aiden just got to VIlledor knowing nothing of it and it's peculiar rules, just got infected and Hakon just saved his life. That 15 minutes video is merely meant as your introduction to Villedor. It's within the first 30 minutes of a -supposedly- extremely long game (if you're a completionist).

With that said, don't expect extremely deep choices. Your choices are mainly about the factions and what territories they control which, from what I understand, greatly influences/determines which ending you get. Others have immediate consequences but those also seem to be of little importance in the grand scheme of things.

One of my earlier choice lead to a kid committing suicide, I'm pretty certain I'll never hear about it again.

EDIT: And there is no save game option. The game auto saves very often so you'll never lose your progress but it does make it impossible to simply reload and make another choice. Not an issue for me personally, I like living with my choices regardless of how infuriating they might be (gives me a reason to replay one day) but I know that this annoys many.
 
Last edited:
I took it and honestly I'm having a blast on this game, it's huge, the lifespan is crazy as is the freedom to roam, frankly they should have used the same tools with cyberpunk, I think there would have had much less problem ... side graphics quality, there is nothing to reproach either! In short, while waiting for a cyberpunk sequel with a big dlc, go there without hesitation. ;)
 
DL2 deserves way better acclaim that it got. Best "realistic" open world traversal gameplay ever. And open world design and content with 10 times the complexity of Cyberpunk 2077. Gameplay-wise this is easy 9/10.

Writing and characters as a whole aren't as bad as they say either. There are some outlying examples of bad writing all over, especially in the beginning. Too much forced exposure to awkward side-NPCs. They tried too hard to make those side quests full of depth like W3 and ended up with NPCs spewing lines and lines of completely unrelatable nonsense. And those atrocious flashbacks of Aiden really set a bad tone. But Lawan and the later characters aren't bad. They probably shouldn't have marketed it as a fully fledged epic with mind blowing choices, and no-one would have even noticed.

If you liked DL1 even a little, or games like Mirror Edge, Prince of Persia, Spiderman, etc., this one is godly. Maybe... a notch too easy in comparison to DL1.
 
DL2 deserves way better acclaim that it got. Best "realistic" open world traversal gameplay ever. And open world design and content with 10 times the complexity of Cyberpunk 2077. Gameplay-wise this is easy 9/10.

Writing and characters as a whole aren't as bad as they say either. There are some outlying examples of bad writing all over, especially in the beginning. Too much forced exposure to awkward side-NPCs. They tried too hard to make those side quests full of depth like W3 and ended up with NPCs spewing lines and lines of completely unrelatable nonsense. And those atrocious flashbacks of Aiden really set a bad tone. But Lawan and the later characters aren't bad. They probably shouldn't have marketed it as a fully fledged epic with mind blowing choices, and no-one would have even noticed.

If you liked DL1 even a little, or games like Mirror Edge, Prince of Persia, Spiderman, etc., this one is godly. Maybe... a notch too easy in comparison to DL1.
There's a lot of fetch quests, and you feel it. Writing isn't bad - I think many times is good or even very good, but execution is just not good many times. Presentation, cutscenes, animations lacking (but that's norm for video games) a lot of quality, and artistic vision - there's no staging, Techland not "selling" this city, world during many cutscenes.
Questline with books is good example, it's just one big fetch quests it's not even funny, if you don't read a lot and know this stuff, reward is talking with two characters, one you can romance, if you don't act like jerk. Writing isn't bad for this questline, romance is good and not some cringefest, but execution and nonsense inside this questline, when they send you to various places to look for books - why exactly you have to go to marked places? how do they know, I can find books there? dunno...
There's one quest with NPC wanting to give rose flower to another NPC, and I have to say idea for this quest is good, it's a little bit sentimental but in good way, writing is good, but it's just fetch quest.
So it's more complicated than "writing bad".
Map, gameplay is top notch, it's addicting. I think 9/10 for gamplay is fair :)
 
Wasn't a big fan of the first one, didn't manage to finish it. However, I am seeing tons of great reviews of this game, do you think someone like me, who didn't really love the first one would enjoy the second one more?
 
The writing could use some more work in my opinion. For example there is an npc that mentions his wife is pregnant and you know he is going to die. It then gets worse as he and several other npcs start goofing off in an elevator. It's death flag city and blatantly obvious.
Its not the worst, but very far from the best.
 
Wasn't a big fan of the first one, didn't manage to finish it. However, I am seeing tons of great reviews of this game, do you think someone like me, who didn't really love the first one would enjoy the second one more?

Yeah, it's more streamlined, easier, more accessible. Evidently targeting wider audiences. But the genre is the same. It's a parkour open world action game. Game got more to offer this time around but environment traversal is still the main selling point.
 
Top Bottom