It was okay
It was fun gameplay not alot of story didn't take planning ... i could just kill random people and win but besides those factors....it was good
Reviews for "Stoneage Assassin 2"
Pretty
First thing I'd like to mention: no, crossbows did not exist in the stone age. The term stone age refers to a period in human history in which stones were used to create tools out of wood and other stones. You can't carve a crossbow out of wood using stone. The earliest evidence of crossbows date back about 3000 years which puts the crossbow in the iron age. Does this even matter? No. It doesn't make a damn bit of difference. This game isn't a history lesson, and the author didn't intend it to be. Stop dwelling on it.
Graphically, this game is beautiful. As some people have mentioned before, it would have been nice if different animations showed up depending on where the bolt struct the enemy. The other big issue I had was that the mission briefing pages didn't match the game in the slightest. For such a nice looking game, to stick these ugly, un-designed and un-stone-age-like mission breifings in between each scene was a real disappointment.
Gameplay was mediocre. First off, you start the game with a small set of instructions. Either give the player time to read them, or don't bother giving them at all. The gameplay is simple enough to figure out on your own, but sticking the instructions there distracts you from the enemies who kill you within the first second of trying to read them. Frustrating. Secondly, the ability to duck behind something could have been put to better use. I didn't need to duck once throughout the entire game.
Good game
The graphics are good, despite what others say, I skipped all the cut scenes, and it is obvious why this made it to the "mane page". Ya, they had crossbows, for hunting. And yes, they could talk. They had an economy built back then, as mankind always has. I do believe they "had" all the stuff that you THINK they do not, OBEYxALEX. Learn your history.
Not bad
But a far cry from the first one. There was actually less plot and less detail than the first one, which seems a little backwards to me. Was this rushed?
I Suggest You Read This
I only gave this game five stars because it fell short in many aspect, but I can respect an honest attempt and potential. The artwork was good. I thought it added an element of mystery to the game. I assume this was your goal. However, without sound effects, the sense of mystery seemed "muted" (forgive the pun).
Also, there was no strategy to the kills. It seemed like all I had to do was mindlessly shoot as many people as I could, hide if needed, then kill the rest. Possibly add some boulders held up by sticks that I would have to shoot. Or maybe add routes for the guards, so I have to shoot when the others aren't looking.
Finally, I'm not sure what the point of the narrator was, but it became extremely annoying. Listening to his very monotonous voice drone on about the psychology of war was literally unbearable. I skipped most of the cut-scenes and more than likely missed a lot of the story. If you have a message you want to get across, then dedicate something to that message. Don't just carelessly throw it into a game and expect people to sit through it while they're waiting to play. Just a thought
Thank you for reading and I hope this helps with further submissions.