This review contains spoilers
It goes without saying that the Manhunt games are two of the most viscerally disturbing games ever made. Their controversy famously overshadowed the content of the games themselves. But what nobody says is that once the shock value wears off, we're left with two games with incredible atmospheres, fantastic sound design, and brilliant stealth gameplay that feel like a commentary on video game violence in itself. The games confront you with a situation where you're a rat in a maze, encourages you to commit horrific executions of the NPCs who are trying to kill you until you relish it, and then makes you feel dirty when it calls you out on it. It's genius to an extent.
However, the second game embodies the law of diminishing returns. It's not as fun as its predecesor because it often relies on gun violence over executions, which is not as thrilling as being cornered and having to rely on stealth to get by. I feel like the gunplay is also the reason why the game is so short too, and don't get me started on how pedestrian the gunplay is too. It's less fun than the simple yet effective stealth gameplay and the game suffers as a result. The story of Manhunt 2 is arguably better than its predecessor, but it feels like it's trying too hard to evoke Fight Club in many ways. In fact, the split personality twist ending is so obvious from the first mission that it's a cliche in the psychological thriller genre at this point. I do think that Daniel Lamb is a more compelling protagonist than James Earl Cash and The Project is an intriguing mystery. In addition, the atmosphere of Manhunt 2 makes up for its flaws. I didn't care for the 'Personality Clash' mission, however. It makes the subtext of the franchise too obvious, Confronting you with the people you've killed over the course of the game to make you feel guilty. The game already features that subtext! Why turn it into text?!
In any case, I wish the gameplay of the Manhunt games was discussed more often than its controversy. The gameplay of both games is so much more interesting than, say, Rockstar's Grand Theft Auto franchise, or even the Red Dead franchise. It's a shame, really, since this is arguably Rockstar's most experimental game series.
However, the second game embodies the law of diminishing returns. It's not as fun as its predecesor because it often relies on gun violence over executions, which is not as thrilling as being cornered and having to rely on stealth to get by. I feel like the gunplay is also the reason why the game is so short too, and don't get me started on how pedestrian the gunplay is too. It's less fun than the simple yet effective stealth gameplay and the game suffers as a result. The story of Manhunt 2 is arguably better than its predecessor, but it feels like it's trying too hard to evoke Fight Club in many ways. In fact, the split personality twist ending is so obvious from the first mission that it's a cliche in the psychological thriller genre at this point. I do think that Daniel Lamb is a more compelling protagonist than James Earl Cash and The Project is an intriguing mystery. In addition, the atmosphere of Manhunt 2 makes up for its flaws. I didn't care for the 'Personality Clash' mission, however. It makes the subtext of the franchise too obvious, Confronting you with the people you've killed over the course of the game to make you feel guilty. The game already features that subtext! Why turn it into text?!
In any case, I wish the gameplay of the Manhunt games was discussed more often than its controversy. The gameplay of both games is so much more interesting than, say, Rockstar's Grand Theft Auto franchise, or even the Red Dead franchise. It's a shame, really, since this is arguably Rockstar's most experimental game series.