By John Walker on April 19th, 2011 at 3:19 pm.
There’s are some extremely strange bits and pieces flying around about Valve and Portal 2 today, all over the place, and perhaps best summed up by the cavalcade of nonsense being posted on Metacritic by confused disgruntled gamers (and presumably quite a few trolls). The main contentions:
1) Portal 2 is 4 hours long
2) There’s Day 1 DLC
3) It’s a console port
4) The Potato Sack ARG didn’t change anything.
Let’s have a think.
1) Portal 2 is not four hours long. My first run through the single player took me about eight hours. Partly because I took my time to explore everything, finding easter eggs, and enjoying the dialogue. And partly because that’s just how long it is. I’ve replayed a bunch of it this morning, from about 8am to 12pm, and knowing what to do and ploughing through it as fast as possible, skipping past all the longer conversations wherever possible, I hadn’t reached the end of the second act in the four hours. So, including the co-op content, I was not even halfway through the game. People claiming to have completed it in four hours are either some sort of speed-gaming geniuses, or lying.
2) There is no “Day 1 DLC”. There is the daft store, with all the overpriced guff that aesthetically augments your co-op character for the enjoyment of the one other person you’re playing with. I’m very happy to be disparaging about such silly expense, but it absolutely isn’t missing content for the game being charged for on top of the box price. That is something that gets me really riled, and something that I think openly mocks the customer – discovering that even though they’ve paid for the game, if they want to full version with all the missions/levels/weapons, then they need to pay more. But that’s in no way the case here. You’re not missing out on anything, but for some pointless skins and hats for the co-op character that make no difference at all to the game.
3) I’ll eat ten hats if it’s a console port. The game looks stunning, running in mega resolutions, in a game that’s obviously primarily designed for PC. Yes, there are 360 and PS3 versions, but no, the PC version at no point feels anything like a bad port. In fact, I wonder at how some of the co-op levels are even possible with only a controller for reflex movements. There is, however, one epically stupid mistake, where for the split second it takes for the game to save the words, “Please don’t turn off your console” appear on screen. This appears to be the evidence people have for the port claims, and there’s absolutely nothing else about the PC version suggests it’s a port, and even if it were, it would be a bloody perfect one in which there were no reasons to complain whatsoever.
4) This one is tougher to figure out, really. To the best of our knowledge, as a result of the ARG, the game did come out a few hours earlier than certainly we’d been told to expect. Whether Valve oversold the possibilities of what might come about from people engaging in the Potato Sack CPU business is still up in the air. Clearly there are some who are upset that it didn’t bring the game out over the weekend as so many had hoped, especially if they paid for the Sack in the attempt. We’ll be contacting Valve to see if they want to comment on how it all went.
As for complaints about the content being the same as Portal, the writing being trite or obvious, or the endings having been ruined by Valve, these really are just troll comments with no basis in truth whatsoever. To find out why we think it’s one of the best games this year, and likely will be by the end of the year, read our review here.
19/04/2011 at 15:22 Hunam says:
What about the complaint that today it is far to sunny to play on the PC and we should all be outside in the sun reading books with flannels on our heads and midday beers?
19/04/2011 at 15:28 Chris D says:
We fear the sun. It burns us.
It also makes it quite tricky to see what’s on the screen properly.
19/04/2011 at 15:31 JFS says:
I am.
19/04/2011 at 15:35 bwion says:
Speak for yourself. They’re predicting snow this afternoon here. This is somehow Valve’s fault.
19/04/2011 at 16:12 obvioustroll says:
When the sun shines so brightly as it does on this most glorious of days, it makes me fall to my knees and praise the Lord, that someone invented double lined curtains.
19/04/2011 at 16:29 doktorfisch says:
This is the day I realized curtains are not just for porn moments, and my LCD monitor has an illuminance sensor.
19/04/2011 at 16:42 Rabbi says:
err
19/04/2011 at 17:01 Shortwave says:
Valve is also to blame for the inch of snow still in my yard and more on the way.
19/04/2011 at 17:11 mbourgon says:
It is nice outside. I saw a deer. Perhaps later I will tell you about it.
19/04/2011 at 17:38 Jimbo says:
One portal on the ceiling above your PC, second portal out on the patio.
19/04/2011 at 18:05 Scorpi says:
@ Jimbo: You’ve been playing the game exactly enough, and it shows. I’m going to go soak up some thermal encouragement rays.
19/04/2011 at 19:57 Radiant says:
@bwion
Snow?!? In April? SOMEBODY CALL PRINCE.
19/04/2011 at 20:00 CKScientist says:
>It is nice outside. I saw a deer. Perhaps later I will tell you about it.
After this, I was just waiting on her saying something about seeing a rabbit outside (the day before yesterday.) When today she had seen a couple of humans, I was convinced, and was expecting some strange time travel twist. But it never came off! Weird.
19/04/2011 at 20:12 Carra says:
Playing portal on laptops in the sun is what we should do.
19/04/2011 at 21:49 Qeyleb says:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/4/30/
Also, Hunam, I salute your name: it is the name I nearly picked. I am glad to see it getting good use, for I am just a lurker.
20/04/2011 at 02:19 Hunam says:
I’m glad you didn’t, because I’ve been using this name, or a variation of since 1998 and so people would think you were me. Which in all honesty might be a boon because you might be better than me.
20/04/2011 at 04:34 anonymousity says:
What about the complaint that we can’t play portal 2 because we’re at work?
20/04/2011 at 08:33 godgoo says:
@ anonymousity
What about the fact that I can’t enjoy Portal 2 OR THE SUNSHINE because I work in an office WITH NO WINDOWS under a proxy that won allow steam???!!!!!!!! Doubly frustrating as I’m the only one around (I work in a school).
20/04/2011 at 14:33 Foosnark says:
Too sunny and nice out today? Obviously someone just trolling. The temperature dropped from 31 of your British thermal notation units yesterday to 5 today in the course of the hailstorms and potential tornadoes we went through last night; it’s supposed to be gloomy today, raining tomorrow and storming for the next 5 days after that. Seems like the perfect time to call in sick and cozy up to your favorite homicidal rogue AI.
19/04/2011 at 15:24 Scatterbrainpaul says:
I’ve noticed a lot lately that you only ever seem to get scores of 10 or 0 on User reviews on Metacritic . I use to quite enjoy reading some of the user comments on metacritic, but it seems to be populated by the same people who write comments on youtube
19/04/2011 at 15:32 Felixader says:
Hm. Hmmmmm. Hm.
You know, i think the new system on YouTube actually makes sense.
Either you like a video or you don’t. The Comment Section is where you can state why you did think what of the game.
The same can be applied to Games.
The one big thing (what’s normaly the numerical rating of certain sites [i confess that i hate those, no wait, not hate i just can't make much from them]) should show, did you overall like or not like the Game.
The Article is the Place where you state why.
Best thing of course is only an article and then the readers brains making their decisions based on them.
19/04/2011 at 15:34 Malawi Frontier Guard says:
Everything is populated by the people who write comments on Youtube.
They walk among us.
They are us.
19/04/2011 at 15:36 Gnoupi says:
Moreover that in this case, it’s really an obvious comment bombing from some online community.
Before the first “reviews” like this, it was mostly normal reviews, like for example during this morning.
19/04/2011 at 16:00 Jesse L says:
Malawi: Luckily that’s NOT true, and it always makes me feel better when I remember that.
19/04/2011 at 16:04 Adam says:
Trolls will be Trolling.
19/04/2011 at 16:22 Orija says:
Seeing how all the 0 scores carry the same complaints, I am sure they come from a single forum, /v/ most probably.
19/04/2011 at 16:35 Delusibeta says:
I’d go as far as say that Orija is spot on: /v/ is most likely at the forefront of this round of Metacritic bombing. http://i.imgur.com/cGgFk.png
19/04/2011 at 16:43 Orija says:
The comments are hilarious.
And why couldn’t the idiots at Valve just say that they were parodying the Crysis 2 fiasco?
19/04/2011 at 17:05 coolguy5678 says:
In general, any user rating system which takes the mean of everyone’s rating, while also allowing users to see the rating before rating it themselves, is fundamentally flawed. A simple example: A game currently has a single 1/10 vote; you think the game deserves 5/10, so you rate it 9/10. The average is now 5/10. You win, so to speak. With a large number of voters, the best strategy is to come up with your own rating and compare it to the current average. If your desired rating is higher than the current average, give the maximum rating allowed. If it’s lower, give the minimum rating allowed. Anything else is just minimizing your own voting power.
It seems Youtube has noticed this, and gone over to the like/dislike system which is basically the same thing. Another solution is not to let users see ratings before rating it themselves, but in most cases this entirely defeats the point in the rating system (since ratings are primarily used for people who haven’t played the game/watched the movie/whatever yet). I think the most elegant solution is to use the median instead of the mean, but if users don’t realise this and use the minimum/maximum voting strategy (and I’d say there are other factors leading to min/max voting, like fanboys and anti-fanboys), then everything gets assigned either the minimum or maximum rating, depending on whether the majority liked it or disliked it.
20/04/2011 at 10:48 solaris999 says:
@ Malawi Frontier Guard
We have seen the enemy and he is us 0_o
19/04/2011 at 15:27 alphager says:
The “don’t turn your console off”-thing *is* a deadly sin. It shows that the game was developed first for consoles and then for PCs (if it were the other way, consoles would have the text “don’t turn your computer off”). However, the port seems to be good, so it’s just an estheticall problem.
19/04/2011 at 15:29 Jim Rossignol says:
Or it means that the art assets are shared between both versions of the game! How could that be!?!
19/04/2011 at 15:29 CMaster says:
Not really. The message is unnecessary with PCs (everybody knows that they can’t just pull the plug – Windows gives them a good telling off if they do. All it really shows is that they added the ability to show the message to the “core” (pre-port) game and forgot to remove it for the PC version.
19/04/2011 at 15:30 President Weasel says:
Jim beat me to it, but it proably means they localised, or had already localised and sitting around, a bunch of multi-platform messages that they applied to all the versions.
19/04/2011 at 15:31 Hunam says:
You have no idea how games are made. At all. Not even slightly.
(To the people saying it’s a port)
19/04/2011 at 15:32 TechRogue says:
I draw your attention to this post by a Valve employee: It’s easy for strings like this to get mixed up during development. On the console versions we can fail cert for not having a string warning the user not to shut off the console. We can also fail cert if the string says “Please don’t turn your PC off…”. So as such the strings get changed to be appropriate on the console (usually during the phase where we are heavily testing consoles and working to pass cert late in development). In this case it looks like a bug that the string was also changed on the PC version.
That really has no bearing on which platform is the “lead” platform, all of the platforms are important to us and it’s certainly not true that the game was built for consoles and then ported to PC. Like most of our past titles PC in fact tends to be the most used platform internally during much of development, though consoles get plenty of love too since we want to ensure quality across the board. “ Reference: http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showpost.php?p=21926759&postcount=9
19/04/2011 at 15:33 Gnoupi says:
Explanation from a developer about this message: http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showpost.php?p=21926759&postcount=9
19/04/2011 at 15:33 alphager says:
@Jim: The Art-assets: yes, they should be shared. But should the PC-version contain references to the square and triangle buttons of the PS3? The “don’t turn your console off”-thing should never have been a shared asset in the first place.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not mad and I get that errors happen (though I don’t get how that one could slip past the testers, considering how much testing Valve usually does). I’m just saying that it is evidence that the PC was not the primary development platform.
19/04/2011 at 15:34 Unaco says:
Jim and CMaster said what I was about to say. Seems like it’s a tiny oversight from when the ‘core’ version was branched off, and they forgot to change that 1 line (how much text/art is going to change between platforms?).
Or… Someone at Valve left it in intentionally. People always complain about seeing “Press the Start Button” on PC Games… Maybe someone at Valve is calling his friends and colleagues over and going “See! I told you! Someone’s saying it’s consolified because of the save game message.”
19/04/2011 at 15:46 Hunam says:
Again, that’s now how games are made even slightly. The saving prompt was probably added a day before it went gold and probably added the code into all versions of the game instead of changing the text for the PC version. Probably because they were tired.
19/04/2011 at 15:49 Tacroy says:
What? I haven’t seen any references to PS3 controls after an hour of playing, so are you just making up an example?
And I’m absolutely certain that the “press [space|X|yellow] to jump” is a shared asset, just one they set properly before release.
19/04/2011 at 15:52 aldo_14 says:
yes, they should be shared. But should the PC-version contain references to the square and triangle buttons of the PS3? The “don’t turn your console off”-thing should never have been a shared asset in the first place.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not mad and I get that errors happen (though I don’t get how that one could slip past the testers, considering how much testing Valve usually does). I’m just saying that it is evidence that the PC was not the primary development platform.
It doesn’t seem very compelling evidence. You could just as easily use it as a basis that the PC version was developed first, and there was a merging mistake somewhere along the line of porting it to console.
Particularly with the start text. The reason it is part of a shared string file is almost certainly because it’s simpler to manage and correct one file than update a file for each platform.
It seems quite often that the notion of being developed for several platforms simultaneously is enough to annoy people.
19/04/2011 at 15:55 Ravenger says:
From my limited amount of play this morning it’s much more of a real PC game than Crysis 2, which had too many compromises for consoles – including the infamous ‘Press Start to play’ before it was patched out.
About the only thing to me that does seem like it’s a console compromise is that every level so far is a separate load with a loading screen. I wish Valve had found some way to get rid of the loading screen between levels, as it’s immersion breaking, particually when you could hide loading during the elevator rides.
19/04/2011 at 16:02 Hunam says:
“About the only thing to me that does seem like it’s a console compromise is that every level so far is a separate load with a loading screen. I wish Valve had found some way to get rid of the loading screen between levels, as it’s immersion breaking, particually when you could hide loading during the elevator rides.”
That’s actually a Source engine thing rather than a console thing. Actually, I see what you mean. I would actually say it’s a console thing. However, the amount of loading is really bad in the game, far too often you’ve got a big, console style animated loading screen. in your face.
19/04/2011 at 16:24 pepper says:
You indeed have no clue how these things are developed and it proves nothing, except that all version probably share a library for the interface. Its probably quite easy to call up the wrong screen when entering the loading/saving phase.
In short, its a normal bug that tells us nothing about what was the primary development platform.
19/04/2011 at 16:40 Archonsod says:
If someone not being bothered to change the savegame message is the best you’ve got then it sounds like the problem is deliberate nitpicking to find faults rather than anything else.
Hell, my copy of Napoleon : TW has a Microsoft logo on it; Xbox games also have a Microsoft logo on them so clearly Napoleon is a shoddy console port.
19/04/2011 at 17:12 wazups2x says:
Nvm
19/04/2011 at 17:35 Okami says:
Reading gamers argue about game development processes is a phyically painful thing. You really have no clue about game development.
19/04/2011 at 18:59 Rich says:
“Reading gamers argue about game development processes is a physically painful thing. You really have no clue about game development.”
I hope the irony is not lost on you.
19/04/2011 at 19:38 Joshua says:
@ Everyone opposing OP
Where were you during the Crysis 2 bashing? You give me that feeling that there’s hope for the PC gamers future still.
19/04/2011 at 22:15 Jeremy says:
Maybe they just had faith in the human race to not care. Joke’s on them I guess.
20/04/2011 at 04:36 SCEnGi says:
I just want to state that technically, the PC is just a type of console, it is a system in which you control the actions of said console or of other objects connected to said console, so even if they didn’t mean to do that, the term “saving please do not turn off you console” is still correct, and it is possible to accidently shut off a PC, something happens to disconnect the power cord, and you can do it purposely too. if you hold the power button you can override the windows (or whatever OS you have) and shut off the PC, though you would have to be stupid to do so
20/04/2011 at 08:44 Dozer says:
I wonder. Is “Saving. Do not turn your system off.” acceptable to the console certification people (the people who demand these messages appear, and don’t say “don’t turn your PC off”)? ‘System’ is a platform-agnostic term – it can mean PC or Xbox or PS3.
20/04/2011 at 09:39 SlashFacePalm says:
That wasn’t supposed to be in there?
I Thought it as a GLaDOS-esque joke… It Didn’t come across once as “Console port lolol” When I played through. I Even laughed slightly when I saw it the first time. I dont see what all the hate is… Does it even mater? Portal 2 Is Fantastic.
20/04/2011 at 09:46 Lightbulb says:
[joke]I think its an indication that you really should be playing it on a console if your PC is so crap and slow that it shows the message at all…[/joke]
20/04/2011 at 13:17 VelvetFistIronGlove says:
“the loading screen between levels, as it’s immersion breaking, particually when you could hide loading during the elevator rides.”
Most previous single player Source engine games have had a small semitransparent “loading” overlay rather than the fade-to-black followed by a loading screen seen in Portal 2. Even the 360 port of HL2 has the same small loading overlay, but with the addition of a progress bar. The loading screens in Portal 2 are jarring; I don’t understand why they used them.
20/04/2011 at 14:35 Foosnark says:
Maybe Steam was just trolling people with the “don’t turn off your console” message. It would not be the first time. :)
19/04/2011 at 15:29 ad_hominem says:
I finished the singleplayer game in what Steam reckons to be 3.9 hours, but I honestly didn’t feel like I was intentionally speed running. I enjoyed the hell out of it, and I’m certainly going to go back to it again, but the fact remains that it is more than possible to complete the game in 4 hours – I did it completely unintentionally.
The opposing comments, make me feel as if there’s a chunk of the game that my copy just skipped or something.
19/04/2011 at 15:32 ad_hominem says:
I should also say that the game didn’t feel too short at all, there’s a huge amount of content to be had in that space of time, and I’m sure I missed a lot of it on the first go.
19/04/2011 at 15:53 HermitUK says:
Indeed, it took me near five hours, and that was without really doing as much exploring as I could – quick look at the achievement list shows a few secrets I need to go and find on another playthrough.
And I agree, it certainly didn’t feel too short. As with the first game the amount of content is perfectly matched to the story they wanted to tell.
I can’t honestly think of another recent game that’s made me grin this much, whether it’s because I’ve worked out a solution to a puzzle, or because of another brilliant bit of writing. Can’t wait to get stuck into the co-op.
19/04/2011 at 16:14 John Walker says:
Okay guys, answer me this – and I’ll try to do it without spoilers, but people who haven’t played it should skip this comment.
You saw the slow intro, in the bedroom, slamming through the wall, and made your way to GLaDOS. You played through the her 22 chambers, then went deeper down. You played through all of the three sections in the CJ section, eventually returning to the surface. And then you played through all of the 20 or so W chambers? And you did that in four hours? I’m at a loss as to how this is even possible. I think walking through all the chambers, and listening to the conversations, would take longer than that, let along solving the puzzles for the first time.
19/04/2011 at 16:18 Meneth says:
I don’t see how 4 hours is possible either without rushing through everything at top speed.
It took me somewhat less than 7 hours, and I still missed quite a few easter eggs apparently.
19/04/2011 at 16:22 HermitUK says:
http://steamcommunity.com/id/hermituk/stats/Portal2?tab=achievements You can see my progress with the handy date/time on the achievements. Took a couple of breaks.
Current P2 playtime stands a 5.6 hours. This includes leaving it running on the title screen for a little while (maybe 15 minutes, tops), and also watching some of the extras vids and playing the Super 8 teaser. So just under 5 hours is my estimate at a completion time. And I listened to all the dialogue – thought the writing was top notch throughout. As I say, though, I missed a few secrets which I’ll be heading back to find at some point.
19/04/2011 at 16:47 J-Spoon says:
I don’t know, Steam claims that I’ve played it for 4 hours, when I KNOW I’ve been playing since 9 pm. I know for a fact that I beat it at around 6 am. And then I played the commentary bits up to the 3rd chapter, and it’s 9 am now. So I don’t know if I trust Steam’s playtime counter.
19/04/2011 at 16:57 thegooseking says:
Steam says I finished it in 85 minutes! I don’t think Steam’s timer is being very reliable here. It actually took me eight hours.
19/04/2011 at 17:04 Azradesh says:
Steam reckons wrong. It tells me I played for 5 hours, but in know for a fact I started at 8:30 and finish at about 16:30 with about 45min for lunch. That’s just over 7 hours. I did notice that steam had to reconnect 3 or 4 times however, that, and steam seems to round the hours down seem to account for the short “play” times.
19/04/2011 at 17:15 HermitUK says:
Regardless of Steam timer being inaccurate for some folks, just shy of five hours is still my completion time.
First achievement for escaping the first room was at 8:40. I started playing at 8:30 ish by my watch. Last story achievement was at 3:21 and with the ending I was finished around 3:30. That’s seven hours. I’ve been out twice, had breakfast and lunch, and a couple of tea breaks, which works out at just over two hours I spent not playing the game in that time.
Valve said before release that “The entire combined game, both single player and co-op campaigns, will be about four times longer than Portal 1. Each campaign is individually twice as long as Portal 1. Give or take.” Which seems about right to me, as Portal 1 is a 2-3 hour game.
That said, I still don’t get why people are so concerned with the length. It’s an excellent bit of gaming no matter how long it takes you, and once again I think they got the length spot on – enough content and story to fill the time without any of it overstaying its welcome. What’s more, I’ve still got co-op stuff to do, and as with Portal I’ll be playing the single player through again without a doubt.
I also want to get stuck into some map making when the SDK is out (if it isn’t already. I should check that).
19/04/2011 at 17:19 JeepBarnett says:
@HermitUK
Your profile says 5.6 hours, but this is incorrect if you look at your achievement time stamps!
http://steamcommunity.com/id/hermituk/stats/Portal2?tab=achievements
Lunacy – Unlocked: Apr 19, 2011 7:21am
Wake Up Call – Unlocked: Apr 19, 2011 12:39am
So from the beginning of the into to the start of the credits it took 7:21 – 00:39 = 6 hours and 42 minutes. Not to mention co-op. Also, a game’s value is not equal to its length.
EDIT: We posted at the same time and you’ve totally ruined everything I’ve said. Carry on! :)
19/04/2011 at 18:54 HermitUK says:
@Jeep The co-op is incredibly good fun. Anyone complaining about the game length is writing off an entire half of the game, presumably because they lack the friends to play it with. Ah well, such is life.
19/04/2011 at 19:32 JohnH says:
I just finished it and according to Steam it took me 5.7 hours. I’ve listened to dialogue and not blitzed through any content that I’m aware of.
19/04/2011 at 20:06 ad_hominem says:
If the steam play time counter thing is wrong, then I’ll happily withdraw my assertions that I completed it in 4 hours. I don’t know when I started playing, and I don’t know when I finished. All I know is that a fantastic game happened in between.
19/04/2011 at 21:57 empty_other says:
Steam says i did it in 2 hours..
My Xfire says 7 hours.
20/04/2011 at 04:33 J-snukk says:
Portal 2 (If my steam is accurate) took me around 7 hours to complete (singleplayer) and Portal 1, 4 or 5; I can only assume this means I’m stupid.
20/04/2011 at 05:51 bill says:
I’m about a third of the way through Jade Empire and steam says I’ve been playing for 11 minutes.
If people are going by steam counters then they may well be a bit off…
20/04/2011 at 07:45 skalpadda says:
Steam claims I have played it for 5,9 hours and that would have included playing the first hour or so right after it unlocked and then starting from scratch last evening. I actually timed it after I restarted and it took me almost precisely 8 hours, so Steam is definitely off on time played.
I’m sure it’s possible to do it in 4 or even less, but only if you already know the puzzles or are good enough to instantly know what to do. I’m fairly certain most people will want to poke around the areas a bit, listen to all the dialogue and have to do some trial and error to get some of the trickier puzzles done, so calling it 7-8 hours for the single player seems pretty spot on.
21/04/2011 at 00:28 Cael says:
I have 9 hours played on my steam stats and have completed both coop and single player, I wasn’t even trying to rush and I genuinely tried to listen to all the dialog. The game was incredibly fun and I’ll be playing more to try and get the achievements but I don’t see how anyone can take more than 6 hours for single player unless they were terrible at puzzles.
19/04/2011 at 15:31 Retribution says:
Wait, Portal 2 PC has split-screen? There goes my only reason to get it on a console instead, if true…
19/04/2011 at 16:01 John Walker says:
No, the PC doesn’t have split-screen.
19/04/2011 at 16:08 Dominic White says:
Well, you can apparently force a kind of weird kludgey split-screen mode via the console, but hear me out here.
You trolls and morons flip the fuck out over a vaguely console-looking save-notification, but I don’t seem to hear any complaints about a MAJOR MULTIPLAYER MODE completely missing from the PC version! What is wrong with you people!? That is something actually worth complaining about and getting on Valves back about! All the other complaints are insane and petty and groundless, but this is actually a large feature absent from supposedly the ‘main’ version of the game!
What the fuck!?
19/04/2011 at 16:31 Ricc says:
Splitscreen multiplayer on PC has gone the way of the LAN mode. It’s not expected anymore.
19/04/2011 at 16:33 Orija says:
It’s the infectious hate they revel in, the target of said hate isn’t a priority.
19/04/2011 at 16:36 Dominic White says:
Except that it’s a key selling feature of almost every console multiplayer game out there. What is more convenient for a two-player game? Two friends sitting on a sofa, or each of them having to own a gaming-spec PC, be set up online, and have seperate copies of the game?
The code for split-screen is in the game. You can force it via the system console. Why couldn’t they have just put in an official menu. Hell, they could have just copy/pasted it from the 360 version.
PC gamers are so messed up nowadays that nobody cares when major features are missing, just so long as it doesn’t remind anyone that multiplatform games exist. That’s tragic.
19/04/2011 at 16:59 DD says:
I agree with dominic on this definetly. I actually didnt even think about the computer version having splitscreen but that would make things a whole lot better. That way I wouldnt have to buy 2 copies for me and my lady to play or break down and rent the ps3 version.
Other then that, loving the game so far.
19/04/2011 at 17:19 Colthor says:
NO SPLIT-SCREEN?! WHAT KIND OF SHITTY PORT IS THIS?!
Less facetiously, it seems odd when PCs’ input and output devices are a superset of the 360′s, and they’ve already written the code to do split-screen, that they’d disable it on the PC. And it’s a pity, because it was brilliant in Settlers 2 (maybe the last game that implemented it…).
19/04/2011 at 17:28 Daniel Rivas says:
I don’t understand why you’d want splitscreen. Unless you plug your pc into a tv?
In which case, what foul arcana is this etc etc etc.
19/04/2011 at 17:32 Anarki says:
Um, it does have split screen. A quick use of google should have you up and running in about 5 minutes.
19/04/2011 at 17:43 Dominic White says:
“I don’t understand why you’d want splitscreen.”
£20 Controller for a second player, or £800 for a second gaming-spec PC, monitor, internet connection and another copy of the game?
Is that really so hard to comprehend? Am I the only PC gamer with friends?
19/04/2011 at 18:06 Daniel Rivas says:
Classy.
19/04/2011 at 19:06 HermitUK says:
I’ll play plenty of online coop, but I have a 360 pad I use for certain PC games – SMB for instance. Split screen co-op would have been a nice addition, as I have a mate who I know would enjoy Portal 2, but he’s between gaming PCs right now due to lack of funds.
19/04/2011 at 20:24 Optimaximal says:
I don’t want to feed the fire, but it’s interesting that there is a splitscreen_config file in ..\steamapps\common\portal 2\portal2
19/04/2011 at 20:58 HermitUK says:
As I understand it the code is in there, and it’s possible to enable with the console, but it’s not been tested or configured to work on the PC and so is somewhat glitchy.
Might also be fixable by the community with more poking around in the config and/or when the SDK comes out, but it’s a teensy shame nonetheless.
20/04/2011 at 04:49 SCEnGi says:
I was glad that i figured out before i pre-ordered the game that the ps3 version comes with a free PC steam version, so if i wanted to play with friends sitting next to me, or ones from across the world i can, the split- screen isn’t that bad either, and the linked steam-PSN accounts is pretty flawless as far as i can tell. And that i can play with anyone on steam or ps3 is an added bonus
19/04/2011 at 15:31 dangermouse76 says:
The anger has made me loose faith in humanity a little, so much rage over a game companies marketing strategy. Actually you what it’s funny cause I get to not feel like that.
I am off to play British Bullsdogs on the grass with my mates…..yeah !!!
( runs away with arms flailing ).
19/04/2011 at 15:36 Felixader says:
It’s everyone own decision to put energy into a companys Advertisement Campaigns.
Of course it’s a problem when you get told “buy this to get to be able to pay earlier for that!”.
But anyone with a brain should see the initial problem with that reasoning from the beginning. X-P
19/04/2011 at 15:34 rareh says:
The i totally agree with the 0/10 comments.
1. The game is extremely easy.
2. DLC already ?
3. Game is short as hell(3 hours).
4. Story is meh, nowhere as good as Planescape: Torment.
5. Gets boring after 1st hour(due to the difficulty being for people with not much brain power)
6. Jokes aren’t funny.
etc
I am not trolling i am purely stating my opinion.
People have a right to have their own opinion, i know a lot disagree with me, but a lot also agree with me on metacritic for example.
19/04/2011 at 15:38 dangermouse76 says:
Fuck it I wrote something then realised I don’t give a shit about your opinion…move on nothing to see here.
19/04/2011 at 15:38 Felixader says:
Wow. If you don’t smell like the wet underside of a mossy, dark pavingstone bridge then i don’t know what does. X-P
19/04/2011 at 15:41 DrugCrazed says:
Hehehe, he thinks that RPS control what ads go on the site.
19/04/2011 at 15:43 Unaco says:
“I am not trolling…
Although i understand why the writers want to defend portal 2 cause of the ads on this site.”
Not Trolling, but accusing RPS of biasing their review/opinion, shilling for a game they know to be terrible, and lying to us all because of what ads they carry. That about right?
I seem to remember a pretty scathing Wot I Think of Fallout: New Vegas, while the site was festooned with Fallout: New Vegas ads. Also, the recent (somewhat) negative WIT of Dragon Age 2, with the site plastered in DA2 ads, let alone the articles critical of EA/Biowares behaviour with regards to their forums and access to the games/DLC. I think there were even some HomeFront ads on the site when it came in for a mauling.
In short, your insinuation is incorrect and fairly insulting. I believe you owe RPS an apology.
19/04/2011 at 15:47 rareh says:
All i am saying is writers are suppose to be neutral, except on the review where they can be less objective.
They aren’t suppose to defend a game from user reviews.
Thats very fishy.
19/04/2011 at 15:48 Snall says:
As opposed to the reviewer writing, with faulty logic, that apparently there’s no way you can finish the game in 4 hours? And I guess all the people in the comments are lying. I love the internet.
19/04/2011 at 15:54 Jim Rossignol says:
This is the best comment ever.
19/04/2011 at 15:57 aldo_14 says:
All i am saying is writers are suppose to be neutral, except on the review where they can be less objective.
They aren’t suppose to defend a game from user reviews.
I don’t see why not – users can, after all, and it would seem only fair that reviewers can defend their opinion in the same manner.
19/04/2011 at 15:57 jplayer01 says:
Oh, you’re right. It couldn’t be simply the fact that the authors on RPS are human too and thus have their own opinion about the game which quite possibly differs from yours. No, that can’t be it. Way too far-fetched. Obviously, they’re on Gabe’s payroll and they’re trying to protect their overlord from any and all criticism like good little lap dogs.
That’s right, RPS. We have you figured out!!!!111!!11one!one!!111
P.S. If you believe any news source is unbiased and neutral, welcome to the real world.
19/04/2011 at 16:03 rareh says:
A writer already wrote what he thinks on the review.
This article was basically telling people that the opinions of certain people are wrong.
Since when are opinions wrong ?
In my opinion red is the best color is an RPS writer going to say my opinion is wrong ?
Sure he/she might have a different opinion, but saying its wrong is out there.
I still have respect for RPS and i read it daily, but this article shouldn’t have been posted.
19/04/2011 at 16:16 telpscorei says:
There is a difference between stating an opinion and presenting facts. All of the points at the start of this article are being presented as facts. It’s not a case of “I think the colour red is the best colour”, it’s “the sky is a lovely shade of green”. Hence the honourable John Walker trying to clear things up. Although from the sounds of it he got the length of the game wrong.
19/04/2011 at 16:32 ResonanceCascade says:
“4. Story is meh, nowhere as good as Planescape: Torment.”
HAHAHAHAHAHA. Yeah, this person isn’t serious. No one would make such a random comparison if they weren’t just trolling. “Yeah, I’ll just compare a brand new first person puzzle game to a 12 year old RPG that has one of the most acclaimed stories in all of gaming.” Not buying it, brah.
19/04/2011 at 16:43 Archonsod says:
“Since when are opinions wrong ?”
When someone is using an opinion despite objective factual evidence proving the contrary, mainly.
19/04/2011 at 16:50 Outsider says:
Right.
19/04/2011 at 17:03 Beebop says:
Shhh, if you disturb the troll at feeding time you’ll spook it and we will miss this fantastic opportunity.
Observe, if you will, the proud curve of its tusks, the hair on its lower back and the bright green colour of its rump that indicates that it’s ready to mate, but most of all, look at the masterful way it has phrased its comment to raise the question “Is this dude for real?” and yet also never quite answer it.
Truly a thing of beauty in its natural habitat. Let’s just hope it doesn’t run into a female in the near future.
Bee
19/04/2011 at 17:41 dethtoll says:
My favourite part:
“4. Story is meh, nowhere as good as Planescape: Torment.”
19/04/2011 at 17:44 Oozo says:
That Discovery Channel-comment had me express my amusement audibly.
19/04/2011 at 18:41 Lilliput King says:
“Since when are opinions wrong ?”
Man, you found a way.
19/04/2011 at 19:42 Joshua says:
Using PS:T as a standard for story is like using Crysis as a standard for graphics.
19/04/2011 at 20:40 Malawi Frontier Guard says:
I, too, shall write a reply to this post.
19/04/2011 at 22:44 rareh says:
“Using PS:T as a standard for story is like using Crysis as a standard for graphics.”
All of us should have high standards.
That way the industry would get better.
Problem is when we get happy when a company gives us a product.
4 hours long for 40 euros.
No challenge mode
No leaderboards
Things for us to buy in first day that could be included, this isn’t a free to play MMO.
Very easy
Meh graphics, crysis had better and it came out like 4 years ago…
Meh story, PS:T came out like 12 years ago and had a better story…
Uneven voice acting sometimes glados acts mad when she says something according and sometimes doesn’t, reminds of nico’s accent on gta4 which was very uneven, breaking the immersion immensely.
Jokes weren’t funny at all, the ” i should ask if your alive first” joke wasn’t funny at all for example.
20/04/2011 at 00:08 Lilliput King says:
Oh, get stuffed you whiny sack of whinge. Holding Portal 2 to account for not being the best game of the last dozen years does not make you clever.
20/04/2011 at 05:07 SCEnGi says:
Ok i get your point of view on the “opinions” and that you can’t call those wrong. For example i can see how you wouldn’t find the jokes that funny, i know a few people how would not find them funny. Me personally find them quite amusing. Though it has been stated several times that it is completely impossible to finish the game in under four hours, even if you are a Genius, that on the fact of reflex’s wait time load time, and walking time. so no you could not have finished it in 3 hours, don’t exagerate acts to fit a point, it only adds gas to an open flame. and it has also been stated of NO there is no DLC unless you count hats and what not, which i do not, but feel free if you do. And just saying, don’t dis on story lines just cause you don’t like them, to me it seemed like you were trying to start an argument. if you don’t like a story line keep it to yourself, people do love the story line and how it plays out, and in a writers perspective it is a good storyline, you don’t have to like it to say “oh that is a good story. EX) I hate the book “the Great Gatsby” but i will admit i can see how it was a great story and that it was a top novel, it is a good story, just not truely for me
and to add, this article is in no way saying the opinions are wrong, he was pointing out some things flying around the internet bound to confuse and enrage people, like the DLC, he never once stated that an opinion was wrong
20/04/2011 at 09:34 rareh says:
@Sengi
“he never once stated that an opinion was wrong”
People say its 4 hours long(I completed it in 4). He says.
“1) Portal 2 is not four hours long.”
People say day 1 DLC. He says.
“2) There is no “Day 1 DLC”. There is the daft store”
The draft store has DLC , so yes there is DLC based on the definition of DLC(this isn’t a opinion, just look up the definition of DLC).
He made an article denying opinions, that is so wrong from a journalist perspective…
As if it isn’t enough he even insults them
“posted on Metacritic by confused disgruntled gamers (and presumably quite a few trolls)”
What about all the 10/10 aren’t those guys confused as-well ?
Should call all the people giving 10/10 to the game blind fanboys? Since he call all the guys giving 0/10 trolls or confused disgrunteld gamers, while they might be loyal customers to valve that were extremely let down.
20/04/2011 at 17:36 SCEnGi says:
@Rareh
One, ok so there is “downloadable content” on the first day, (if you look at it that way), i see DLC’s as something that hinders you actually finishing the game.
Two, he naver once talked aganist ONLY the 0/10 people he talked about Metacritic in general and every website has trolls, he is not saying everyone there is a troll
three are you just talking about single player mode, and where are you basing this time off of, cause i am good at these kind of games and it took me 5.1 hours and I will admit it was with a little easter egg hunting, if you can give me proof i will believe you on the time thing, but i would also count the co-op as part of the game
The main thing i am trying to get here to actually is that it just seems to me that you were trying to start an argument (which i somehow got lost in) that is all i am trying to say is that
20/04/2011 at 17:39 Dozer says:
Depends how broadly you define ‘content’ I suppose.
Yes the coop skins and gestures are content that you download. But it’s superficial meaningless content that doesn’t affect the gameplay at all. Glamour Content. Not Gameplay Content (which would be more missions, more NPCs, more in-game items that actually have an effect beyond letting you play Barbie with a computer game character)
19/04/2011 at 15:34 Simon1987 says:
it is a console port and the puzzles are dumbed down for xbox kids. I started at like 9am and was done for dinner.
Not worth the 27 quid, maybe worth ~15 top whack.
valve need to ditch the sauce engine and make a next gen one.
19/04/2011 at 15:38 Hoaxfish says:
not to be spoilery… but
turret harmony is awesome
19/04/2011 at 15:38 Snall says:
“1) Portal 2 is not four hours long. My first run through the single player took me about eight hours. Partly because I took my time to explore everything, finding easter eggs, and enjoying the dialogue. And partly because that’s just how long it is. I’ve replayed a bunch of it this morning, from about 8am to 12pm, and knowing what to do and ploughing through it as fast as possible, skipping past all the longer conversations wherever possible, I hadn’t reached the end of the second act in the four hours. So, including the co-op content, I was not even halfway through the game. People claiming to have completed it in four hours are either some sort of speed-gaming geniuses, or lying.”
….so, it took you around 8 hours to play through the entire game, scratching and sniffing at everything- but then you couldn’t do even half the game in MORE than half the time it took you to beat the game- and this while “ploughing (sic) through it as fast as possible.” …*cough* Nothing to say here…luckily I don’t care since I don’t even play portal- but this paragraph just made me laugh.
19/04/2011 at 15:40 dangermouse76 says:
Again sorry opinion removed as realised I don’t care sorry sorry sorry.
Turning off computer now.
19/04/2011 at 16:04 triple omega says:
“My first run through the single player took me about eight hours.”
“So, including the co-op content, I was not even halfway through the game.”
That is all.
19/04/2011 at 18:13 Snall says:
To be perfectly fair I’m close to drunk.
19/04/2011 at 18:44 Lilliput King says:
“…*cough*”
19/04/2011 at 19:58 bob_d says:
@ Snall: Good god, man, what’s wrong with you? You’re supposed to be completely drunk before you post comments on the internet.
19/04/2011 at 15:38 magicpanda says:
The whole metacritic thing is mostly the complete and utter fuckwits at 4chan.
http://i.imgur.com/cGgFk.png
19/04/2011 at 16:16 Jerricho says:
How to light the touch-paper: A masterclass in trolling
“All these low reviews must have not bought the DLC. I bought the DLC as soon as I heard about it, it makes the game so much better. I’ve been telling all my friends to buy the full DLC pack, and I encourage you to do the same. Great game. Thanks, Valve.”
Oh how hard I laughed. *sniff* its beautiful.
19/04/2011 at 15:42 DrugCrazed says:
Feh, people can believe what they like.
*glasses*
For science.
YEAH!!!!
19/04/2011 at 15:45 Daypitoum says:
TLDR OP is mad ?
19/04/2011 at 16:19 Dances to Podcasts says:
Hello, hello. What’s going on, what’s all this shouting? We’ll have no trouble here.
19/04/2011 at 15:48 vash47 says:
Day1 DLC, no thanks. I’ll skip this one.
19/04/2011 at 15:53 Jim Rossignol says:
READ THE WORDS.
19/04/2011 at 15:57 rareh says:
Ye, i recommend you do.
Buy it when its for 5 bucks on a steam sale.
19/04/2011 at 16:03 fallingmagpie says:
Don’t understand this attitude. If you’d rather apply a blanket generalisation than consider the difference between DLC missions/characters/quests etc and ‘things you can stick to your character’s back’, and as a result not play what might be one of the games of the year, then that’s your call. Self-defeating though.
Also, am I the only one who thinks these prices suggest Valve are just taking the piss out of the whole cosmetic DLC thing? I’ve never played TF2 so I don’t know how hats etc are normally priced, but to me it smacks of them sitting their laughing ‘surely no-one will pay £5 for a pink paint job?’.
19/04/2011 at 16:19 KlaxonOverdrive says:
But reading is haaaaaard…
19/04/2011 at 17:15 bwion says:
DAY ONE WORDS-READING?
NO THANK YOU SIR!
19/04/2011 at 17:18 Edawan says:
But reading is haaaaaard…
Trolling is easy, though…
19/04/2011 at 18:00 J-Spoon says:
Should be noted that I apparently unlocked a hat through an achievement. Yes, I probably can’t do this with all the random skins and junk, but hey, free hat.
Also, Day 1 DLC is stupid, but character customization options USED to be free. Hell, you had an array of player models to choose from in Q3, I noticed that by default, Portal 2 has NO customization options, not even emotes.
I blame the MMOs for creating this kind of situation.
20/04/2011 at 08:21 Hidden_7 says:
Yeah, but you can unlock stuff through playing / achievements, so there are customization options, you just have to earn them. Forcing people to earn them through gameplay unless they buy them IS stupid, but it’s not like someone who doesn’t shell out gets nothing, they just get stuff less quickly.
20/04/2011 at 08:55 Dozer says:
Do you know, I went to the shop to get a sandvich for breakfast the other day. They were asking £2.00 for a cheese ploughman baguette. But for £2.30 I could get a chicken caesar salad baguette! This is BS, they should include the chicken caesar salad filling in the cheese ploughman baguette. I hate day 1 additional content, so I will boycott Sainsburys and in future when I get hungry I will trap pigeons and eat them raw.
19/04/2011 at 15:49 Samwise says:
everyone saying day 1 dlc skipping it is an idiot, it’s cosmetic enhancements, it’s makes no difference, why do you even care if it’s there or not, you don’t HAVE to buy it ..
19/04/2011 at 16:26 Archonsod says:
Wait, people can actually control and have responsibility for their own actions? What madness is this!?!
19/04/2011 at 17:51 DiamondDog says:
Yeah, I’ve heard of that. Something like… Phree-Will? I think Will is the man who invented it.
19/04/2011 at 15:49 skurmedel says:
Well the game will inevitably end up in a Steam sale (hopefully the summer one), and one can wait if he/she doesn’t feel the content is enough for the asking price.
19/04/2011 at 15:58 Creeping Death says:
Personally I can wait 3 or 4 years until they are giving it out free xD
Not bashing on Portal 2, I just personally feel that if I want to play more Portal… I’ll just reinstall Portal
19/04/2011 at 16:35 skinlo says:
You can say that with any game?
Want Crysis 2, play Farcry. Want BF3, play BF 1942 etc etc.
19/04/2011 at 17:09 skurmedel says:
Want Skyrim? Play some Zork.
19/04/2011 at 18:24 UW says:
Yeah, you can say that with many games (Not CoD really) but you can probably assert with some confidence that it will actually happen quite quickly and quite drastically in this case. If you go based on Valve’s previous record on their own releases, at least.
I wouldn’t even say it’s a criticism to say “I’ll wait a few months until it inevitably gets a lot cheaper.” If you’re happy to wait, the game certainly won’t get worse (May even get better, with patches and added content) so really it’s just good sense. I’d say it’s rather a prudent course of action.
19/04/2011 at 23:37 Deano2099 says:
I’d rather play it before all the memes get worn out on the internets
19/04/2011 at 15:50 G915 says:
I’m really intrested in Valve’s comments on the whole potato collection thing…
I’m not a potato-hater or anything but I think that the massive ammount of work some people put into playing all those games (see that oxymoron?:) was just not worth the 6 or 7 hours ..
19/04/2011 at 17:50 thegooseking says:
What massive amount of work? People put a massive amount of work into the ARG (which itself was free, and its own reward), but as for the Potato Sack games, people were either playing them and enjoying them, or loading them up and leaving them running in the background when they went off to do other things. Neither of which really qualifies as ‘work’.
19/04/2011 at 20:49 McAfreak says:
The thing is, it could have been released much earlier than 10 hours before. The deal was Portal 2 would release as soon as the bars for all 13 games were filled. There was a system to how long it would take for a game to complete, and I don’t feel like the group that organized the wiki followed it that well.
Many people fail to see this fact, though, even though it was proven time and again that how fast this all went was completely based on the people and how well they were organized. They did pretty well if you ask me, but they could have done better.
Another contributing factor was that there were people who thought that merely owning the games in the potato sack was enough, that it didn’t require anything else, and some of these people probably make up the group that’s mauling valve over this issue.
20/04/2011 at 08:05 PaulMorel says:
Yeah, the ARG really just pissed me off.
When they announced it, I was ecstatic, thinking that I might get to play Portal 2 on Sunday night. I work multiple jobs, so I have very little time for gaming during the week, so I was psyched. I was sad that I would spend my weekend game time playing games that I wasn’t interested in … but if it meant that I got P2 on the weekend, then whatever.
So, you can imagine my anger when it became clear that we weren’t going to get the game until some time on Monday. I’d just wasted my weekend playing mediocre games for nothing.
For me, Releasing on Monday = Releasing on Tuesday = Releasing on Wednesday = Releasing on Thursday.
So the ARG did not make me happy. It wasted my time, and did not benefit me at all. I can’t wait until I have a few free hours with my eyes open on Friday…
19/04/2011 at 15:52 Chizu says:
Game took me 5.2 hours to complete the singleplayer first time. Played continously.
I didn’t rush it, thats just how long it took me to do it.
But I don’t care, I enjoyed every second of it, and thats what matters.
Halfway through the co-op with a friend, and thats taking more time, because he is a little dense :D
Subsequent playthroughs of the SP with be a definate, along with a run through with the commentary.
The DLC thing is just people wanting something to moan about, those same people who spend all their time moaning about TF2′s store items, but these ones are completely cosmetic.
Points 3 and 4. Pft.
19/04/2011 at 18:15 jplayer01 says:
I completely agree. I had no clue Portal 2 was such a bad game until I checked Kotaku and their “Portal 2 being panned on Metacritic” article. Ridiculous. I’d love to know what people are thinking when they give a game like this 0/10 or 1/10.
I feel sorry for the developers who put years of effort into a game which isn’t deserving of such *absolute* derision. I hope they don’t look at Metacritic and think it’s the universal opinion …
I can’t even understand how Portal 2 can get such negative responses while a game like CoD rehashes the same basic shooter gameplay we’ve had since Doom and *still* manages to get 10/10 everywhere as well as a billion dollar profit per iteration (mildly exaggerated).
It boggles the mind.
19/04/2011 at 19:20 bit_crusherrr says:
Took me 5.5 hours according to steam. I’m quite dissapointed.
19/04/2011 at 23:39 Deano2099 says:
Luckily, Valve don’t have shareholders or any of that stuff so won’t base decisions on metacritic user scores.
19/04/2011 at 15:55 shoptroll says:
According to some of the chat transcripts on the ARG wiki it sounds like Valve might be issuing some startement regarding to the ARG’s finale. Best to wait and see what Valve says about the ARG before jumping to conclusions about GlaDOS@Home.
19/04/2011 at 15:56 jerkstoresup says:
What did people expect with the Potato ARG? Did they want the game more than 24 hours before it was scheduled to be release? For playing each indie game and collecting every single “potato”?
It was a very simple form of online marketing (made complex by very clever clues) that got people hyped and thinking about the game, and if nothing else, gave something for fans to keep busy with while they waited the last week before release. The end-goal from Valve’s point of view was to get as many eyes as possible on their game, and it worked.
The game is out now, so the complainers can either enjoy it or waste even more time bickering about irrelevant things.
19/04/2011 at 16:28 Consumatopia says:
If the intention was to only speed up release by half a day or so, then the arbitrary “computation” should have only started one day before release and gone much faster. The ARG is just as much subject to criticism as the game itself, complaining about Glados@home being disappointing is no less legitimate than complaining about an MMORPG having too much grinding.
19/04/2011 at 17:26 fionny says:
The ARG was poorly done and seemed to have no effect, do we even know if people playing the games had a direct effect on it?
I personally think it was a cheap deception they pulled on people. Ill not fall for their poxy marketing again.
19/04/2011 at 15:57 DaFishes says:
This is the same Metacritic crap that happened when DA2 came out. Also, it is why I never use Metacritic to decide whether or not to buy a game. I go there only to point and laugh.
19/04/2011 at 16:00 The Comfy Chair says:
The game only took me 4 hours and i listened to wheatley ect because the conversations are awesome :) However i didn’t get stuck on a single level and kind of breezed through the puzzles, so that’ll be why (but i am good at this kind of puzzle). I suspect most gamers will hit the 6-8 hour mark if they pay attention to the characters ect. like i did.
19/04/2011 at 16:03 Colthor says:
Regarding point 3, would they be in-game micro-transaction hats, or real hats?
19/04/2011 at 16:04 Diziet Sma says:
Enjoying it so far am a few test rooms into act 3. 1.6hrs. I don’t care if the single player content is short, what I’ve seen so far is very well designed, although a tad easy. I expect the meat of the game to be in co-op and the single player there purely for the world & story.
19/04/2011 at 16:09 John Walker says:
No, you cannot be. It’s not possible to be into the final third of the game in 1.6 hours. I refuse to believe that.
19/04/2011 at 16:33 ScruffyLemming says:
@Diziet Sma
I’m gonna assume by act 3 you mean chapter 3? They are not the same thing. The game is very clearly split into 3 distinct acts, namely
***SPOILERS HERE***
1) Opening/Glados section
2) The Gels/Cave Johnson Section
3) Wheatley Section
***SPOILERS END***
It took me around 7 hours to complete all 3, and from skimming the achievements I missed a hell of a lot of stuff. If you actually made it to the last act in 1.6 hours your doing something wrong. There’s more than 1.6 hours of dialogue in the first 2 acts never mind solving the puzzles.
*edited for typo’s*
19/04/2011 at 17:00 Mattressi says:
Actually, I managed to finish both the singleplayer campaign and the co-op campaign in around 10 minutes. And my co-op partner was my blind dog.
19/04/2011 at 18:24 thegooseking says:
@Mattressi
I finished the single player and co-op in eight minutes, and I am a blind dog.
Oh, wait, that was you?
19/04/2011 at 21:59 Baka says:
Edit: a tad to late, had this page open for far too long…
20/04/2011 at 12:46 Ilinx says:
Same thing happened with me – halfway through on 1.6 hours. Are people actually saying they personally have completed it in 4 hours, or just looking at other stats?
19/04/2011 at 16:05 World One Two says:
It’s been a while since I’ve played a Source game, so I may be talking nonsense, but I was wondering about the graphics options. The shader detail maxes at “very high”, but other settings only go up to “high”. Is this just the way it should be? Because I can’t work out if my game looks very slightly worse than John’s screenshots in his review. Got a super-duper PC so I wouldn’t have thought I’d be locked out from the “very high” settings. Perhaps it’s just that I was playing with the Crysis CCC lvl 6 tweaks last night, and I’ve blown my expectations out of proportion.
19/04/2011 at 18:58 J-Spoon says:
I get the same settings options on a fairly decent PC, and seem to recall that Vindictus (another Source game) also was the same.
19/04/2011 at 22:09 Memph says:
it’s correct that on later source games, shader detail is the only option to go to ‘very high’.
high is max for the rest.
20/04/2011 at 08:58 Dozer says:
That’s wrong. Valve should make all those labels go up to 11.
19/04/2011 at 16:05 wcaypahwat says:
I’ve not seen that “Don’t turn off console” message at all, and I’ve been playing all day. Maybe I’m going blind, or someone upgraded my PC?
20/04/2011 at 08:59 Dozer says:
Maybe you’ve never saved the game in that time?
19/04/2011 at 16:08 Kualtek says:
The thing that’s annoying me so far is the incessant loading times. That feels like a console port more than the words on the screen or anything else.
19/04/2011 at 16:19 Bhazor says:
I think thats more the 8 year old Source engine shining through.
19/04/2011 at 16:41 ResonanceCascade says:
Yep, even HL2 had that same problem, and I don’t think even crybabiest crybaby would call that a console port.
19/04/2011 at 16:43 Malfernion says:
@kualtec: It’s the source engine, have you ever played half life 2 or episodes? same “problem”
20/04/2011 at 01:48 Theory says:
HL2 etc. were nothing like as bad as this (can’t comment on the console ports however). There is quite literally a loading screen between every chamber no matter the size, whereas in HL2 they were at least ten or fifteen minutes apart.
In co-op you do get to do multiple chambers without a loading screen, and it’s bliss.
20/04/2011 at 04:49 MultiVaC says:
The HL2 loading screens seemed to be a fair bit longer than Portal 2′s though. It seems like they went for shorter but more frequent loading screens. The biggest mistake, of course, is actually having literal “loading screens” instead of the tiny, non-intrusive box they used for HL2 and Portal. I have no idea why they would do this; it makes the loading seem much worse.
19/04/2011 at 16:08 MrWolf says:
RAGE!!!!
19/04/2011 at 16:08 Guiscard says:
Metacritic really need to renovate how they deal with user comments. Simply having a sea of either 10s or 0s is not helpful to the reader or conductive to how Metacritic clearly intended users to review the games.
20/04/2011 at 09:02 Dozer says:
What the heck is the point of Metacritic in any case? Who cares what public opinion says about any instance of media – since when has public opinion been worthwhile? When I want something recommended, I find a bearded expert like Mr Walker here.
20/04/2011 at 12:11 Inarborat says:
@Dozer Fully agreed. Metacritic is a disease that carries far too much weight in the industry. The average person has shit taste in….pretty much everything, why would I listen to them for games as well?
20/04/2011 at 14:23 Dozer says:
(I wrote that previous comment while under the influence of Douglas Hurd’s (he was Thatcher’s Foreign Secretary for some time) biography of Lord Salisbury, who was a phenomenal foreign secretary at the height of the British Empire and Prime Minister through much of the late Victorian era. He came across as a very admirable guy. Salisbury respected the influence that public opinion had, while simultaneously taking the view that if your actions are popular, you’re probably doing something very wrong. Given I can’t play Portal without more moneys for hardware, I will read library books instead!
19/04/2011 at 16:09 Rikard Peterson says:
A number of hours don’t mean much anyway, as that’s something that’ll vary greatly between people. Steam says that I’ve played Portal (the first one) for six hours, and I haven’t even finished it. I haven’t bough P2 yet despite liking the first one – partly because I suspect that because vocal people complained that Portal was too short and easy that I won’t be able to see more than the first half of the game. Then it’ll become too difficult. I’ll stick with adventure games.
19/04/2011 at 16:10 Sarlix says:
I don’t understand, why would there be a notice saying don’t turn off your console? I don’t own a console so maybe I’m missing something, but I’ve never had the urge to switch off my PC mid save…curious.
19/04/2011 at 16:45 ResonanceCascade says:
Here’s what John Mccasky said about this over on the steam forums, for anyone who’s curious:
“It’s easy for strings like this to get mixed up during development. On the console versions we can fail cert for not having a string warning the user not to shut off the console. We can also fail cert if the string says “Please don’t turn your PC off…”. So as such the strings get changed to be appropriate on the console (usually during the phase where we are heavily testing consoles and working to pass cert late in development). In this case it looks like a bug that the string was also changed on the PC version.
That really has no bearing on which platform is the “lead” platform, all of the platforms are important to us and it’s certainly not true that the game was built for consoles and then ported to PC. Like most of our past titles PC in fact tends to be the most used platform internally during much of development, though consoles get plenty of love too since we want to ensure quality across the board. “
19/04/2011 at 17:41 Sarlix says:
Thanks for that.
19/04/2011 at 16:11 drdss says:
Playing through slowly so that I could appreciate the humour and design, and only getting stuck a couple of times, I played from 9am to 4pm with only short breaks. Steam says that’s 101 minutes, which seems way off. So if you play straight through without stopping, the truth is probaly somewhere in between.
I suppose I’d better get some work done now!
19/04/2011 at 16:13 misterk says:
I do feel like Valve messed up a bit with the ARG. A lot of people got pretty excited by the ARG, to find out it reduced the release time by ~10 hours. Now Valve doesn’t owe anyone anything, and a lot of people had fun doing the ARG, but inevitably setting people up to expect the game to come out early and giving people 10 hours, I can see why people got angry. I was admittedly disappointed that I didn’t get to play it over the weekend, but oh well.
The notion that this was some evil scheme of Valve’s seems… unlikely to me, I imagine they thought it was a fun, cute idea which would make themselves and the potato sack money. No doubt they are correct, but I think they will need to do a bit of work to placate people who spent their entire weekend getting a game released 10 hours early. Yes, I know, they didn’t have to, and I know they could have just not done it, but they DID choose to do so, and why did they do so? Becuase they really, really wanted to play Portal 2. Disregarding people who burnt a massive amount of time, and potentially a fair amount of money, because they love your products, would seem a foolish commercial decision. I do believe that Valve needs to damage control on this one.
Oh and for fucks sake give a press release on episode 3 already.
19/04/2011 at 16:52 Malfernion says:
I keep finding it really odd when people pull the whole ‘valve said it would be released early’ crap.
It was released early, only seem to remember the stuff valve put out saying “help portal 2 be released early”, nowhere in that sentence did I see the words ‘at least several days early’ which most people seem to have seen.. valve said we could release it early and we did, how is this them lying?
They had to set the rate of the countdown before hand too, they didnt know how many would be playing potato sack games did they? Would you still have wanted them to release on the weekend even if only 4 people had been participating?
It seems some people spend all their time complaining that they think valve fixed the arg, and others seem to imply that valve should have belittled all the legitimate hard work people have done by forgoing the ARGs rules and just releasing the game 2 days early.
bah.
19/04/2011 at 17:02 ResonanceCascade says:
Malfernion,
To be fair, the ARG did say 4/19/11 at 7:AM= 4/14/11 at 9AM along with the early release things. It was annoying and a little disappointing to those of us who busted our asses in the ARG, but my rage ends there. At annoyed.
That said, even though it wasn’t that big of a deal, it certainly could have been handled a lot better. I even sent a (very civilly worded) email to Valve stating as much, because they like to know these things so they can plan better in the future.
19/04/2011 at 19:29 misterk says:
I do think its not unreasonable to suppose that “released early” would mean more than 10hours. I’m pretty sure that a lot of people who spent time, and, indeed, money, might not have if they had known thats pretty much all they’d get. I do not know if the ARG was intended to actually unlock more, or it was tightly controlled so that was the maximum they got. Valve doesn’t owe people anything, but this seems like a big PR mistake on their part, and to clearly comitted customer’s expense. I expect they’ll say something.
I speak here as someone who didn’t spend a single penny, but did spend some (enjoyable) time playing defence grid. I was disappointed that it wasn’t released in time for me to play it, especially as I don’t have access to my computer now until next monday, but I’m not overly worried.
20/04/2011 at 07:04 wu wei says:
Well, that and 13 games at a 75% discount. But please, continue justifying your sense of entitlement.
20/04/2011 at 07:30 skalpadda says:
Whatever your motivations for buying the potato sack, you still got thirteen very cheap games and Portal 2 did release early. I can’t see how Valve were being devious or misleading with any of this.
20/04/2011 at 09:02 misterk says:
Sigh. As I explicitly said, but apparently I have to reiterate, I have no sense of entitilement, and I didn’t pay anything this weekend. What I am arguing is not that Valve have committed a moral wrong, and should be punished for that, but they are a company who likes money. So considering those people who are now annoyed with Valve are the very same people who were extremely excited to play Portal 2, it behooves a smart company like Valve to smooth over those snags. In particular, I believe that the ARG was a strategic mistake, because it promised more than it delivered, which set people up for disappointment. It no doubt made Valve money short term, but might have lost them some originally loyal customers long term. I have no doubt Valve will care about this, because historically they have done so.
20/04/2011 at 12:17 Inarborat says:
If people are swearing off Steam because they had THE OPTION of buying a bunch of awesome games with A CHANCE of Portal 2 being released early, then good riddance. I thought it was clever and the best thing about the Potato Sack, which seems went right over the head over all the complainers, is Valve using it’s powers to pimp the hell out of some really great indie games. I played some games I probably never would have looked at, had fun, Valve made some money, the little guys made some money, too. Great for everyone.
They’ll be back, no doubt.
19/04/2011 at 16:14 Teddy Leach says:
This message goes to the people complaining about Day 1 DLC:
RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH.
19/04/2011 at 16:19 Sarlix says:
Very eloquent.
19/04/2011 at 16:15 Dominic White says:
I said it above, but it bears repeating:
While internet morons freak out over them putting the wrong ‘Don’t turn off your system’ image in the PC build, nobody seems to have even noticed that a MAJOR MULTIPLAYER MODE (split-screen) is entirely missing from the supposedly superior PC version.
Yep, the consoles have more features here.
Oh, sure, you can force it in the console and INI-hack yourself a control profile so you can play splitscreen on the PC version, but it’s unsupported and kludgey at best. Why, Valve. Why did you cut this major feature that would have cost you almost zero time or effort to implement? Why is it missing from both Left 4 Dead games, too?
Why, Valve? Why? Do you really want PC gamers to pay twice as much in order to play with their immediate friends?
19/04/2011 at 16:36 zergrush says:
Just like L4D.
That’s a shame, I complained about it on the Steam foruns back then.
19/04/2011 at 16:59 Dominic White says:
The saddest thing is that all the idiots screaming about how it’s obviously a console port (due to a single misplaced image file) drown out the sane few who want to point out that there’s actual content in the console versions that’s MISSING from the PC build.
The PC has gamepads and multiple USB ports. Hell, it can use any controller under the sun. And PC specs mean that gaming-spec models can handle split-screen gaming even better than their console counterpats. Why does nobody find it strange that it’s missing here?
19/04/2011 at 17:07 DD says:
Lead the charge!
19/04/2011 at 17:52 TheApologist says:
This is annoying, and almost a reason to pay the £10 premium for the PS3 version. Almost regretting not getting the PS3 + Steam version now.
You are totally right, why take it out of the feature set for PC?
19/04/2011 at 18:06 J-Spoon says:
Personally, I hate split-screen and avoid it whenever possible, yet I can see myself being angry if it was a feature I cared about, so I feel for you. At the same time, I feel like you’re in the minority – outside of HTPCs, I don’t see too many computers set up in a way conducive for two players right next to each other (in MY day-to-day, mind you. YMMV).
Still, if it’s easily available through console commands, Valve should offer a toggle in the settings. Maybe a patch down the line? Though the trend with L4DX isn’t promising.
19/04/2011 at 18:07 Dominic White says:
The beta/demo version of Left 4 Dead actually had official split-screen support. They pulled the feature after people COMPLAINED that it was there. Apparently there’s a lot of PC gamers who are so bugfuck insane that the very idea of two people sharing one computer sends them into a frothing, console-hate-fuelled rage.
19/04/2011 at 18:34 J-Spoon says:
Seriously? Cretins. How lonely to you have to be to cry “not our tribe” over inclusion of a game feature?
19/04/2011 at 21:22 psyk says:
@Dominic
It dosen’t help when sites actively engage in the elitist bull that goes on.
20/04/2011 at 00:21 Monchberter says:
Personally I would LOVE officially supported split screen. Yes, I have two controllers (racing games) and YES I have a a media PC under my tv that i’m playing through Portal 2 with now – on mouse and keys but anyway.
I’d love to be able to get my friend round for some coop without making it such a struggle, If there’s one thing that puts off console players it’s EFFORT to play. Seeing me fiddle around in the Source Console jury rigging Portal 2 to split screen does not a potential PC player make.
My contribution; about 8 or so langorous hours in and i’m nearly done with the Wheatley levels. I am strolling and enjoying this and frankly, if you’re not taking in the sights what with the game not really pushing you to play at breakneck speed, then you’re really failing to appreciate the game properly. Don’t give me the ‘time poor’ excuse. If you’re bragging about a sub 4 hour completion, then you’re likely playing games enough of the time to get that good. SAVOUR a good game, don’t gulp it down.
Anyway, I see this as Valve’s love letter to Half-Life, they just couldn’t resist modelling another stunning decaying old science facility.
19/04/2011 at 16:17 Dawngreeter says:
I beat Portal 2 in negative two hours.
When I decide to get the game (which is to say, when I have the money for it) I will have already finished it two hours ago. It creates an interesting paradox in which I will probably not want to buy the game since I already finished it, but if I don’t buy it I would never have finished it two hours earlier so the act of not buying it will invalidate my already existing experience with the game. I will probably have to be in a constant state of contemplation about purchasing it an hour from now in order to have played it already.
19/04/2011 at 16:23 bwion says:
I both have and have not finished the game.
It’s very confusing.
19/04/2011 at 16:26 Dawngreeter says:
That is probably a more severe form of an existing phenomenon in which you can either know how far along in the game you are or how long you have been playing it, but not both.
19/04/2011 at 16:38 Dances to Podcasts says:
In other words, you’ll watch it on Youtube?
19/04/2011 at 17:09 CyberBrent says:
“This sentence is false.”
19/04/2011 at 17:11 SuperNashwanPower says:
Until you watch it on youtube, the cat is effectively both alive and dead at the same time.
Also photons know you are watching them, and kindly request that you stop being so creepy.
19/04/2011 at 17:55 JFS says:
Bertie? Is this you?
19/04/2011 at 16:19 bluebogle says:
Man, the degree of entitled bullshit people yap about. I don’t even look at Metacritic because of all the friendless haters on there.
It’s a fantastic game, it’s not a console port, and you’re a complete idiot if you think otherwise.
The ARG was a bit on the stupid side, but the game itself has been brilliant, and the writing is wonderful, the graphics lovely, and the gameplay smart and exciting.
19/04/2011 at 17:19 ResonanceCascade says:
Agreed on all counts. The only thing I’d add is that the ARG went from pretty deep and interesting to “Aw, schucks,” so I guess it averages out OK.
The game itself is just great.
21/04/2011 at 01:13 Laephis says:
Can we please get a moratorium on using the word “entitled” on the Internet, please? For god’s sake, it’s so overused and *misused* that it makes my head hurt. Just. Stop. You aren’t being clever by repeating an empty talking point spawned from the depths of Fox News.
21/04/2011 at 01:46 Wulf says:
u mad, bro? >_>
I can’t help but psychoanalyse when I see something like this. I mean, why would you be so mad at the word if you didn’t have some sort of investment there? Whenever I see people this angry over the misuse of a word, I tend to think it sounds like ‘stop calling me on what I’m doing’ rather than ‘stop misusing a word.’
Words get misused and misappropriated every day on the Internet, billions of them, it’s happening right now. You could get angry about any of these misused words, and yet you pick just one out to get really, really very angry about. (It wasn’t a complaint, after all, it was rage. And not of the Id sort. …there’s probably a really clever joke in there, somewhere.)
Anyway. I just find that interesting.
21/04/2011 at 02:21 Mario Figueiredo says:
You seem to always see angry people when they get annoyed at something. In your opinion, people can’t get annoyed at anything?…
Curious coming from someone who gets frequently annoyed at what others have to say when it isn’t in line with your way of thinking, Wulf. How about exerting some consistency and either not get angry when people say things you don’t like, or stop being so condescending towards people that are expressing their annoyance at something?
Psychoanalyze that.
19/04/2011 at 16:21 Myros says:
After the last Portal release the RPS guys went into ‘fanboy’ mode for it, so no suprise to see the same thing this time around. For me the 1st game was easy and short without much replay value, an interesting concept sure, but not worth all the raving. Looks like this one is more of the same … it IS short wether you take 4 or 8 hours for the SP part. Thats little more than a demo IMO, but to each their own. Will pick this one up in some future sale Im sure, for now I’ll just have to deal with the rabid RPS staff and their Portal fetish :)
19/04/2011 at 16:49 Archonsod says:
Given the first game was ‘short’, you’d be something of an idiot to complain the second game was also ‘short’. I mean why not complain about the fact it has very similar gameplay to the original Portal while we’re there, or that they were so lazy rather than come up with an innovative new title they simply added a number to the original one.
19/04/2011 at 17:08 J-Spoon says:
8 hours is a demo? Whew, tough crowd.
19/04/2011 at 17:15 JFS says:
That’s true. Even if it is 8 hours, it *is* short. I remember a lot of people were angry about Metro 2033, Call of Duty, Homefront, whatever for only presenting them with a one-digit amount of singleplayer campaign playtime. And most of those had about or more than eight hours… at least I don’t recall anyone claiming playing them through in four hours, as is the case with Portal 2.
I believe this wouldn’t have been a problem if the game weren’t full-price, but alas, Valve seems to need money. Perhaps they are going to buy Greece with it. Or Portugal. Or the US, should those rating agencies decide to pawn them.
19/04/2011 at 17:18 Myros says:
4 hours I’d call “little more” than a demo. Even 8 hours Id call WAY over-priced. But like I said, to each their own. If your happy with that price for what you get, cool. Have fun.
19/04/2011 at 17:45 J-Spoon says:
Obviously you are entitled to your opinion, and my comment was just that, you’re a tough critic :) Not meant to be disparaging in any way.
And I agree with you, everyone makes their own cost/benefit analysis; an 8-10 hour game is just about perfect for my lifestyle (DA felt like work after a certain point… though I did finish it), but even 8 hours might be not enough for a full-priced game for some… both of which is totally ok.
19/04/2011 at 18:00 Archonsod says:
8 hours is longer than the single player content of the majority of FPS games over the past 10 years. In fact it’s longer than I remember Half Life 2 being, or for that matter the initial single player run through of both the L4D games.
19/04/2011 at 18:12 J-Spoon says:
@Archonsod: Actually I’m having trouble remembering an FPS that took more than 8 hours to beat. I mean, Doom/Doom2/Duke3D took me multiple sittings, but that’s because I wandered around lost a lot…
Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3 sure, but that’s kind of a different animal.
19/04/2011 at 18:30 Zogtee says:
“Given the first game was ‘short’, you’d be something of an idiot to complain the second game was also ‘short’.”
Considering that he hasn’t PLAYED Portal 2 yet, I’d say yes, you are quite right there.
19/04/2011 at 18:32 Archonsod says:
To be honest the only one I can think of is the Op Flash / ARMA games, but I’m not sure about that as a) I’ve usually always bought them when they’ve had one or more expansions included and b) my helicopter piloting skills turn a deadly airborne gunship into a self guided brick for the most part, so it generally takes me about three hours to get to the helicopter mission and around three days to get past it.
19/04/2011 at 18:54 drewski says:
Doom 3 is about 15-18 hours depending on player skill and difficulty level (and assuming you’re not trying to speedrun).
Since that I can’t recall an FPS single player game that took me more than about ten hours. I guess the FPS crowd would argue that it’s the multiplayer that provides value in a modern FPS, not the single player, whereas once you’ve played through Portal in SP and co-op, most gamers will be done.
19/04/2011 at 19:18 Archonsod says:
Same applies to any linear non-sandboxy game though. Assuming the co-op is the same length as the single player you’re talking 16 hours, which would still come out favourably compared to say Deus Ex, Stalker et al.
19/04/2011 at 23:48 Deano2099 says:
Are there not challenge modes like in the first game that will extend it far past that 8 hours? And remember, it’s not an FPS, it’s a puzzle game. That’s 8 hours of original and different puzzles. If they treated it like an FPS there would be loads of repeated sections where you’re essentially doing the same thing. It isn’t like that.
20/04/2011 at 10:42 Myros says:
Quote: ““Given the first game was ‘short’, you’d be something of an idiot to complain the second game was also ‘short’.”
Considering that he hasn’t PLAYED Portal 2 yet, I’d say yes, you are quite right there.”
Funny, I’d say if someone can’t tell the difference between commenting on an article or principle and complaining about a specific game … well, rather than be rude myself I’ll just quote the original:
“something of an idiot”
19/04/2011 at 16:21 grechzoo says:
Sorry to ask, but i recently gave my copy of portal to a friend, and now my bro is on my for one.
I normally wouldn’t beg here, because its quite annoying, but i figure most of us have copies of portal spare to gift. (i would if i didn’t act so fast in giving mine away)
PM on forums if you would be so generous, otherwise just feel free to smack me around for asking, I already feel shame :) :p
19/04/2011 at 18:55 drewski says:
Check John’s review, a few kind souls offered me copies and may be happy to donate you their spares.
19/04/2011 at 16:23 AbyssUK says:
When I was a lad a computer was called a console, you typed on your console and logged into your console…. so in Portal 2 set in the 1980′s style glados doesn’t don’t switch off your console still work
19/04/2011 at 16:32 AbyssUK says:
wait i forgot to complain about something….. erm… no Directx 11 ! grr lazy console port!
19/04/2011 at 16:24 Jamesworkshop says:
who knows it took me 3 hours to complete portal and now you can find people who can complete in in about 15 minutes.
If the out of bounds bug didn’t get fixed it could be easily doable
19/04/2011 at 16:26 Mutak says:
Whining about the potato sack stuff is just stupid. It’s a bunch of fun cheap games bundled together. At the very least it gave you a way to kill time while waiting for portal. If you only bought it to speed up the portal release and you’re unhappy with the result then you have no one to blame but yourself. Maybe next time you’ll recognize a marketing gimmick when you see one.
19/04/2011 at 16:29 Archonsod says:
Gamers : Making rocks look smart since 1998
19/04/2011 at 16:30 Luk 333 says:
Regarding this whole Metacritic affair I’ll employ the immortal words of Al Swearengen: Fucking cocksuckers.
19/04/2011 at 16:32 Dinger says:
Hilarious:
1) four hours, eight hours. Who cares? Wasn’t the lesson of Portal 1 that a game shouldn’t outstay its welcome? Give me a blast-through four hours, or eight with time to smell the flowers, and I’m happier than I’ll be if you mutliply the puzzles or introduce deathtraps and savepoints to make it 20-hours.
2) Zero-Day DLC (or skins, useless junk) makes some sense: If you’re going to make money selling something to gamers, make the most money but having it available from the start. DLC is kinda like the hotel minibar though: keep it out of the way and unessential. I’ll be annoyed if you charge me to use the fridge. I’ll be really pissed off if you put a water bottle on my bedside table with a note saying I can drink it for five quid. And if you make the toilet accessible only by a credit card swipe, I’m liable to leave housekeeping a gift in the bed.
3) Yeah, it’s released for console at the same time. Port?
4) ARG? Hell, they had that potato sack thing behind a lot of math and variables. I suppose someone could have calculated what impact playing would have. In fact, didn’t someone do just that? Come on, we all suspected they weren’t going to move the release date up that much: it was probably wired to their brick-and-mortar distribution contracts anyway. Brilliant marketing: their indie studio buddies made some money off of it, Portal 2 got a lot of buzz, and the players did move the release up. What more do you want?
5) Trolling? Hell, RPS, just by posting this, generates a lot of discussion and a lot of hits. I’m sure when they look at their page-impressions, they’ll find that Portal 2 made them a lot of cash. If they want to make more money, all they need is someone to write a nasty review. That will bring out the haters.
So, in other words, RPS makes money by furthering the discussion. That’s the troll effect. They do not make money by being a shrill defender of a hated game.
19/04/2011 at 17:01 Nick says:
for 26.99 I care if its 4 vs 8 hours tbh, but apparetly it isn’t so thats ok then.
19/04/2011 at 16:32 Corrupt_Tiki says:
Mk, RPS, Is it worth $50? for purely SP?
I really want this game, but I don’t know if I want to be spending $50 plus the 2-3 hour dl time or whatever it will take. =/
And I will be very disappointed if this is the best game of the year.
I want Battlefield 3 to romp everything :> Duke not being shit, would also be a bonus, oh and Skryim!
19/04/2011 at 17:00 Dances to Podcasts says:
It depends. Do you calculate the value of a game by time ingame/money spent or by fun ingame/money spent? If the first, I’d advise a walk to the park to watch the ducks. If the second, Portal 2 might be an option. :)
19/04/2011 at 18:24 Zenicetus says:
That’s my current dilemma with this game. I’ll only be able to play it SP, not multiplayer. I think $50 USD is a very fair price for a 6-8 hour SP game plus MP if you’re actually going to use the MP side of the game. But if I’m not playing MP, then the cost/value calculation changes. And this is also in the context of a bunch of other games out there right now, that are more long-term immersive and replayable (Shogun 2, various flight sims, the upcoming Witcher 2, etc.) So I’ll get it eventually, but not right now, and not at this price.
19/04/2011 at 16:33 zergrush says:
Those last Portal-related threads are barely recognizable from the usual RPS comments. This game is apparently turning everyone into angry 14 year old gamefaqs users, be they pro or anti-Valve.
You should all feel ashamed.
19/04/2011 at 16:41 Rinox says:
It’s probably just a temporary spillover of steam trolls riling everyone up. It’ll go away.
19/04/2011 at 17:39 Ricc says:
Quick, somebody post a DNF trailer or Black Ops DLC announcement, so we can all go back to our usual, measured discussions. ;)
19/04/2011 at 16:35 geokes says:
Sorry but I really hate valve selling hats etc. it’s just making people buy overpriced items that could have been included in the actual game. In tf2 it was justified with the hundreds of free updates before and how the game was included in the orange box but a new fully priced game it is not. I’ll wait for a steam sale on this one :/
19/04/2011 at 16:44 Kandon Arc says:
Making? I don’t recall anyone being forced to spend money on purely aesthetic items that have no impact on gameplay. It’s likely no different from TF2; profits from it will go toward free content updates for everyone.
19/04/2011 at 17:47 geokes says:
I mean as opposed to them being in the game for free as unlocks, like games used to do :(
19/04/2011 at 17:48 drplote says:
I’m pretty sure if it was free I still wouldn’t use the DLC. Valve’s definitely not “making” anyone buy it.
19/04/2011 at 18:34 Zogtee says:
Self entitled stupid pissface fucking shithead bollocks.
20/04/2011 at 00:42 Phydaux says:
So you’re a communist? ;) I’m only pulling your leg.
Art assets cost time for someone to make. Some people like having different art assets in their game. DLC lets that happen for those people, Valve make more profit on the DLC, it’s how things work.
It is interesting how worked up people get over trivial things. Imagine that all the DLC that has been released for Portal 2 didn’t exist. Then play Portal 2. You’ve missed out on nothing, and enjoyed one of the best games ever made.
20/04/2011 at 09:11 Dozer says:
I went to see a new film at the cinema last week, on the day it was released. The ticket cost £10. But in the lobby of the cinema it was possible to buy popcorn for £3! This day 0 extra content is complete BS. I’ll never go to the cinema again. For entertainment I’ll clench my eyelids shut and watch the patterns appera on my retina.
19/04/2011 at 16:41 dangermouse76 says:
Loud noises !!!!!!!
20/04/2011 at 00:31 Phydaux says:
I ate a big red candle!
19/04/2011 at 16:44 Rabbi says:
1) For a game without replayable MP content the game should be longer to justify a $45 price tag.
2) If they have finished content on day 0 it should be in the game. Not putting these things in the game, no matter how little they effect game play, is terrible for consumers. Justifying this practice makes you part of the problem.
3) Regardless of whether it’s a console port, the two offending text strings (the other one is at some point the game tells you to “Press Start”) are sloppy and the game should be criticized for them. They also definitely should have been caught during QA.
4) Yeah, the number I’ve heard is that it came out 7 hours early. If people are really upset for buying other games JUST to unlock Portal 2 early then that’s their own fault.
19/04/2011 at 17:18 CaspianRoach says:
>no matter how little they effect game play,
They do not affect gameplay at all.
19/04/2011 at 17:51 drplote says:
So your #2 is “This is a problem! If you disagree, you’re part of the problem!” Not real easy to disagree with you, I’d say.
19/04/2011 at 18:13 Rabbi says:
I’m actively trying to think of it as anything other than a slimy business practice, and I just can’t. It benefits consumers 0% and benefits the companies 100%. It is worse for consumers in every way than including the content as part of the game. If you can explain how it is anything other than a negative for consumers then I’d be happy to listen.
19/04/2011 at 18:22 Archonsod says:
That’s because you base your argument on the incorrect assumption that the content is created and then deliberately removed, rather than it being produced in the three months after the game was completed and handed to Sony/Microsoft to certify for release on their toy boxes.
19/04/2011 at 18:27 ResonanceCascade says:
…because they’re completely optional and have no effect on gameplay, yet they raise money for REAL, free content for everyone, thereby benefiting the consumer and causing no loss for anyone who didn’t buy them?
That only took me like 1 second to think up, you should really try harder! :)
19/04/2011 at 18:35 Rabbi says:
@Archonsod, IF that’s true then it’s still not a POSITIVE for them to not release that content for free to the consumers through a patch. You know, some companies used to do that..
@ResonanceCascade, What free additional content is that DLC funding exactly? Have they announced free maps that are in development? I must have missed some news.
19/04/2011 at 18:37 Zogtee says:
“If they have finished content on day 0 it should be in the game.”
Their decision. Not yours.
“Not putting these things in the game, no matter how little they effect game play, is terrible for consumers.”
No, it isn’t.
“Justifying this practice makes you part of the problem.”
No, it doesn’t.
19/04/2011 at 18:53 Rabbi says:
@Zogtee, Please try not to be overly verbose when defending your perspectives.
19/04/2011 at 18:57 ResonanceCascade says:
Valve does free DLC for all their other games, and they already announced that there is DLC coming for Portal 2, so yes, clearly you have missed something.
If Valve has now magically decided to start charging for levels and other REAL addons, then I will eat my overpriced, non-essential digital hat.
19/04/2011 at 19:24 Archonsod says:
“@Archonsod, IF that’s true then it’s still not a POSITIVE for them to not release that content for free to the consumers through a patch. You know, some companies used to do that..”
Well yes, but by the same argument it’s not a positive that they charge for games in the first place. Clearly in an ideal world developers would work on every game for as long as we want them to and provide it all for free. Unfortunately we live in the real world where people like to earn a wage.
Prior to DLC if you had a three month wait between finishing a product and it being released you started on your next release. Companies can’t afford to pay developers to sit around idle, at least not while keeping game prices below a hundred dollars.
19/04/2011 at 21:38 psyk says:
@3
if only you had read the comments.
20/04/2011 at 09:22 Dozer says:
Comrade Rabbi, do you also object to coffee shops selling a range of different products at different prices? Or the existence of three classes of airline travel?
20/04/2011 at 09:27 Dozer says:
Or is it that you feel that you’re missing out on the full Portal 2 Experience by not having some cosmetic boondoggles in the coop mode, and you resent Valve for making you pay for said meaningless cosmetic boondoggles even when you know they’re meaningless?
Do you resent the Volkswagen group for selling cheap(ish) Volkswagens and prestigious Audis at the same time? Surely everyone should get an Audi at VW prices?
19/04/2011 at 16:44 TheApologist says:
So, there are some words on the screen that say console instead of PC and this effects your enjoyment of the game?
I have literally no conception of what goes on in the minds of people who turn their own entertainment into anger, shit and misery for absolutely no good reason.
20/04/2011 at 02:03 gingerbill says:
agree with theapologist . I think its just normal now that when i big game comes out a load of sad trolls with nothing better to do spend hours posting how rubbish it is . I think portal 2 is brilliant , very very funny.
19/04/2011 at 16:49 JFS says:
Why does RPS even feel obliged to defend Portal 2? There may be some fans of ye olde Portal who didn’t get what they expected, and that’s legitimate, and some who like the new game, but why such a fuss about it?
19/04/2011 at 16:55 heretic says:
they are responding to silliness on the interwebz which might put off some people who have not bought it yet, and their opinion (being a pc games website) is that people should play this, nothing wrong with that…
19/04/2011 at 17:17 John P says:
They’re correcting factual errors here, which is fair enough.
I didn’t invest anything in the ARG, so I’m really surprised that people are upset about … something. I don’t understand it.
Making shit up because you’re unhappy with Valve is poor form. The game’s longer than 4 hours unless you rushreallyfastbecauseyoucantwaittogetontheforumsandexpressyourhatredforvalvegrrrrr
And selling some cosmetic stuff is not ‘day 1 DLC’, and Valve should be commended for not doing that when so many companies do nowadays.
19/04/2011 at 17:25 JFS says:
Hm, yes, but then again nearly everyone on RPS (and elsewhere) should understand that the claims of “OMG console shitport” and “DLC LOL DLC” are… exaggerated. I believe with the above post, RPS is choosing a side in the conflict Valve vs trolls, and I’m not sure whether this is the right way to go.
If RPS had reported on massed trolling, on raised accusations, Valves responses and the Metacritic bombing in a neutral way, journalism would’ve had a great day. Now, to me it looks more like we’re setting up a banquet for trolls, while pouring gasoline into the fire to warm them during their feast.
Sure, commentary and opinion is also a part of journalism, but perhaps not that fortunate to deploy on day one of the shitstorm.
19/04/2011 at 18:01 Malfernion says:
@JFS: key difference is that RPS is a blog, not a news site. The guys can write their opinions all they want, not that that is what they are doing here.
Here they are merely cleaning up the facts, which is a much nicer thing than just deleting the troll posts that are blatantly misguiding people in the comment sections.
19/04/2011 at 18:31 PanzerVaughn says:
I dont see it as RPS getting worked up about people dissing Portal2. I see it as people being Tasteless Assholes, and their sphincters just happen to be positioned over Portal2 at this current point in time. Tasteless Assholes have a long history of needing to be paddled
“Mona lisa’s ugly, he was a shitty painter.”
“I dont get the joke, that comedians not funny, he should stop forever. ”
“BAND X > BAND Y”
someone has to stand up to try to knock Assholes on their… well. you know. It wont work, but if we dont try they’ll just keep spinning around covering every wall they can reach in metaphors and euphamisms.
19/04/2011 at 18:52 Dervish says:
Except the very concept of “taste” implies the ability to make comparisons and evaluate one thing over another as superior. So… maybe rethink your branding, there.
19/04/2011 at 23:17 Kadayi says:
Clarification is not a defence, it’s clarification. Especially in the case where there is clearly deliberate misinformation being passed off as fact by other parties.
19/04/2011 at 16:51 heretic says:
u mad??
._.
19/04/2011 at 17:02 Nick says:
just fyi, saying this makes you look like a moron.
19/04/2011 at 17:07 Teddy Leach says:
Not to nitpick, but using text slang and not capitalising the first letter of a sentence can also make you look like a moron.
19/04/2011 at 17:39 ScubaMonster says:
Actually this is brilliant. He’s communicating with the trolls in their own language.
19/04/2011 at 18:21 J-Spoon says:
We need translators in these turbulent times.
19/04/2011 at 19:11 TillEulenspiegel says:
FYI isn’t “text slang”, I’m pretty sure it has a longish history in business communication. At the latest, it’s in the same old Usenet generation as IMHO and FAQ.
Example: how often have you seen reddit/4chan/etc regurgitator-of-meme morons using a given abbreviation? Point proved.
Keep on shaming people who use shit like “PROTIP”, though. I fully approve of that.
19/04/2011 at 22:52 Nick says:
Teddy, I don’t think it makes me look like a moron, however your response makes you look like a dick. Funny that. Not closely adhering to stringent grammatical rules on an internet comment thread, what a fucking moron I am indeed. Its not even text slang as was pointed out.
19/04/2011 at 23:59 heretic says:
Nick, u mad??
._.
20/04/2011 at 09:20 JackShandy says:
And so the cycle continues.
20/04/2011 at 09:31 Dozer says:
Heretic you misspelled “Teddy” in your last comment.
And I know there’s a 50% chance I’ve misspelled ‘misspelled’ but I cannae be bothered to google it to find out which is right.
19/04/2011 at 16:52 Reverend Speed says:
Have done a little search for ‘crash’ on this comments thread, found nothing. So… Is Portal 2 crashing for anybody else?
I can get to the menu screen, click on ‘new game’ (EXCITEMENT!), watch the fun loading screen, the screen FADES TO WHITE (EXCITEMENT) and crash to desktop without error message.
Anybody else?
19/04/2011 at 17:05 Milky1985 says:
You done the normal (gfx updates, audio updates etc)
Oh and turn down teh shader effects is a good one to stop crashes sometimes (specally on a weaker gfx card)
19/04/2011 at 17:10 Reverend Speed says:
So, to quote from my Steam Ticket:
“Computer runs XP with 2046 RAM, Intel Core2 Quad CPU, Gigabyte P35-DQ6 motherboard, Asus nVidia 8800 card. Latest drivers installed. Online Armour firewall with Avira AntiVir Personal antivirus (uninstalled both and tried with Portal 2. No dice).”
Turned everything on, off, sideways. Cursed.
There’s more, but I doubt you need to hear it. Just looking for a little company in misery as (in my experience) Valve rarely responds to you when you’re in a minority that has problems running one of their games.
(If you’re lucky, they’ll fix it two or three weeks later, ala L4D2)
I’ve liked Valve since that first PC Gamer preview, but this sort of thing just really disappoints me.
19/04/2011 at 17:26 heretic says:
this might not help but I had a similar CTD with Mirror’s edge (similar card 8800), no explaination. It turns out this dumb PHYSX shite had turned itself on some special settings in the graphics panel (something like enabled on the GPU even though afaik the GPU doesn’t support physx) so toggle that option and give it a go.
19/04/2011 at 18:04 Archonsod says:
Tried verifying the integrity of the game cache? Most crashes I have with Steam tend to be because it’s only actually downloaded 70% of the game yet for some reason thinks it’s done. Tends to be a particular issue if the servers have been under a heavy load.
19/04/2011 at 18:44 Reverend Speed says:
Thanks for the advice chaps but nothing doing, I’m afraid. I should possibly point out that I’m not the only one this is happening to:
http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1847560
http://segmentnext.com/2011/04/19/portal-2-crashes-freezes-sound-stuttering-graphics-errors-performance-fixes/
As I say, experience suggests that all one can do in this situation is sit tight and hope Valve gets around to addressing it. But thank you for the comments. =)
19/04/2011 at 16:52 Vague-rant says:
I’d really like split screen on the PC. Its annoying to mess with the console at the best of times, let alone when I’m slightly pissed and want to play some split screen left 4 dead and am trying to remember what to type.
I wonder how much work it actually it is to put in though. I can’t imagine too much, but then I guess they might have to test the whole thing if they turned it into an “official” feature.
19/04/2011 at 17:52 pinkled5 says:
“I’d really like split screen on the PC.”
Spoken like a true console gamer. Can you imagine two people sitting at a desk banging elbows and playing footsie while trying to focus on the game at hand? No, thanks. My PC is remaining just that, a Personal Computer…
19/04/2011 at 17:59 TheApologist says:
@Pinkled5
Genuine question: Are you being sarcastic or do you mean that?
Because, I normally game at my desk. But when my friends come round, sometimes we move the PC to the living room plug it in the telly and play together. At these time, it would be nice to have that option on Portal on PC.
How does that make me a console gamer?!
19/04/2011 at 18:04 thegooseking says:
@Pinkled5
I don’t know why everyone’s asking for split-screen. It’s very easy and quite common to run dual monitors on a PC these days. Ask for support for letting players on the same machine have one monitor apiece!
19/04/2011 at 18:16 heretic says:
genuine question: how do you play l4d2 split screen? particularly how do you set up two keyboards/mice? is that even possible? would like to give it a go actually as don’t have two pcs capable of running l4d2 at home (yet!)
19/04/2011 at 18:33 Ricc says:
@heretic:
You would have to use a USB controller for the second player. I’m not sure Windows even knows how to handle two keyboards and mice. L4D2 certainly doesn’t.
Enabling splitscreen requires a few console commands. I’d start looking at the official forum. There should be a sticky.
19/04/2011 at 19:08 Vague-rant says:
@heretic
Yup its console commands, and 360 controllers. Fortunately, hooking my PC to the TV is actually really simple (takes less than 10s). The big pain is remembering what the console commands actually are.
As for pinkled5, what I like about the PC is its flexibility. That includes the ability to plug it into a TV or my monitor. Note, they also call “The Da Vinci Code” a book, but that doesn’t stop it being a really good doorstop.
19/04/2011 at 22:13 gwathdring says:
I play multiplayer games on my computer sometimes, and hook it up to the television. Until my room-mate bought a third controller, whenever more than two of us wanted to play Super Smash Brothers, we’d plug my computer in to a TV and run an emulator, for example. My laptop speakers aren’t great, and sometimes I hook into a TV because I just don’t feel like using headphones, or I didn’t want to lug a gamecube across town on the off chance my friends would have a hankering for SSB.
Hmm … not many games allow me to do that, so I have trouble coming up with examples of when I’ve been able to other than emulation. Oh! Hedgwars. Civilization IV hotseat. That’s with the same controller though …
Sometimes there’s just something nice about having the option. In the same way having local networking can be extremely convenient, sometimes you want to be able to just plug in a controller and start playing, whether there’s a TV with HDMI handy or not. The dual monitor argument is fair, but not everyone wants to buy two high quality monitors and the suggestion is still predicated on the game supporting two players on the same machine as long as there are two monitors for output which is pretty similar to split screen and is still not terribly common.
The controller issue is a big one. You usually have to buy special software of limited functionality to get two mice and keyboards running on the same machine, and getting them to be considered separate devices takes a fair bit of finesse and effort as far as I can tell (I’ve never tried it, but I’ve done a limited amount of research into it). So already you’re almost entirely limiting same-machine multiplayer to games that support both keyboard and mouse and an additional control mechanism. As such, I wouldn’t say same-machine multiplayer is conspicuous in its absence from most PC games.
I guess part of it is that I, like many PC gamers, like fiddling with things and having options. Maybe it’s not necessary, or convenient, or useful, but dammit I want to be able to do it. I can’t really blame a company for not acquiescing to that, and there are some kinds of games where controllers really don’t work well (PC RTS games) and it might not be worth including the option.
I stand by wanting local servers and local co-op, though. If the game can be played with two players, and there are two of us present with computers, cables, and unique copies of the game, we should be able to play together whether or not we have internet.
19/04/2011 at 22:48 Ravenger says:
I don’t see why the PC version couldn’t support split screen like the consoles. I’d like to play co-op with my daughter, and it’s annoying that to do so I have to buy two copies of the game, whilst console owners only need one copy. It should be perfectly possible to play using two 360 controllers, or M+KB plus a 360 controller, like Guardian Of Light.
20/04/2011 at 15:45 pinkled5 says:
I think the feature would be greatly underused so from a cost/benefit analysis I doubt Valve will ever consider implementing it. Plus, they want your friend to have to buy Portal 2 in order to co-op so there’s additional discouragement for them to do so.
19/04/2011 at 16:53 nayon says:
I thought the puzzles in the first one were better. Most of this game was finding a very tight spot you could throw a portal onto, and do the momentum preserving jump. That was repeated so many times. Most of the puzzles were immediately obvious, only the execution was tedious.
The large amount of exposition was cool, but didn’t really go anywhere. Seeing the insides and depths of Aperture Labs was a very cool idea (not trying to spoil too much), but felt like a one-shot gimmick.
The writing wasn’t as good as the first game, but it was still good. Glados felt like she was trying too hard to be creepy/funny in the beginning of the game, but I don’t know if that was intentional. Perhaps it was.
Overall, it’s a good game, maybe even a great game, but not an AMAZING game. It does take your breath away quite frequently, but in the end it doesn’t really go anywhere with its elements and overuses certain puzzles. Especially the gels were really narrowly used. The plot is kind if shallow and anticlimactic, but there are a few good twists. It only answers 1-2 questions you might have had, and doesn’t do much else. Don’t get me wrong, I liked the game, but I expected more.
This is all from my one run of the single player campaign though. And the way you finish off your final foe was really good, I actually thought of that during the 2 hour sleep break I took during my run :D I wonder if they’ll explore that idea further in the future.
19/04/2011 at 16:54 RakeShark says:
Ack, wrong post.
One the topic, I was excited about the ARG from a non-involved stance. I got the potato pack to see wha the fuss was with all the games I had heard about before this whole thing was going on. Discovered that Defense Grid, SMB, and TWEOFT were fun games, the rest being somewhat forgettable, and Amnesia being too damn scary to play.
I really do think we’re in a point of time where silly self-entitlement is rife.
19/04/2011 at 19:39 ArthurBarnhouse says:
I don’t think the ARG hue and cry can just be boiled down to a simple entitlement issue. Valve said, “buy these games, and if you play them enough we’ll release portal two early.”. But the bar was set so high that the game only got released a few hours early. Early release generally isn’t understood as an hour early release, and I don’t think it’s a huge stretch for people to think otherwise.
Your right, the extras on those games were great (well, in the games that I liked anyways), and probably people are angrier than they need to be about it. But the final result of the ARG was pretty irritating, and it felt like Valve dangled a carrot that turned out to be a waste of time and, for some people, money. Again, it’s not the end of the world, but clearly mistakes were made with it on Valve’s part.
19/04/2011 at 21:59 Nogo says:
I get the ARG frustration, but honestly, if you’re angry that valve made you purchase or play video games in order to purchase and play another video game a day or two early it’s time for some serious introspection.
19/04/2011 at 17:00 sneetch says:
With respect to point 4 (the game coming out earlier or not) being in Europe I don’t think I have ever before been able to play a Valve game on the actual release date before (as in it’s always become available after midnight on launch day or damn close to it).
This was certainly the first time that I (if I only had the sense to call in sick today) could have played from before 9 this morning.
Anyway, I’ve largely given up on user reviews both on metacritic and in general; they’re rarely useful, far too often they’re written by people who are fanboys (in the truest sense) or simply have an axe to grind because of perceived wrongdoings.
19/04/2011 at 17:03 Milky1985 says:
The arg did change something, Valve games normally come out at around about 10pm our time (leaving us no time to play them), this time it came out at about 4am today, meaning i already have the game decrypted waiting for me at home.
The “please do not turn off your console” is stupid tho, someone screwed up the strings like IW did in MW when it told the PC crowd that it couldn’t connect to Xbox Live :p
Which ever poor sucker copied the strings into the big “IF(PC) then…elseif(PS3) then” part of the code forgot to change it (wonder if it says that on mac as well?) and will likely be locked in a supply cubboard in valve atm and being laughed at :p
19/04/2011 at 17:03 Tomm says:
Am I the only one who hasn’t seen the saving screen?
Anyway, it really sucks that Kotaku did their redesign, seems a lot of idiot commenters ended up over here.
19/04/2011 at 17:09 Shortwave says:
Oddly enough I ended up here because I wasn’t interested in Kotaku’s console news constantly.
Also that place is flooded with so many little jerks and wannabe chanstars.. Hurt my brain!
So, here I am.. Hello, my names Rian. I came from Kotaku!
I enjoy the articles here much more.
19/04/2011 at 17:18 skurmedel says:
Do they even write about PC stuff? Sincere question. Maybe they pretend they do like Eurogamer.
19/04/2011 at 17:07 Shortwave says:
All I can say is I think their ARG was a totally muck up in the grand scheme of things.
The game is really amazing though and I hope all the nonsense doesn’t ruin that for anyone.
The soundtrack I thought was again top-notch and met my expectations fully.
The dialog had me laughing more than once, and it was truly amusing and witty humor!
The story was amazing I thought..
Generally they had to make minor changes to be able to develop the story more-so, which is fine..
They did a good job with it, it kept me chasing the goal happily. :P
I however have a single issue, Valve seriously needs to start “shipping” games with FOV options from the get go. Playing this on a 5040×1050 resolution was tole ratable but it killed my eyes.. I used a 50fov in mostly every FPS game with my eyefinity setup. That’s the only way I can do it without my eyes feeling like they are falling out of my head.. I simply don’t understand why this is an issue again.
So bothersome, and only because it’s such a minor thing.. silly.
BUT, I totally love this game. You should play it.. Children should play it.
Good times… Better when FOV isn’t botched.
19/04/2011 at 17:48 Mechlord says:
fov_desired 50
In the console.
I was very glad it was 90 by default instead of the eye-bulging valve standard of 75.
19/04/2011 at 19:53 Shortwave says:
No no, that is the issue.. The majority of the console commands are disabled.
Including all relating to FOVs.
19/04/2011 at 17:08 wazups2x says:
A reply from a Valve employee about the “Please don’t turn off your console”:
http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showpost.php?p=21926759&postcount=9
“It’s easy for strings like this to get mixed up during development. On the console versions we can fail cert for not having a string warning the user not to shut off the console. We can also fail cert if the string says “Please don’t turn your PC off…”. So as such the strings get changed to be appropriate on the console (usually during the phase where we are heavily testing consoles and working to pass cert late in development). In this case it looks like a bug that the string was also changed on the PC version.
That really has no bearing on which platform is the “lead” platform, all of the platforms are important to us and it’s certainly not true that the game was built for consoles and then ported to PC. Like most of our past titles PC in fact tends to be the most used platform internally during much of development, though consoles get plenty of love too since we want to ensure quality across the board.”
19/04/2011 at 17:15 Kaira- says:
Umm… isn’t this the very definition of DLC? You can download additional content and in this case, you’ll have to pay for it. And, it came out the very same day as the game? For me this sounds a lot like Day 1 DLC, but maybe that’s just me.
Edit: And now that I’m on it..
Am I wrong if I remember Gabe saying that PS3 will have the ultimate Portal 2-experience?
19/04/2011 at 17:21 John P says:
Depends on what you’d call DLC I suppose. I have no problem with companies selling frilly bits that have no impact whatsoever on the game experience. There’s no story content missing, no levels missing. That’s the kind of ‘day 1 DLC’ that people have a problem with, surely? Deliberately removing part of the game so you can charge more than the RRP for the complete game is unethical and disgraceful. But that’s absolutely not what Valve did.
19/04/2011 at 17:22 wazups2x says:
“Am I wrong if I remember Gabe saying that PS3 will have the ultimate Portal 2-experience?”
You are wrong. He said the the PS3 will have the best CONSOLE experience.
19/04/2011 at 17:56 Kaira- says:
Yeah, day 1 DLC is a bit hard to feel good about. Either it has some meaningful content, which raises the question if it was cut out of the game, or then it is just textures, which raises the question – where is the content in this?
@wasups2xz
Oh, okay then. Carry on.
19/04/2011 at 17:59 Rabbi says:
If the content is ready on launch day it should be in the game. It’s bad for consumers for them to hold this content out of the game then sell it separately. It’s your responsibility as a consumer to not support this practice.
19/04/2011 at 18:26 jplayer01 says:
Simple solution: Buy the game if you like it (…. don’t if you don’t like it). Buy the DLC if you want it, don’t buy it if you 1) don’t like it or 2) think they’re just trying to gouge their customers.
If you say the DLC lacked actual content which deserves your money, then good. Don’t. Buy. It. But then don’t bitch about TF2 and all the hats. It seems the people playing it don’t have a problem with all the hats.
Personally, I loved TF2. The hats? Don’t care. Love the gameplay though. I don’t see what the hats have to do with 1) the gameplay and 2) all the absurd fun I’ve had in the time I played it.
If enough people buy the game and not the DLC, it sends a message to stop with the DLC shit. If people buy the game AND the DLC … good for them. Maybe you want to bitch about people buying jewelry and expensive clothes too? It’s a *luxury* item which you don’t need to buy and needn’t even exist in your mind’s eye. Just ignore it. You have no interest? Then fine, it has nothing to do with you either. But don’t penalize the game itself which *is* very good (especially compared to the crock we’ve been getting lately) for DLC which you have no interest in and has nothing to do with you. It’s optional.
Just like how achievements are optional and I absolutely hate them, but I don’t rate every game I play with 0/10 or 1/10 *just* because of the achievements. It doesn’t even fall into my rating. It might get a mention, but it has no bearing on the game itself.
19/04/2011 at 21:29 Urthman says:
To me, “Day 1 DLC” in the pejorative sense means content that seems like it should have been in the original game but was held back so they could charge people extra.
I certainly don’t think designer multiplayer robot skins feels like content that belonged in the original game but Valve is cheating us out of to make extra $$$.
19/04/2011 at 17:17 Joshua says:
Did someone mention that Portal 2 only uses DX9?
19/04/2011 at 17:22 John P says:
Couldn’t care less personally. It looks great.
19/04/2011 at 17:34 Joshua says:
Nah, it was a reference to the outrage around Crysis 2.
19/04/2011 at 20:35 TotalBiscuit says:
Portal 2 was not the sequel to the best looking PC game of all time, nor was it touted as cutting edge graphical tech. Comparison isn’t valid.
19/04/2011 at 23:42 Mario Figueiredo says:
What do you mean “only”, Joshua? What do you think DX10 or DX11 would add to the game?
19/04/2011 at 17:32 Milky1985 says:
ONe thing i have just found however that shoudl be checked to see if its true – from “http://kotaku.com/#!5793543/the-people-are-panning-portal-2″
“The console versionof Portal 2 includes eight unlockable free gestures in its co-op campaign. Well, they’re free as long as you take into account that the console version costs $10 more than the PC/Mac version.
The 16 gestures for the PC version are listed in the in-game’s store, $2 a pop. Note the same Atlas disco ball icon in this store and in the console version, a sign that some of what’s in the console version appears to cost money in the PC game.”
Yes they do pay 10$ more, but a while ago research was done into where the case per game purchased goes and have a guess at how much licencing costs were (hint its about hte same)?
If this is true its a bit crappy, why? bcause NOT EVERY PC GAMER HAS A MIC or the capability to use one (have to quiet because parents asleep etc, some of the gesters look silly but some useful) why whould console gamers get the gesture but not us?
Oh also if it is true that they are only accessable via purchase, then you can’t get all the achivements, why because some of the achivements are related to gestering people…..
The store has gone from “meh who cares” to “ok thats a bit annoying” to me now, hoping its not tru ethat console gamers get stuff that we don’t :(
19/04/2011 at 17:45 JeepBarnett says:
Not true. PC has the same 8 gestures unlock as you play through the game. This is a different gesture with the same icon (it might be a bug that it has the same icon).
19/04/2011 at 21:22 Joof says:
The gesture aren’t useful at all in game. Anything that is useful for communication would be done with the probe commands.
19/04/2011 at 23:01 BunnyMaz says:
You CAN buy the gestures in PC. But you can also unlock them by playing – have unlocked 5 gestures so far, the beanie hat and the flag. I don’t know what I did to earn them, they just showed up as I continued to play. So, pleased to say, you’re not going to need to worry about missing those.
Have been listening to the other half run through the commentary version of the game – they talk about their plans for the coop and the gestures, and it is really quite interesting. I recommend it.
19/04/2011 at 17:33 BobsLawnService says:
What are you fruits on about with this ARG business. It reduced the time in which the game was released by over twice the amount of time it takes to finish. In other words you were given the chance to finish it three times in the time it would have taken you to finish it once. Or something.
Really, there is no pleasing some people.
19/04/2011 at 17:34 euanc says:
I’d also like to add that all the cosmetic items that are purchasable are also unlockable in the game.
19/04/2011 at 17:36 Grinterloper says:
I have a question concerning the custom skins dlc for the bots, are Valve disallowing the use of player made custom skins for characters and by extension, modding?
I mean they are obviously wanting to build up the microtransaction side of their business and it’s good that they are keeping anything purchasable as purely cosmetic, (or in the case of TF2, obtainable by other means) but the use of player made skins surely undermines this?
Considering the company has expanded as much as it has off the back of the mod community (consider CS, DoD and TF) this’d be one hell of a kick in the balls. Providing of course this is the case.
19/04/2011 at 17:39 pinkled5 says:
“That is something that…openly mocks the customer – discovering that even though they’ve paid for the [software], if they want [the fully functional] version..then they need to pay more.”
Hmmm, sounds like what Microsoft did when they released an uncompleted OS called Vista, then created an after market fix, slapped the label “7″ on the box and made everyone pay to get it.
But I digress…
19/04/2011 at 17:40 Felixader says:
I like how lot of the complaints of PC Gamers imply that developers only use Controllers while creating a game. X-P
19/04/2011 at 17:42 VeliV says:
Did any review mention the DLC stuff by the way?
19/04/2011 at 17:43 ScubaMonster says:
The only good reviews to pay attention to are middle of the road ones. The “OMG EPIC 1000 out of 1000!! 1 MILLION STARS!!” and “OMG TERRIBLE WORST GAME SINCE ET ON 2600!!” are pretty worthless. I just look at the ones that might have a lower score but not unreasonably low, and see what their quibble might be with the game, then judge whether or not that might be a valid complaint.
19/04/2011 at 22:25 gwathdring says:
That’s what I tend to do. I also like to wait a while and wait for some of the later voices.
19/04/2011 at 17:45 Miidgi says:
I really have to say, when I beat the game and quit, my steam account said “4 hours played”. Maybe its just using the integer and the real value is like 4.99 or something, but that’s what it says. I will admit that I was hurrying though (although I did still get decently stuck a few times), and that I missed a lot of content that I am excited to go back and root around for.
That said, still a *fantastic* game, and while I wish it took me a bit longer, I still say it was worth every penny. I know I’ll play through it several times, and the writing and dialogue are nothing short of fantastic. All of the other points made here are strong.
19/04/2011 at 18:09 thegooseking says:
As I said earlier, my Steam account says 85 minutes played. I have played more than that. From first achievement (Wake Up Call) to last achievement (Lunacy), it was almost exactly 7 hours. I rounded up to 8 hours, and maybe it wasn’t quite that much, but it was close.
19/04/2011 at 17:59 Yosharian says:
I played through quite slowly and got stuck on a few puzzles… Steam can’t seem to make up its mind if it’s 7 hours or 8.9 hours. I think about 9 hours sounds right.
Never noticed the ‘Don’t turn off your console’ button.. I only used the quicksave feature a few times, rest of the time I was using autosaves… So I didn’t notice this at all.
Don’t care about DLC.
Haven’t played the Co-op yet, will do soon.
I’m a bit disappointed with the SP campaign though. Despite its brilliance, I was hoping for something longer… Or maybe something with more Half-Life stuff in it. I was half-waiting for some sort of time travel that would take me to the HL2-era.
Regardless, 9 hours is on the short side for a SP campaign but with the Co-op campaign I think you get your money’s worth.
So, when is Episode 3 coming out?
19/04/2011 at 18:01 athropos says:
Portal 2 is not worth 50$.
19/04/2011 at 18:06 TheWanaB says:
I base a games worth on the games quality, not how much time it takes to play. As such Portal 2 is defiantly worth $50.
19/04/2011 at 18:13 thegooseking says:
@The WanaB
Well, exactly. One would have a hard time defending the argument that Portal 2 is worth less than Final Fantasy XIII, even though the latter is far longer.
19/04/2011 at 18:29 J-Spoon says:
What, you didn’t enjoy the 33-hour tutorial? :P
19/04/2011 at 18:17 StingingVelvet says:
#4 has a little merit, if only just because Valve have released their games at midnight on Steam every time as far as I know, so the 7AM plan was simply to allow them to roll it back to 12 (which they would have released it at in the first place without the potato thing).
The other three are stupid. The store is crass, but you can ignore it and still have a complete game.
19/04/2011 at 18:17 Froibo says:
Your forgot to mention the reward for getting all 36 potatoes in the ARG. Valve very generously gave these people the valve complete pack including portal 2! The catch? If you already purchased any of these games you can’t gift them…
19/04/2011 at 18:17 Craymen Edge says:
I’ve been primarily a PC gamer for more years than I care to count, but man I hate PC gamers (present company excepted, of course).
19/04/2011 at 18:26 Sunjammer says:
Well it’s not 4 hours, not 5. I’ve made it through the game at a very steady clip (it’s not very hard), and I haven’t spent too much time dillydallying around looking for “secrets” (Haha such an archaic term! There are no secrets anymore), I haven’t finished it, and i’m at 7 hours. It feels like it’ll take me a couple hours more.
I’m not sure it’s the 10/10 it keeps getting. It strikes me as a supremely hipstery hipster-game, and there’s a fair chunk of the writing that actually annoys me in how smugly quirky and fun it is, like that godawful shitfest flick Juno. Just like the first one really. Who the fuck really cares about the cake and the song and all that godawful nonsense everyone thought was the bees knees back with P1. Oh wait i just answered my own question. EVERYONE cared about it. Which is how you know something is probably bad. Even then, this particular brand of comedy was applied in a sort of dry and distant way in P1, which made it work, but here it’s full on wacky quirky comedy hour. It’s a little much.
Then again there’s about an equal amount that genuinely makes me laugh and smile, so it all evens out i guess. Certainly got better when a certain gentleman was introduced. Army of mantis men. Yes.
But it makes me worry about comedy in games. Portal 2 is funny in the sense that it tells you jokes while you play the game. The game itself is not particularly funny. You could redub the game into a very serious piece of business. You might get the same “comedy experience” from muting Crysis 2 and putting on a Louis CK standup routine in the background. Seems like the only guy that can actually integrate comedy into his games from gameplay and up remains Tim Schafer.
Certainly an excellent purchase regardless of complainings. Reminded me an awful lot of Half Life 1 actually, what with the endless epic underground tunnels and pipes. That’s a high five.
19/04/2011 at 18:42 pinkled5 says:
“this particular brand of comedy was applied in a sort of dry and distant way in P1, which made it work, but here it’s full on wacky quirky comedy hour. It’s a little much.”
I agree. The humor in Portal 1 was situational and inferred from miscast verbiage in plausible scenarios. The dialog in Portal 2 is implausible and obviously directed solely at the player. This robs you of the feeling that you’re part of an unfolding plot, an alternate reality contrived to immerse you in a game world. When I hear a turret acting like Rodney Dangerfield or Cave Johnson making wisecracks about possible tumor inducing experiments it takes me out of the moment and makes me feel like I’m observing something, not immersed in something. Most unfortunate.
19/04/2011 at 18:47 thegooseking says:
“EVERYONE cared about it. Which is how you know something is probably bad.”
That’s actually ridiculously wrong. There are plenty of things that are both popular and great, and the people who can’t see that are the ones who have decided beforehand that something popular must be bad, just because their opinion is so much better than everyone else’s.
“Portal 2 is funny in the sense that it tells you jokes while you play the game. The game itself is not particularly funny.”
I don’t tend to laugh. My dad once commented that he’d never seen anyone look so serious while watching Morecambe and Wise. I get amused by things, but it takes a lot to make me express that. So the fact that the things that made me actually laugh out loud in this game were things that I did or that happened to me, rather than things that were said, makes me wonder if we were actually playing the same game. Or maybe we just have a different sense of humour.
19/04/2011 at 19:11 Sunjammer says:
Oh it’s perfectly correct for the individual. Statistically, the more people that have said something is great, the graver the possible disappointment. Conversely, the more people that say something is bad, the sweeter the pleasant surprise! It depends on the entry point; If I expect something to be great and it’s not, i’m sad. If I expect something to be shit and it’s not, I’m happy!
Anyway enough babble. It was somewhat of a joke anyway, which you didn’t LAWL at, MR SERIOUS.
Cave Johnson was fantastic. I laughed more during his bit than any other.
19/04/2011 at 19:34 thegooseking says:
That’s a fair point. I probably had lower expectations of Portal 2 than some did, actually. Mainly, I was worried that making it longer would make it longer than it needed to be (for the reasons I mentioned below; that Portal 1 was so concentrated). When it failed to realise my fears, I guess that made me more disposed to consider it favourably.
19/04/2011 at 20:37 Lilliput King says:
“It strikes me as a supremely hipstery hipster-game”
“EVERYONE cared about it. Which is how you know something is probably bad.”
Pot, kettle.
19/04/2011 at 20:56 faelnor says:
I am different
19/04/2011 at 20:59 Yosharian says:
Yes I totally agree with your comments Pinkled5, you have hit the nail on the head perfectly there with the dialogue.
Still a great game, though.
19/04/2011 at 18:38 Ridnarhtim says:
The massive boxes being displayed on screen explaining what buttons do, do feel very consoley (I mean things like ‘press E to use’ when looking at a button … And effectively covering up the button).
19/04/2011 at 19:34 Joshua says:
Those have been there since Left 4 dead. Although I am quite sure that you could turn them off there, so you can probalby turn them off in Portal 2
Its by no means ‘console-y’, methinks. But I don’t think console-y exists at all, so I shall be silent.
19/04/2011 at 18:39 thegooseking says:
Shooty Man: The Revenge lets me shoot eight monsters. Gun Guy 3 lets me shoot the same monster sixteen times, and therefore takes twice as long to finish. Does that mean Gun Guy is worth more than Shooty Man?
What’s the big deal about how long Portal 2 took to finish, then?
19/04/2011 at 18:42 Sunjammer says:
You’d think people would be happy they’d finished a game, considering how few games actually get finished by the people who buy them.
19/04/2011 at 18:57 Dervish says:
I was highly amused to see a slew of posts, begging for help with certain puzzles, scattered across various forums. No doubt at least a few of those are the same people that went on to complain that they finished a puzzle game too quickly.
19/04/2011 at 19:15 thegooseking says:
I suppose I still have to be spoiler-free, but that ending was far better than that of most games I’ve finished. It would be a damn shame to keep people from seeing that just by making people jump through the same hoop several times instead of one (actually, one of the test chambers actively poked fun at this method of artificially lengthening a game, so, you know…)
I just don’t really see how all the time I wasted trekking around in Fallout: New Vegas somehow added to the value of that game (for instance). Portal 2 was, like its predecessor, so short (though still not as short as some people are claiming, of course) because it wasn’t nearly as diluted as other games.
19/04/2011 at 18:56 edit says:
Some of that business on Metacritic is just shameful, indulgent douche-baggery. The score should reflect the perceived quality of the game. Giving this game a 0 because you don’t like release-day DLC hats is an abuse of the site. Giving it a 0 for any reason is ludicrous when you compare it to other games on the market.
1 – I completed the single player in a little over 7 hours and found it incredibly satisfying. Yet to play co-op.
2 – I will never use that store, so the worst that can happen is I’ll play coop with someone wearing a hat. Whoop-de-do. No issue, though it’s the thing I’m furthest from being on Valve’s wavelength about.
3 – It has no less functionality than any of Valve’s other PC-loving games. Runs beautifully on my system. Feels at home on the PC.
4 – We got the game a few hours earlier than we would have without the ARG stuff (which none of us had to participate in, it was just a fun way to spend some of our anticipatory energy). Valve made no false statements. Any specific assumptions about when the release would occur were our own. I love Valve all the more for being so supportive of indies.
19/04/2011 at 19:53 heretic says:
it might be good though, will make metacritic useless and hopefully people won’t be paying attention to it anymore.
20/04/2011 at 00:07 Mman says:
I’m glad this happened in a sense; with the Dragon Age 2 metacritic stuff there was a bunch of defence of the more ridiculous hyperbolic negative user reviews due to that game having various contentious issues and plenty of people genuinely disliking it (even if they wouldn’t give it stuff like 0/10). Whereas Portal 2 having near-universal praise everywhere I’ve seen (both in critical reception and user impressions) has revealed the more hyperbolic negative metacritic user scores for the joke they are.
19/04/2011 at 19:30 budokhan says:
When you have level load screens every 5 minutes of gameplay, methinks they designed the game for the PS3/360 first, rather than developing a simple streaming system so you could run without seeing loading screens all the time. Especially frustrating when you’re running the game at full settings on an Alienware PC. Other than a few odd visual bugs like trash falling through the elevator as you approach (through the actual pod you walk into, not the usual ambient clutter), I’ve been having a lot of fun.
19/04/2011 at 19:35 Joshua says:
Thats more a source engine thing. Those level load thing shave been there since HL2… Its probalby Valve accomodating for lower memory systems.
19/04/2011 at 19:36 Tacroy says:
Edit: reply fail :(
19/04/2011 at 19:38 Captain Hijinx says:
Hahahaha…
Is this serious? People are getting upset over this? Who are these hyper emotional people?
Anyway, i’m too busy enjoying Portal 2 to even notice this garbage, awesome awesome game.
19/04/2011 at 19:45 Joshua says:
So wait.
The portal 2 ‘DLC” is basically also stuff that can be aquired in game?
19/04/2011 at 19:49 starclaws says:
Ya but the game is more than 4 hours because of all the cutscene waiting. Ceiling crashing though every room all the way to the end and such. You have to pause and wait for every little physics thing to kick in and they force you to listen to everyone and watch certain things before you can use your portals. Through the whole game. If you recorded the whole game and cut all the parts where your just standing there with a thumb up your ass then the gameplay would be waaay less than 4 hours. Even the ending boss has more waiting than actual action. It feels more like a turned based game than an action game.
Oh and: http://evansheline.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/fps_design.jpg
19/04/2011 at 20:06 Ziv says:
It is an incredible game, that I finished in just two (4 hours each) sittings. It is amazing, it does not feel like a console port, seriously guys-it’s valve.
Most of the comments come from people who are dissapointed at the ARG which was difficult and very engaging but had a very anti climatic ending.
19/04/2011 at 20:09 geldonyetich says:
When you’ve got the greater awareness of just how many games are poking around the Internet, for free (no – I’m not talking piracy) or uber-cheap, there’s a certain question of what $50 for a PC game means anymore.
Portal 2, if it’s 8 hours of gameplay, is $6.25 an hour. That’s a pretty lousy money to enjoyment ratio, higher than a box office movie will usually change on its premier. I could get Monday Night Combat for $15. My last two weeks have been consumed by playing Sword of the Stars Complete off a (now defunct) $7 Gamersgate sale. We’ve got an absolute glut of cheap quality gameplay experiences out there available if you look.
So, ultimately, this is the price suited to folk who got enough money that throwing it at the latest big-brand-name stuff is a luxury they can afford. As for me, I enjoyed the original Portal, but I’ll wait until the game price-drops to about $20 in a few months. (And probably have heard every little twist of the game spoiled 5x over by then.)
19/04/2011 at 20:35 thegooseking says:
Because enjoyment totally isn’t a matter of degree. It can definitely be measured simply in hours spent on it. That makes so much sense.
19/04/2011 at 20:53 edit says:
8 hours of gameplay.. in the single-player campaign. Add to that perhaps six hours in the co-op campaign. Down to about $3.50 an hour. I don’t know about anyone else but I can’t resist an immediate second play-through. $1.25 an hour? Or checking out all the commentaries. Or exploring community maps (of which there will be many). Or hunting achievements. Or, for some people, perfecting speed-runs. The hours add up quickly when you like a game. Surely replayability should be taken into account when assessing a game’s value.
19/04/2011 at 21:37 Dervish says:
geldonyetich: That’s nothing. I once saw a guy pay 30 bucks for a steak, and he couldn’t have been gnawing on it for more than half an hour. Even less if you don’t count the cutscenes when he was talking to his girlfriend.
19/04/2011 at 20:25 Laurentius says:
Bleh, reviewers are as always too lenient, game is fun but a little bit panning won’t hurt lazy-ass developers.
19/04/2011 at 20:52 BreadBitten says:
I don’t really quite remember the PC Gaming community having such a long and dense stick up its ass, what really happened during the turn of this generation?
19/04/2011 at 21:03 squareking says:
I hope Half Life 3 has an in-game store where you can purchase differently colored crowbars and designer glasses for Freeman.
19/04/2011 at 21:14 BreadBitten says:
Your snarky sarcasm notwithstanding, THAT WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY AWESOME!
20/04/2011 at 01:01 Wulf says:
And now my mind is running with this bizarre Timmy Mallet as Gordon Freeman skit.
“Look at the turret and go AUUUGH!”
19/04/2011 at 21:14 ananachaphobiac says:
You know who else made outlandish and innacurate claims on Metacritic? The Nazis. And someone on this site is basically Hitler.
Sorry I’m being employed by the people at Godwin Inc.
They said I could have a t-shirt if I said it before anyone else…
19/04/2011 at 21:18 Vinraith says:
Hmm, only 8 hours for the SP eh? Not quite my notion of “full length,” but I suppose by the standards of modern FPS’s it’s not far off.
How long’s the co-op campaign?
19/04/2011 at 22:44 RakeShark says:
The co-op is between 2-6 hours, depending on competency, cooperation, and focus of the players. If you and your buddy are sharp together, you’ll probably get it done in a bit longer than a L4D/2 campaign. If not or otherwise, you can kill a fair bit of time dinking around, as there are some nooks to explore and shinanigans to do.
I will say that the 8 hours I put into the single player game has set the standard for this decade. Every minute feels special, and on more than several occasions it took my breath away. It is as finely tuned and crafted as the Valve pedigree would lead you to suspect.
19/04/2011 at 23:30 Vinraith says:
Answering my own question by way of RPS’s review: 6 hours.
So 14 hours total. OK then, this one will wait for a price drop, which will of course be forthcoming because it’s a Valve game.
19/04/2011 at 23:33 ScruffyLemming says:
If you have any friends who went potato mad during the ARG, you could ask them for the free gift-able copy they just got given.
20/04/2011 at 09:43 Dozer says:
Full length varies in context. In the world of flight simulator aircraft addons, ‘length’ is the length of the aircraft operations manual and all the checklists you’ll need to keep the thing flying and controllable. The more complexity the designer has simulated, the longer the manual needed to explain how to operate it, which indicates value.
Eight hours can be one single flight.
19/04/2011 at 21:28 deadsexy says:
5) Portal 2 makes you remember how much fun games can be, which will ultimately make you a little sad. At least until you boot it up again!
19/04/2011 at 21:29 nayon says:
I also hate the loading screens. They’re totally immersion breaking, and this 2011, most major games have streaming levels now,couldn’t Valve have done it?
I understand that it might be difficult given the constraints of the Source engine but still…
19/04/2011 at 22:21 jonfitt says:
The only thing which has been minorly disappointing so far is fact that the maps are a single test chamber so loading is very frequent.
Surely an average PC can handle a map of the size of at least 2 of the early test chambers?
Perhaps this is a concession to the tiny amount of RAM in a console? Conspiracy!
20/04/2011 at 01:00 Wulf says:
I think it’s more to do with optimisation, so that older machines with older graphics cards don’t flip a shit. This is one of the few games that I’ve seen being this detailed with absolutely no slowdown at all on my old machine, and I appreciate it.
19/04/2011 at 22:38 OpT1mUs says:
I like how people bash others who give P2 zeros on Metacritic and such, only to praise the game to high heavens and act like that isn’t another extreme.
No game isn’t awesome blahblah. It’s short. Too fucking short. And yes that fact alone lowers my opinion of the game.
If you needed 8 hours of it, maybe it’s time to face the fact that you aren’t too bright. It’s a logic game after all.
If the game was 20e/$ I wouldn’t have any complaints, but as it is I do.
Constant praising of bullshit, like hats in TF is the reason you get the same shit in P2. Also the cash store, ugh.
Stop applauding mediocrity.
19/04/2011 at 23:03 7rigger says:
I like how you use implied insults and act like your opinion is the only one that matters.
If we wanted to stop applauding mediocrity, we’d have to close every comment thread on the internet
19/04/2011 at 23:28 thegooseking says:
I have no complaints. I really enjoyed the game and felt it was well worth the money I spent on it.
To be told by someone on the internet that my position of satisfaction is somehow wrong is kind of unbelievable.
Tell us a game that you thought was great. People who piss and moan about great games never do that. What, exactly, is it that was so much better in your humble opinion that it sets a bar against which this can be judged mediocre?
20/04/2011 at 00:53 Wulf says:
I can’t help but feel that the people who’re making comments about it not being 8 hours are overcompensating for something, and have likely taken a good 10-20 hours on it themselves, and thus need to make claims about completing it in half the time that John did so that they don’t look like idiots. It’s really got that vibe to it, does anyone else see that? Otherwise, why not just say it’s short? Why then say that it’s short and people are idiots? I’m calling projection on this one.
(And that’s what it’s like to be patronised and have your intelligence insulted. Please stop that. I want RPS to be above this sort of thing. I know it isn’t. But I want it to be, damn it.)
20/04/2011 at 13:06 thegooseking says:
@Wulf: I’ve been resisting pointing out that I’m a PhD candidate with a measured IQ of well above average. Partly because I’m not sure that’s terribly meaningful in this context (or, indeed, any context other than the one in which I am an expert, in which case my arguments should speak for themselves and not have to be backed up by my position), and partly because I don’t want to sink to that level. And yet, the game took me seven and a half hours.
Now, maybe one could finish it in four hours. I’m not sure it’s impossible. But I finished it in seven and a half hours not because I’m stupid, but because, while I didn’t dawdle by any means, I did take the time to appreciate a game I’d bought. If someone finishes it in four hours, that doesn’t mean they’re terribly smart; they’re just not taking the time to appreciate it (a behaviour that Valve consciously pokes fun at in the intro of Portal 2 itself!). Which, necessarily, makes their opinion on it, if not meaningless, then at least poorly supported.
19/04/2011 at 23:10 Lukasz says:
Question
45 bucks for 8 hour game is simply not worth a purchase no matter how great that eight hours are.
How is re playability of the game? Worth playing three four times through single player campaign?
I have no interest whatsoever in multiplayer or any co-op modes.
19/04/2011 at 23:30 rareh says:
Correction its a 4 hour game for people that have a IQ above 100.
I recommend you wait for a steam sale, because at the moment its overpriced.
20/04/2011 at 00:50 Wulf says:
And you’ve been playing it for, what, 17 hours now?
(Just making a point, here. Insulting the intelligence of people like that is just not cool. You may disagree with them, you may even strongly dislike them, but calling people retards because they don’t share your opinion steps over my personal line.)
20/04/2011 at 00:54 rareh says:
I didn’t call anyone a retard, 100 IQ is normal intelligence.
Think before you write please, k thx bye.
20/04/2011 at 00:57 Dervish says:
“45 bucks for 8 hour game is simply not worth a purchase no matter how great that eight hours are.”
I can’t imagine people making statements like this with a straight face unless they have some bizarre notions about how money works. Hint: the personal value of 45 dollars decreases the more total money you have. Not that it wouldn’t be a ridiculous absolute statement regardless.
Also, why would you look for replayability in a puzzle game of all things?
20/04/2011 at 00:57 Wulf says:
@rareh
If you honestly felt that way, you wouldn’t have wrote it in the first place, you actually felt the need to write that, so you were implying something in the process. You can backpedal all you like, but if you weren’t trying to imply something, you wouldn’t have put it in there in the first place.
So you’re being incredibly transparent in your facetiousness right now.
20/04/2011 at 09:03 rareh says:
@Wulf
I was trying to imply something, but i don’t like insulting people or making fun of their intelligence.
So please don’t put words in my mouth.
The lack of challenge maps like in the first 1, made this game an extreme cakewalk for hardcore gamers of the first(getting every achievement and playing the hardest custom maps), but maybe normal or challenging for casuals.
20/04/2011 at 13:29 Dances to Podcasts says:
“hardcore”
*points, laughs*
20/04/2011 at 19:42 Lukasz says:
@Dervish
I was speaking from my point of view. Not sure what you are suggesting but for me 45 bucks for a game which will only last 8 hours is simply too expensive. If my income was double of what I make then 45 bucks for eight hours of great fun would not be too expensive.
That was not an absolute statement and you, interpreting it as an odd way to understand others words.
The question about re playability was in direct relation to the game cost. If game is only 8 hours long but can be played over and over again without much loss of enjoyment then the value of the game rises in proportion to the cost.
From your statement I assume that replayability of single player mode is null or close to it, therefore confirming my assessment of Portal 2 not being worth the purchase at current time and current price.
19/04/2011 at 23:12 bit_crusherrr says:
1) Portal 2 is 5 and a half hours long
2) HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATS
3) It’s not a console port
4) The Potato Sack meant I could beat the game before tea time.
My 2 cents.
19/04/2011 at 23:13 ScruffyLemming says:
Valve just gave the people who managed to collect all 36 potato’s during the ARG gift-able copies of all their games including TF2, both L4D’s and best of all Portal 2. I have a few friends who are gonna be very happy when they check their inbox’s tomorrow morning…
http://i.imgur.com/vSH4i.jpg
20/04/2011 at 00:14 heretic says:
Thats a pretty amazing gesture fronte valve… have to say I’m impressed with the way they treat the community :)
20/04/2011 at 01:09 RakeShark says:
Confirmed on my end.
People that got the golden potato legitimately through the Potato Sack Games ARG get the Valve Complete Pack, to INCLUDE an extra, GIFTABLE copy of Portal 2.
19/04/2011 at 23:26 _strictmachine says:
I was incredibly annoyed by the “HIT BUTTON TO” prompts that filled the screen for what seemed like way too much of the first part of the game, and then appeared MUCH later on when I was choosing specifically NOT to interact with something to see what would happen – and then the huge “HIT E” prompt jumped up in my face.
I was so frustrated at the beginning of the game I scoured the options menu for a “Console ‘Tard” check box that surely must have been on by default.
I’d go for a “Yes I don’t need the game to condescend” check box as well.
20/04/2011 at 13:47 VelvetFistIronGlove says:
Those annoyed me greatly, too. There are console commands to change the distance they’re visible from, but I couldn’t find a way to turn them off entirely.
I was also bothered by the portals being visible through walls, but that one can be turned off:
portal_draw_ghosting 019/04/2011 at 23:34 _I_I_M_I_I_ says:
Man, you guys are lucky. Every time I start the game, finish waiting for it to load, and almost see the game play screen pop up, I hear the beginning sounds of the level, it freezes, shows the desktop, and goes black. It worked fine for a half hour in the morning, but when I come home everything is all messed up!
But yes, all of your facts are right. I can’t believe some of those trolls!
20/04/2011 at 00:20 Frog100 says:
You havn’t even played the game maybe wait till you’ve played it before you decide who the trolls are :S
20/04/2011 at 01:46 _I_I_M_I_I_ says:
Actually, like I’ve said, I’ve beaten the first chapter. And so far, its really good. I’ve seen tons of walkthroughs, commentaries, viewed some of the maps, and even loaded one in normal portal.\
The last one sadly failed, however.
19/04/2011 at 23:54 malkav11 says:
The ARG really didn’t affect anything for console or retail purchasers. I know, I know, we’re mad, but, well. Really. When you’re offered a $20 credit for preordering an already discounted PS3 copy of the game which includes the PC version so you’re getting more for less money….that was impossible for me to pass up.
And if people seriously bought a nearly $40 bundle of awesome indie games for the sole purpose of maybe getting Portal 2 a little bit early? Well, they have only themselves to blame.
20/04/2011 at 00:05 Frog100 says:
Your claim that you hadn’t even got to the end of the second act in four hours is ridiculous. After finishing single player I had 5 hours played of Portal Two, including having a shower, getting dressed, eating/making lunch and sticking around to listen to some conversations, like the turret template. It was a great game, but it was short. If it really did take you four hours to get to the second act AFTER finishing it once then there’s something wrong with you I could run this again in three hours and I never do speed runs on anything hell I rarely play single player games
But yea there’s no way it took you 4 hours to get to the second act on your first playthrough let alone on your second
20/04/2011 at 00:44 Wulf says:
Maybe Valve should’ve added 20 hours of padding in the form of a labyrinthine maze where the verisimilitude in the assets is very high.
Quality matters to me, not quantity, they could have made it longer but they decided not to pad it and I’m thnakful for that. Other developers could learn from that. Being able to advertise that a game will last you XX hours isn’t the most important thing ever, especially if you’ve just had 20 hours or so of frustration in the form of padding that’s meant to slow you down.
20/04/2011 at 00:55 Frog100 says:
I didnt say it wasnt good I said it was short and it was short regardless of what this article claims
20/04/2011 at 00:56 TillEulenspiegel says:
False dichotomy.
Example: imagine Game of Thrones as a 2-hour film. Think about everything from the novel they’d have to cut to squeeze it into that time limit. Maybe it’d be an objectively wonderful film for someone with no context, but it could be much better given more time. Hence the ten-hour series.
Point is, wanting more good stuff is not remotely the same as wanting length for length’s sake.
We’re talking €50 for a 4-8 hour game, depending on who you ask. Personally, I’ll wait.
20/04/2011 at 01:06 thegooseking says:
It’s only a false dichotomy assuming unlimited resources, which is highly unrealistic. When there is a limit on resources available to produce a title, you do have to make a decision on whether you’re going to have less content with more attention to detail, or more content with less attention to detail.
20/04/2011 at 01:09 Wulf says:
I see your false dichotomy and I raise you a fallacy fallacy.
Your words would carry weight but that you use a film is telling, very telling, because we’ve all seen padding in games just to add extra hours to it. This is the content Valve wanted to make for the game and the story they wanted to tell, now the approach of the video game industry once a game is complete is that if they feel the game needs to be longer, they’ll just throw in pointlessly long and annoying grindy sections to increase the length of the game to say that their game lasts for XX hours.
If you want to give me a correct analogy, and I would like one, then name a triple-A video game from the last few years which lasts for more than 10 hours without padding. You have to look at production costs and realise that the actual game content is expensive, and padding is less expensive, and there are developers who’ll pull the move of just stuffing padding into a game to make it seem as though their game lasts longer than it really does.
Portal 2 does not have any padding and I’m thankful of that. I’d rather be able to enjoy a game from start to finish with no padding than have to suffer a visit to the Deep Roads again.
20/04/2011 at 10:14 Deano2099 says:
There’s very little padding in Portal compared to a man-shoot.
Think about those long games like CoDBlOps and Crysis 2. Now think about what you actually do in them. Now think about how many of those fights are exactly the same as the previous fights. Think how many are just padding, things the game throws at you to cover the trek to the next interesting set-piece.
Portal 2 is just interesting set-pieces. Yes, 7 hours is short for an FPS. No, it’s not short for a puzzle game.
20/04/2011 at 13:57 Wulf says:
Yay! Deano gets it! And said it more eloquently than I could have, too.
Exactly. I’d prefer a short game that’s just mostly set pieces than one which is padded out with things which are just grindy for the sake of slowing the player down to elongate them. I’m not sure if it works for manshoots or not because in all honesty I’m not the biggest fan of them unless the actual shooting part is secondary to other gameplay (ex: Giants – Citizen Kabuto), but in the case of Portal 2, it works.
In fact, I’d love to see more short games that just concentrate on being fun and introducing you to new mechanics right up until the end. I mean, Defence Grid is also pretty short in a way, it doesn’t have a huge amount of maps, but then every one of those maps is introducing you to some new mechanic, be it in alien type, tower, or the layout of the field. There’s always something new, every time, you’re not trudging through something actually thinking of how bored you are.
To be honest, that’s the worst sin a game can commit. If a game ever becomes work or a chore, then it ceases being a game. A game is about having fun immersing you in some new experiences, it’s about escapism. This is why I made the post about how boring fantasy games are in the Garshasp news post and what I’d personally try to do with them. I’d make a fantasy game that’s about six hours long but goes from set piece to set piece with completely new mechanics introduced every time.
And I’ll finish this by saying what I continue to say: Judging a game by its length is the most detrimental thing we could do and sends the wrong message to developers. Quality? Yes. Innovation? Sure. Fun? Definitely! How interesting the world is? Indeed. The overall distilled, purified amount of escapism present? Absolutely. Being brave enough to try new things and to keep trying new things even if they’re experimental? Can’t argue with that. Complaining that the game doesn’t have enough padding between set pieces? Please stop that.
20/04/2011 at 14:05 Chris D says:
I think it all depends on what you’re after. For me, Portal 2 is a bit like going for a meal in a posh restaurant. While I am wondering whether it was really wise to spend that amount on a relatively short lived experience I have absolutely no complaints about the quality, nor any doubt that it’s value for money so long as you’re not expecting to live off it for the next month.
And, in the meantime, I have plenty of left over Shogun 2 in the fridge.
20/04/2011 at 14:31 TillEulenspiegel says:
The posh restaurant analogy is probably a good one. Except I’m going to go next door where the same chef prepares great food for half the price.
Half-Life 2 was a fantastic game with no “padding”, and it was what, 20ish hours? It’s completely possible to create a crapload of great content, as Valve themselves have proven.
I’m a big fan of short stories and novellas; some of my favorite literary works are in that category. I just wouldn’t pay full price for a hardcover version of one. Look, we all have a limit. Would you pay full price for a five-minute game? One hour? Two? Probably not.
20/04/2011 at 01:23 Chimpyang says:
If the game was any longer, the story pacing would have dragged. I’d rather enjoy myself fully for 7-10 hours rather than slog through bits of a 30+ hour game.
My only complaint is that the game was too easy in sp, i have great hopes for the COOP, having read the Wot I Think and the possibility of 4 portal fun.
This is genuinely a very good game.
20/04/2011 at 01:28 Vinraith says:
I wonder, when the average length of a AAA game is the same as that of a movie, if people will still be making the “it couldn’t be any longer without padding!” argument.
I haven’t paid anything remotely resembling full price for a AAA title in ages, and this conversation is doing a fantastic job of reminding me why. Meh, it just means more money for indies, so that’s win-win for me and them.
20/04/2011 at 02:16 RakeShark says:
I can respect the decision of waiting for the price to go down.
I hope you can steer clear of the game being spoiled for you till then, because it really is a wonderful treat.
20/04/2011 at 06:37 Wulf says:
It is an amazingly beautiful little gem of a game. I don’t praise games often, but I will praise this one.
I think the original point I was missing though is sailing way above the heads of some people, so I’ll try and explain it again: If a game is made to be fun, and they concentrate their resources on that, then does it matter if the game is short? How would they elongate it further than they did without further resources (and thus charging a higher price). The thing is is that you can either have a long game, with poor game and lots of padding, one perhaps 60 hours long, or you can have 8 hours of pure joy.
I don’t know whether my point is clear yet, or if it will ever be, but I know which I’d pick, and which I’d pick every time. I’ve played 60 hour long games which were 60% padding and 40% boring content. Yes, they were that long, but would I have wanted to play through them? Hell no. The games in question do all that they can to convince me not to play them by being as unimaginative and as detached from fun as they could be. No imagination – because displaying imagination costs money, just the same old over and over until it ends.
The way I look at it is that Portal 2 is a brilliantly imaginative game. It’s clever. I found myself laughing and commenting on how clever things were quite often, and there were many times where I’d just laugh at the deviousness of something and call Valve magnificent bastards. Because they are. It’s something that engenders amazing feelings. This is what a game is – it’s immersion, it’s good writing, it’s great, memorable characters, and constantly fun from start to finish!
Now let’s look at the 60 hour long Portal 2: They’d have to hire worse voice actors for all the content they’d have to put in, they’d have less of a budget for writers, they’d have to reuse assets, there would be adding, you’d find yourself completing the same puzzle over and over, but you’d want to like it because you spent money on it. And you’d feel exhausted by the halfway point of the game and wish for nothing more than for the game to end. To just end.
Like I said above, show me a game that has a long play time that is actually fun to play for that entire amount of time and has no padding, and my argument is defunct. But we all know that my argument is completely valid, we see it all the time. It’s especially annoying when people with games that are 4 hours long pad them up to 12 hours just to say that they’re that long, and that’s detrimental to the game. There were parts of Mass Effect 2 even that I thought they could’ve cut due to being a bit obnoxiously grindy (the resource gathering, for instance, which was just something included to make the game last longer).
Valve decided to just trim off all the fat. You’re having fun from the moment you start, and it’s a blast and one hell of a ride until the final curtain falls. You look back at it, and the only word is wow.
I think that fixating on the length of a game instead of the quality of it is incredibly detrimental.
20/04/2011 at 07:12 nayon says:
But there already is so much padding in the game! There’s so much of the “shoot a portal to a far place that’s hard to see, then just go through” and “go somewhere high, shoot a portal at low spot, jump down, preserve momentum to fling yourself”. Those two are so ridiculously overused. You spend more time doing that then solving actual puzzles.
As for the length of the game, I got stuck at only one puzzle (sleep deprivation is to be blamed I believe), and I finished it in around 5 hours. I didn’t run through it, I explored the surroundings, tried to find easter eggs, listened to all conversation.
Quite a bit of the puzzles are uninspired and are just slight variations on the same thing. There were a few puzzles that were really brilliant, I wish there more of those. All new ideas were used very basically, but that’s mostly because the gels are very narrow in their application. I liked the gravity beams and the light bridges though.
It was an enjoyable experience, but I did feel a bit disappointed. Nothing really happens in the game, and the puzzles were at times lackluster. Still better than quite a bit of other AAA titles.
20/04/2011 at 10:00 Harlander says:
Yeah, I hear that. I got stuck at one bit when I just couldn’t see the surface I was meant to portal to for far too long. (That was probably a good sign that I should have called it a night…)
Not really sure what you mean by this, though.
20/04/2011 at 13:38 Wulf says:
/picard
Overall Faith in Humanity metre drops from 12% to 11.5%.
See what you did there? I hope you’re happy now. I really hope you’re happy. I’m frowning in dismay at you right now and thinking that XKCD‘s predictions probably weren’t a long way off and that perhaps GLaDOS’s human eradication experiments aren’t too bad of a thing. You monsters.
(Yes, black humour. Not at all serious, here. Still though, good grief.)
20/04/2011 at 13:49 nayon says:
@Harlander by “Nothing happens” I mean I was expecting some grand conclusion, a big reveal, something that ties it to the Half-Life universe or in general some grandiose event. Not to spoil too much, but not only does that not happen, almost no questions are answered except for that whole… nah, can’t say it without spoiling.
I guess my expectations were too high.
20/04/2011 at 15:07 Vinraith says:
The thing is is that you can either have a long game, with poor game and lots of padding, one perhaps 60 hours long, or you can have 8 hours of pure joy.
You can repeat a false dichotomy as many times as you like, it’s not going to stop being a false dichotomy. I’ve got too many games that I’ve enjoyed intensely for hundreds or even thousands of hours to go spending $50 on something, even something very fun, that only lasts 8 hours with little to no replay value. Fortunately, it’s a Valve game, so it’ll cost next-to-nothing by Christmas anyway. It’s not like Valve needs the cash.
20/04/2011 at 02:35 appropriate touching says:
Well I was a bit disappointed with the lack of challenge/advanced maps and the difficulty level – an easy campaign is understandable but there should be a mode in this puzzle game that’s actually puzzling. Also, invisible walls all over the place; I had hoped we’d moved past them. Canned physics too – these things undermine the sense of a self-consistent world.
A very good game all the same. Looking forward to co-op.
20/04/2011 at 08:56 rareh says:
Ye the challenge maps, made me play portal until i mastered each map.
I loved them.
This is the main reason i prefer the 1st Portal over the 2nd.
20/04/2011 at 09:06 Harlander says:
Whassat?
20/04/2011 at 09:49 Dozer says:
@Harlander – i read somewhere else in the RPS comments that a lot of the physics you see in Portal aren’t computed in realtime on your PC. They were computed by Valve weeks ago and recorded as an animation, hence the ‘canned’ comment. I don’t know what exactly this is referring to because I don’t have Portal 2 yet. The same comment was saying that the paint does use real-time physics.
20/04/2011 at 09:57 Harlander says:
I could see that for the bits when big things are falling over and coming apart into a lot of different little bits, like at the beginning… Of course at that point you’re not really interacting with them, just watching
20/04/2011 at 10:01 Dozer says:
That’s probably what was meant. Also Glados’ explosion at the end of Portal the First.
20/04/2011 at 10:37 Harlander says:
My first question in response to that question is
“Why would you care?”
My second question is
“How would you even tell?”
20/04/2011 at 11:11 Dozer says:
I have no idea at all!
20/04/2011 at 13:22 thegooseking says:
@Harlander: I guess the only reason you would care is that player-made maps won’t be nearly as spectacular as the original maps (well, they could re-use the canned physics from the game itself, which limits their options, or create their own, which I don’t see many people doing). That’s kind of a minor thing, though.
20/04/2011 at 13:44 Wulf says:
Are the physics canned if things don’t actually happen the same way every time? I’ve seen some things happen differently and one time a piece of debris almost caused a panel to tweak out, though that might have been pre-recorded too, I don’t know.
20/04/2011 at 03:51 Cim says:
Though most of the things in this article is true… the console port thing is actually sort of legit. It’s not just the “don’t turn off your console” thing, there’s more. The low FOV (with no settings in the video options, you should not have to use the dev. console). The fact that most of the game is one puzzle, followed by a loading screen. It’s obviously geared towards console machines with 512mb of RAM and not PC’s. Not to mention that the textures are seriously low resolution, even Team Fortress 2 has sharper textures.
All in all it does feel like the primary platform was the consoles, not the PC. Which is seriously sad considering this is Vavle.
All that said though, the game is still great and regardless of platform, highly enjoyable.
20/04/2011 at 05:14 MD says:
Does that mean that you can change the fov in the dev console? How high will it go, and are there any problems?
20/04/2011 at 04:10 Doug says:
Just finished it in 1h30min
Maybe it was fast because I’m extremely good with portals, I’ll even have to call myself a pro and because I used no_clip in 6~7 chapters (the puzzles were completely easy but not well built, I refuse to use all my skills in such bad puzzles). Would give this game a 1/10.
20/04/2011 at 04:47 FunkyJ says:
Metacritic User Scores is the primary domain of hating on games that don’t conform to idealistic and childish nonsense about how games should be made, sold, and played, by a bunch of conceited and entitled brats who know nothing about the real world.
20/04/2011 at 08:38 Kadayi says:
Valve should of stuck a cat in it that you must rescue, thus ensuring 10/10 scores across the board from 4chan.
20/04/2011 at 06:26 HeDStone says:
I’m honestly not sure where people get the 8-9 hours of gameplay from… according to my achievement unlocks:
Wake Up Call was earned at Apr 18, 2011 10:15pm
and Lunacy at Apr 19, 2011 3:42am
Puts me at about 5 1/2 hours of gameplay and I didn’t rush through it… I listened to dialog and even got stuck on a few puzzles and places trying to figure out where to go, and took atleast two bathroom / smoke breaks. However, I loved every minute of it…
20/04/2011 at 07:57 foofad says:
Well, using that metric:
Wake Up Call Unlocked: Apr 19, 2011 12:47am
Dual Pit Experiment Unlocked: Apr 19, 2011 6:23am
At which point I went to bed. That’s five and a half hours and I haven’t finished the game yet. There is a gap in time between achievements so it’s not super accurate but the next day I got my next one at 3:27pm and finished the game at 4:15. However my Steam time played was 9 hours at that point. It’s currently at 10 hours played because I replayed a couple of puzzles after the fact and beat the boss again a few more times so I could watch the ending cinematic a few more times.
I had quite a few more headscratchers than I should have due to the whole “I was up until six in the morning playing” thing, but still.
20/04/2011 at 07:04 Leaderz0rz says:
Only problem I have is the constant loading, it’s like playing mass effect 1 and the damn elevators. I mean sometimes it loads at like the worst moment killing any atmosphere you had going at the time. All the complaints about to short, dlc, console port is all shit and they know it. Obviously it was developed in conjunction with the PS3 version but console definitively wasn’t the “lead” platform.
21/04/2011 at 04:36 Rii says:
Umm, the constant loading is a byproduct of it being a console port…
21/04/2011 at 04:38 Serenegoose says:
Yeah. I mean, I certainly don’t recall endless amounts of loading screens in Half life.
One.
In 1998.
Wait, yes I do. Fucking console ports, even way back then, tsk!
21/04/2011 at 04:49 Rii says:
The loads are spaced as they are so that the maps fit in the consoles’ 512MB memory caches. The most common gaming PC config (per Steam stats) has a mere ten times that amount.
21/04/2011 at 04:58 TillEulenspiegel says:
Clever engineering and enough RAM (and ideally a spare CPU core) removes the need for loading screens. Amount of cleverness required drops considerably in a purely linear game.
Still, it’s easier just to stick with loading screens. It’s a crappy user experience, but it’s less likely to be a potential source of bugs.
21/04/2011 at 05:31 Rii says:
Yes, I’m not suggesting it wasn’t a reasonable compromise on Valve’s part, merely noting that we’re certainly not looking at a ‘dyed in the wool’ PC game here. If it was there’d be rather fewer loading screens. Seemed worth noting in light of what the OP was complaining about (loading times) whilst simultaneously dismissing (allegations of consolitis).
21/04/2011 at 17:51 SlayerCake says:
I’d probably say it’s because of the Source Engine, rather than a console port. Considering Crysis levels load faster on my computer that Episode 2 levels…
20/04/2011 at 08:36 jacobvandy says:
Wake Up Call: Unlocked: Apr 18, 2011 10:05pm
Lunacy: Unlocked: Apr 19, 2011 3:29am
I took a few breaks in between there, so a little less than 5 hours for me. I didn’t rush through at all. I didn’t explore every nook and cranny, but I did get stumped on a few of the puzzles. 80% of them were pretty straightforward, though, provided you already knew how to think with portals.
20/04/2011 at 09:42 AdamK117 says:
I love the game, my only dissapointment is the rediculous abundance of loading screens. I understand that, to maximise compatibility, you cant have massive levels that kane RAM; likewise, it’s near impossible to make a variable “level size” setting in options but some parts of this were like a blast back to the old days of 3 mins on 30 secs off.
20/04/2011 at 09:44 postcello says:
Took me about 9 hours to finish the single-player campaign. Explored a great deal, didn’t particularly rush, made absolutely sure to listen to as much of the dialogue as possible. Next up: co-op, followed by a dev commentary run.
Customer satisfaction: 100 %
20/04/2011 at 10:08 The Sombrero Kid says:
I’ve played it for 6 hours and i’m near the end & steam says i’ve played it for 2, i think that might be responsible for some of the discrepancies.
20/04/2011 at 10:32 Laurentius says:
Laoding screens are totally immersion breaking and while game isn’t console port it does feel like it, the menus, options are very console-y, seems like PC was secondary platform for devloperers.
20/04/2011 at 11:16 jalf says:
Geez, it’s too nice a day for all this anger.
I played some co-op with a friend yesterday. It was fun.
20/04/2011 at 11:24 Zanchito says:
Oh, for the love of FSM!!!
A dumb string in a save screen changes nothing about the game, unless you’re looking for a reason to feel offended. Also, I despise bad ports as much as any other PC elitist, but if the port is well done, I’m bloody happy to play it.
Also, Valve developing for consoles first?! I “HAH HAH!” at anyone entertaining such a spurious idea.
20/04/2011 at 13:18 Laurentius says:
Ok, here is the example; i challange you to change 4 graphic options and 2 sound options in P2 and P1, if do it faster and easier in P2 , you must have never before used concepts like windows and pull-down menus. P2 menus are terrible clunky to use mouse with otherwise you can say that P1 menus are pinnacale of mouse using interface…suit yourself.
20/04/2011 at 14:00 Zanchito says:
You have a fair point, but really, I don’t usually measure my gameplay experience by the settings menu. If the game had a relevant in-game menu (inventory, as in Oblivion, for example), then it’d quite annoy me.
20/04/2011 at 15:54 Laurentius says:
I was actually adressing your line about Valve developing for consoles first. Seeing how menus are hardly a mouse freindly as they were before in valve’s games and is Steam itself, i think it’s pretty fair statement.
20/04/2011 at 12:28 sexyresults says:
I feel ashamed of RPS comments today :(
20/04/2011 at 13:00 pinkled5 says:
I really wish Portal 2 would have been on the cutting edge of game innovation the way Portal 1 was. For example, wouldn’t it have been cool to be able to make time portals in addition to space portals? You could place a time portal somewhere in the game. When you placed the second time portal and entered it you would come out at the exact same moment you placed the first one. You could watch yourself do the things you had done and interact accordingly, almost as if you were playing co-op with yourself. Pushing the envelope with new and innovative concepts like that is what I expected from the Portal franchise. But I really felt like I was just playing a continuation of Portal 1.
20/04/2011 at 13:33 thegooseking says:
That would be spectacular, and Portal being a game with relatively few entities to keep track of would be an ideal place to make that happen.
The only problem is you would have to solve potential time travel paradoxes programmatically, rather than with the hand-waving that time-travel fiction usually uses. Even Braid did it in a quite naive way, where if you prevented your past self from doing something, it would just dumbly keep trying to perform the same actions you had done previously. I don’t think that would be terribly great in Portal.
20/04/2011 at 13:49 pinkled5 says:
@thegooseking I think that a thoughtful examination of all relevant issues regarding time portals could be intelligently resolved. Look at how they resolved the freefall effect in Portal. Put some springs on the back of her calves and no one asks “how can she fall so far without injury?”
20/04/2011 at 22:07 Daiv says:
I’m really enjoying Portal 2. I must be a horrible human being. Also, fat.
21/04/2011 at 18:05 xn4nd says:
Honestly, I think this 4 hours thing is a bug in the steam software. I played half the game in 6 hours, and steam said I had played for 2 hours. When I had finished the game, somewhere around 9-10 hours, it says I’ve only played for 4 hours. That’s probably where people are getting their numbers. If anything, I’d say that this supports the notion that “time flies when you’re having fun”. Either that, or we begin traveling hundreds of thousands of mph faster when we play this game… which would explain why it’s only 4 hours of game time, but 10 hours have passed in the real world. >_>
22/04/2011 at 08:10 Corion says:
I beat it in approximately 4.5 hours. I spent plenty of time lolly-gagging around trying to shoot portals off into nowhere, hoping to “escape” the testing sooner into the game. The puzzles were just not that difficult. I even spent a good 10 minutes here and there trying to get them to speak extra lines of dialogue. I waited for all of the dialogue to finish out before continuing. I guess I don’t stand around scratching my head as much as most people, or perhaps I don’t solve puzzles in a slow, deliberate manner once I already know the answer.
I didn’t rush either. I enjoyed it. I played at a leisurely pace. But it only lasted 4.5 hours. Same with co-op. I’m not going by Steam timers here either. I know when I started and when I stopped, and it just did not take even close to 6, 8, or 10 hours.
I don’t understand how you could take so long to beat it, trying to rush through it and knowing all of the solutions. If I took 40 hours to beat HL2 that doesn’t mean it was a 40-hr game, it just meant I was slower at beating it than everyone else.
Why not try a poll? Ask people how long it took us.
22/04/2011 at 11:31 jackoatmon says:
Nonsense? The game took me under 3 hours to play through on the first try, and I dunno what planet you live on but there’s nothing “stunning” about this game unless you meant hat ti’s “stunning” that valve didn’t update the graphics from the last Portal game.
What a f^&*ing waste of money.
14/09/2011 at 11:35 Cold Canuck says:
I am sincere in my statement that this game can be finished in approximately 2 hours.
Having recently played through the game, in it’s entirety, four or five times, ignoring all distractions and achievements and going simply for speed…pausing the stop watch during the load times for each level (since load times would vary from system to system), my first speed run was 2hrs, 17mins, second pass was 2hrs even….my third run was 2hrs and three minutes.
I don’t know where estimates of four+ hours comes from, I’m going to assume that it is old news and not a recent representation of times.
24/09/2011 at 04:56 wisnoskij says:
Lol, the game IS 4 hours long, ignoring the multiplayer.
I spent tons of time just standing around listening to dialogue, not skipping cut scenes, exploring, getting some steam optional achievements, and getting completely stuck on 2 puzzles for like 20 each because I was just not paying attention.
4.5-5 hours latter and I was finished.
I would estimate there being 3.5-4 hours of plot and gameplay there and the rest was me just wondering around looking for Easter eggs.
And easily under a 2 hour game if you know the puzzles.
And I have never speed run anything in my life.