Up front, I want to admit I'm biased towards the cinematic action-adventure genre. The PlayStation-exclusive type of game design is not my thing, and I find it to be lacking as a a genre when it comes to producing an actual video game, which is what we're here for. However, some of them do hit for me, and I get some enjoyment out of them. Hellblade 1 was one of those. I thought it was good and I liked it.
I do not like Hellblade II.
I already knew something was up when reviews were left until release day, and how reluctant Microsoft seemed to be to market the game. I saw that Hellblade II reviewed "good" at a Metascore of an 81 or so, but it was a significantly lower mark than the first game.
After playing it, I'm not too surprised. Hellblade II gives you a garbage first impression by essentially being a walking simulator for the first 20 minutes, after which Senua picks up a sword and you're given a rude awakening by being introduced to the plodding, dull, and mind-numbing combat.
This is why I don't like "cinematic" games like this, because the combat and gameplay always feels stiff. There's so much effort put into cinematography, sure, but when every combat encounter results in the same 10 or so canned animations, with little to no variation whatsoever, it becomes a snoozefest. I can't count how many times I've seen Senua get knocked on the ground after parrying a strike with the same animation each time, or using one of the same selection of execution animations. And you'll see these often too! Especially since the combat amounts to building a charge for what is essentially a one-shot, which means that combat encounters can be breezed through fairly quickly so long as you charge up that execution move. By the way, the final boss uses the same canned combat animations you've seen for the whole game.
One thing you'll notice right away while playing Hellblade II is how stunningly beautiful it is. It is one of the best-looking games you'll ever see on a console thanks to the power of UE5. I can't take anything away from that - but Hellblade II's confusing, hollow, and bland experience is not helped at all by the graphic fidelity.
It is worth mentioning that Hellblade II only runs at 30fps. Which is fine, because you're likely going to be playing this off of Game Pass. My personal belief is that if a game is $70, there should be a performance mode. If the game is on Game Pass, however, I'm only paying $15 at max, so that's no big deal. For me.
Another minor technical issue: Hellblade does not work properly with Xbox Game Streaming. The Focus button, which you need to progress the game's numerous puzzles, does not work while streaming. I was able to work around this by turning the stream off and on. Later I reached a section where you MUST sprint to survive the level's design, and Senua just wouldn't sprint because the LB button didn't work properly while streaming. Since I like streaming my Xbox audio to my PC, I had to plug in an Elgato to proceed with the level. This is only going to be a problem for maybe 1% of people who play Hellblade, so I won't give it flak for this... but this is an XBOX game. Shouldn't XBOX Game Streaming work for it at launch?
What makes Hellblade II mediocre beyond the combat? Unfortunately, it's the story.
I beat Hellblade II in only 7 hours. Originally I thought it was 5, because it didn't feel like 7, but then again my console was on pause for what added up to an hour... so let's say 6 for good measure. Those reviewers and tweets you see weren't joking about its length. It is a very short game. Nowadays playing a AAA game that is so short is an anomaly, sure, but this game was in development for FIVE years, wasn't it? How did 5 years of development result in a 5 hour game?
Hellblade 1 had a story built around Senua's psychosis, and I think that's what made it excel, and it's why I liked that game despite my aversion to the genre.
Hellblade 2's story does not feel like it is built around Senua's story. After meeting some NPCs on her journey, Senua instead ends up hunting down giants that are ruining the land after spelunking in a cave to be proven worthy. There you go, that's the plot. I don't know how Senua's psychosis is relevant to that, because I don't think it is. The point is that Hellblade 2's story is extremely generic compared to Hellblade 1, and is a concern I had almost immediately within the first hour of playing.
Hellblade 1 really shined by being a solo experience built around Senua. Hellblade 2 features multiple companions and NPCs, which doesn't really lend itself well to using Senua's psychosis in the plot. Senua's psychosis no longer feels like a relevant portion of the game's themes and story, and instead is reduced to a background element of a dull story - a story that is somehow confusing and boring at the same time. Why? Because when the story is said and done, it's not even really clear on what happened for the most part or what it even means. While Hellblade 1 had a similar feeling, you at least got the idea and thought-provoking thematics they were trying to express.
Hellblade 2's ending presents itself as if the creators believed they had just made something profound, but instead you're just left scratching your head. What's funny about this is that the first line you hear in the ending cutscene is "All the questions answered." NO, THEY WERE NOT.
I don't know what Senua's plot or story arc is supposed to be here. Does she even have a character arc in this game? I don't think she does! The game tries to toy with this idea of Senua feeling guilty for people dying... when we just spent a whole game where Senua was all alone? Senua feels like the deaths of others are her fault, and the voices in her head try to remind her of that. (Which they do a good job of. The psychosis portrayal when it comes to Senua herself is still very well-done) It just comes across as forced and doesn't really suit the kind of character arc that Hellblade 1 concluded with. Senua's story felt finite and this attempt feels aimless, a vainful venture to continue a character arc that was already concluded.
Here's an example. At the end of The Witcher 3, Geralt's story is pretty much done. This is why many speculate that The Witcher 4 will feature Ciri or a custom protagonist. Because what else is there to tell? Geralt did everything he can possibly do and his arc is at a satisfying end, so any further attempts to tell stories for Geralt will feel forced. Same thing here. Senua's story felt done already, so her arc in Hellblade II is most comparable to a D&D DM who is struggling to continue a campaign after his players hit the end of the planned Adventure.
I'm at a loss of what else to say since the experience is so short of an acid trip that I'm grasping at straws here. It's not even good acid!
I guess I can mention that it's voice-acted pretty well. I'm surprised Senua's VA hasn't gotten more roles.
All in all, Senua's confusing mess of a plot and lack of steady direction only reinforces my own personal belief that Hellblade didn't need a sequel at all.
Score: 66
I do not like Hellblade II.
I already knew something was up when reviews were left until release day, and how reluctant Microsoft seemed to be to market the game. I saw that Hellblade II reviewed "good" at a Metascore of an 81 or so, but it was a significantly lower mark than the first game.
After playing it, I'm not too surprised. Hellblade II gives you a garbage first impression by essentially being a walking simulator for the first 20 minutes, after which Senua picks up a sword and you're given a rude awakening by being introduced to the plodding, dull, and mind-numbing combat.
This is why I don't like "cinematic" games like this, because the combat and gameplay always feels stiff. There's so much effort put into cinematography, sure, but when every combat encounter results in the same 10 or so canned animations, with little to no variation whatsoever, it becomes a snoozefest. I can't count how many times I've seen Senua get knocked on the ground after parrying a strike with the same animation each time, or using one of the same selection of execution animations. And you'll see these often too! Especially since the combat amounts to building a charge for what is essentially a one-shot, which means that combat encounters can be breezed through fairly quickly so long as you charge up that execution move. By the way, the final boss uses the same canned combat animations you've seen for the whole game.
One thing you'll notice right away while playing Hellblade II is how stunningly beautiful it is. It is one of the best-looking games you'll ever see on a console thanks to the power of UE5. I can't take anything away from that - but Hellblade II's confusing, hollow, and bland experience is not helped at all by the graphic fidelity.
It is worth mentioning that Hellblade II only runs at 30fps. Which is fine, because you're likely going to be playing this off of Game Pass. My personal belief is that if a game is $70, there should be a performance mode. If the game is on Game Pass, however, I'm only paying $15 at max, so that's no big deal. For me.
Another minor technical issue: Hellblade does not work properly with Xbox Game Streaming. The Focus button, which you need to progress the game's numerous puzzles, does not work while streaming. I was able to work around this by turning the stream off and on. Later I reached a section where you MUST sprint to survive the level's design, and Senua just wouldn't sprint because the LB button didn't work properly while streaming. Since I like streaming my Xbox audio to my PC, I had to plug in an Elgato to proceed with the level. This is only going to be a problem for maybe 1% of people who play Hellblade, so I won't give it flak for this... but this is an XBOX game. Shouldn't XBOX Game Streaming work for it at launch?
What makes Hellblade II mediocre beyond the combat? Unfortunately, it's the story.
I beat Hellblade II in only 7 hours. Originally I thought it was 5, because it didn't feel like 7, but then again my console was on pause for what added up to an hour... so let's say 6 for good measure. Those reviewers and tweets you see weren't joking about its length. It is a very short game. Nowadays playing a AAA game that is so short is an anomaly, sure, but this game was in development for FIVE years, wasn't it? How did 5 years of development result in a 5 hour game?
Hellblade 1 had a story built around Senua's psychosis, and I think that's what made it excel, and it's why I liked that game despite my aversion to the genre.
Hellblade 2's story does not feel like it is built around Senua's story. After meeting some NPCs on her journey, Senua instead ends up hunting down giants that are ruining the land after spelunking in a cave to be proven worthy. There you go, that's the plot. I don't know how Senua's psychosis is relevant to that, because I don't think it is. The point is that Hellblade 2's story is extremely generic compared to Hellblade 1, and is a concern I had almost immediately within the first hour of playing.
Hellblade 1 really shined by being a solo experience built around Senua. Hellblade 2 features multiple companions and NPCs, which doesn't really lend itself well to using Senua's psychosis in the plot. Senua's psychosis no longer feels like a relevant portion of the game's themes and story, and instead is reduced to a background element of a dull story - a story that is somehow confusing and boring at the same time. Why? Because when the story is said and done, it's not even really clear on what happened for the most part or what it even means. While Hellblade 1 had a similar feeling, you at least got the idea and thought-provoking thematics they were trying to express.
Hellblade 2's ending presents itself as if the creators believed they had just made something profound, but instead you're just left scratching your head. What's funny about this is that the first line you hear in the ending cutscene is "All the questions answered." NO, THEY WERE NOT.
I don't know what Senua's plot or story arc is supposed to be here. Does she even have a character arc in this game? I don't think she does! The game tries to toy with this idea of Senua feeling guilty for people dying... when we just spent a whole game where Senua was all alone? Senua feels like the deaths of others are her fault, and the voices in her head try to remind her of that. (Which they do a good job of. The psychosis portrayal when it comes to Senua herself is still very well-done) It just comes across as forced and doesn't really suit the kind of character arc that Hellblade 1 concluded with. Senua's story felt finite and this attempt feels aimless, a vainful venture to continue a character arc that was already concluded.
Here's an example. At the end of The Witcher 3, Geralt's story is pretty much done. This is why many speculate that The Witcher 4 will feature Ciri or a custom protagonist. Because what else is there to tell? Geralt did everything he can possibly do and his arc is at a satisfying end, so any further attempts to tell stories for Geralt will feel forced. Same thing here. Senua's story felt done already, so her arc in Hellblade II is most comparable to a D&D DM who is struggling to continue a campaign after his players hit the end of the planned Adventure.
I'm at a loss of what else to say since the experience is so short of an acid trip that I'm grasping at straws here. It's not even good acid!
I guess I can mention that it's voice-acted pretty well. I'm surprised Senua's VA hasn't gotten more roles.
All in all, Senua's confusing mess of a plot and lack of steady direction only reinforces my own personal belief that Hellblade didn't need a sequel at all.
Score: 66