I am about four hours into the game...

I am totally frustrated already ! Why would the developers think its a good idea to put time sequences in a game "Where You Can Die"

The story is a very good one... Now....I didn't mind the inventory problem..Where you can't carry everything, but ..dying is another thing...

I found myself walking three steps & saving at every move...That is frustrating..

If it wasn't for MaG's Wt on the antidote ...I would have never got passed that part <sigh>

I take it you did not read flotsam's review?

Ana

Yes I did read it....

I am just voicing my opinion as to why they have to make adventure games in this form of game play...

The timed sequences in my opinion enhanced the story and made it realistic. Being in the situation of life and death, chased by killers has to be done fast.

It's not easy for the gamers' nerve (include me in there), but it is true to the storyline.

I agree, MaG

The game is very good...Maybe if they made it if you die...The game will pick up from the beginning of the timed sequences...

My frustration came from having to save so often..Other then that I have no other complaints..

I didn't buy this game because I never did get through the lasers in the 1st one. When I read the review and saw it included timed areas I decided not to waste my money. But good luck to those of you who have nimble fingers because I liked the graphics and the storyline in Still Life 1. The reviews on gameboomers are great with just the information I need. Leaves me more money to spend on games I will enjoy.

I followed Len Green's walkthrough for the laser puzzle in Still Life 1, and it wasn't difficult if you knew exactly what to do. There were several "safe places" where you could stop while you checked the instructions to see what your next few moves were.

Flotsam's review told me almost all I needed to know about Still Life 2 though. And the rest (about who the killer was originally intended to be) was posted over at ***this site***.
I've read that the author of that article had inside information and knew who the developers of the first Still Life originally planned to be the culprit, though I can't be sure that's the case. But it's certainly a more interesting conclusion than the one offered in Still Life 2.

I'm not buying it either although I was able to finish Still Life before running out of robots! Anyway, maybe they put in those timers because they hate us for being so picky? I do not play games for reality, which uses a whole different part of my brain, I think.

My first game was Space Quest, so I don't mind dying in games. Don't like timed sequences though.

You mean like point and click off the narrow mountain road in early King's Quest games and falling into certain death? I died like hundred times that way in some dark cave in King's Quest IV. That was really stupid.

Well, frustrating, maybe, but what great stories !!!!

Ah yes, Pirate_Hunter, that dark cave in The Perils of Rosella, how well I remember it. But that was some time ago and I was younger then, and a lot more tolerant of frustration in games than I am now!

I`ve never known a timed sequence in any adventure game make the game more realistic. What is realistic about the age old action/die/restore sequence. They are just as tedious now as they were in the old days. Probably the best implementation of these timed things was the Tex Murphey games where if you were not interested in the "timed" part you could just take your time to solve the puzzle and the only penalty was you got fewer points as a result. I never even bothered with the points in the TM games - still enjoyed them though.

As for Still Life2 - never gone back to it after I saw it had timed/die sequences.

Ditto mj2c

You can get killed in Tex Murphy games, usually for doing something too slow.

Oh, but they give you lots of time with the timed sequences! Also later on, when you accidentally get yourself hurt, you don't die, but you can use the first aid kits to completely heal yourself.

In any case, I never got killed, so I decided to get myself killed on purpose (curiosity killed not only the cat, it seems!) just as an experiment to see what happens, and you don't even have to reload a gamesave. The game automatically puts you at the beginning of the timed sequence again, and those timed parts aren't long. You don't get any other penalties than simply restarting the sequence, which is nice, because now you have a better idea of what to do the next time around.

The only thing I found really silly, is that they limit your replay of the alternate endings. I wanted to replay seeing what would happen er.. nevermind - let me not mention spoilers...

I`ll probably give it another go some day but, from what Ive seen, it`s a very clunky second rate effort. A great shame as the first one was fantastic. Unfortunately, since getting a new compy with Vista, I cant replay the first Still Life.

Isn't this the game where you can replay the other possible ending(s) from the game Menu once you've finished it?

Hi, All

I just finished the game....Let me start out by saying... "I'm Totally Impressed"

If you can take dying a few times...Put up with the inventory thing....

You are in for a real treat !!!!

I was totally scared out of my pants !!!!!

The back round music is something that is right out of a movie...

The cut scenes will make you want to play it all over again...

What a story !!!!...Very impressive...

I agree about the Tex Murphy games, I never went back after trying to hide from the guy in the shower. My nerves were shot..lol...but it is a great game and so is Still Life 2. I think sometimes they need to change up a bit instead of the humdrum of adventure games but not too much. Some people are expecting a relaxing experience but as for me, I think Still Life 2 has a great story and more in depth than the first and all the twisty turny stuff really makes it interesting. I'm having fun with it. Makes me want to play the first one over again.....

It is! I think SL2 is a terrible sequel that they shouldn't have made. I was eagerly waiting for its release when I first heard about it, but now it seems to be nothing more than a sub-par story (ridiculous killer for both storylines!).
I wish they had just left it alone. x.O It has neither the same atmosphere that made the first so compelling, nor the graphics from the first. The latter bit is actually pretty sad, considering the temporal distance between the two; they should have just stuck with the gorgeous, eerie pre-rendered backgrounds and beautiful cutscenes.

I get how it could be exciting, but it's too much action and too little plot/adventure for my tastes, and seems more like a poorly made horror movie. D: And there were some pretty over the top sequences:

I don't know when I'll get Still Life 2, so could somebody tell me who the killer was from the first game.

Perhaps via email would be a good idea so as not to spoil it for others.

Ana

I understand the reissued jewel case version of Still Life doesn't have StarForce, so it should work with Vista. Anyone tried the new edition on a Vista computer?

In my opinion SL2 offers a lot more suspense than many horror games and certainly more than SL1. The timed sequences are fair and, if you figured out what has to be done, can be done without any problem.