DBZ Budokai Tenkaichi 2 is a game that really takes me back. Remember getting on PS2 at around Christmas time of 2006 and really looking forward to it in spite of how much I disliked the first game. Fast forward to around 19 years and while the game is a good sequel and is crazy how much the devs improved upon BT1 in such a short period of time, I also find BT3 and Sparking Zero to be more enjoyable games.
I'll start with the positives, the music is incredible. It's some of the best Dragon Ball game soundtracks you can ever listen to and since this is technically the first DBZ fighting game that didn't use the infamous plagarized score from earlier games makes the OST of this stand out that much more.The improvement to the fighting from BT1 was a crazy step up. Everything from animations, to game feel to visual effects. All of the naunces that later games in the series would have are here. However there some mechanics only in this game like high and low blocking and attack cancelling.
The multi man battles in story mode is a fun way to challenge yourself too. Seeing how many opponents you can take out before your HP on one of your fighter hits zero.
The final positive depending on who you ask is the sheer amount of content in BT2. The story mode can take you about 20-25 hours to finish which is pretty crazy for a fighting game story mode especially for it's time. Kid me most definitely loved the length since I didn't get many games at the time and every new game was basically an event.
This is where the positivity ends, BT2 is a very good sequel but my big issue is how long the story mode is. There are a good number of people who criticize BT3 and especially Sparking Zero for how short their story modes are but I argue BT2 can feel too long and padded for it's own good.
For one, the overworld doesn't really add much to the game and just gets in the way of the pacing. It is a fighting game so I just want to cut to next fight. On top of this, does it really make much sense to be exploring when a major story beat is about to happen. I don't really want to cut to Piccolo flying around the open world before he meets Imperfect Cell.
Another issue is that doing the movies is mandatory and part of the beaten path in order to get to the "canon" sagas and GT. This is like making side missions part of the main story since the DBZ movies were esstentially side missions to begin with. The Garlic Jr. filler arc is also on the beaten path.
This in turns leads to my next issue is that the cutscenes aren't very well made. Budokai 1 had far better in engine cutscenes and that was back in 2002. There are some sequences in BT2 specifically that are well made even at the time I played the game I found the cutscenes to be bad. The Goku vs Vegeta fight in the mountains and the Android 18 vs Vegeta cutscenes are standout examples. Problem is that scenes like this are too few and far between. Most BT2 cutscenes will play out like this:
Characters either fly in, lying down on the ground, or holding their arm with all of the stuff that caused them to end up that way happening off screen with the most amount of camera composition you will get is the camera moving up or down and a close up. That's how most of the cutscenes will go.
Some can complain that BT3 removing cutscenes makes it worse, I argue that the devs just didn't try and expected you to know the story. They knew these games aren't a good jumping on point for DB.
The cutscenes of the movies are quite poor since some movie specific characters don't pop up like the most of the henchmen of Cooler and Bojack and Broly has no Paragus in the in in engine scenes. It makes me wonder why the movies are on the beaten path when they aren't even good retellings especially when the movies themselves are less than an hour.
Some of the gameplay issues I have with the story mode can be a little nit picky like Goku being able to use Kaioken or Spirit Bomb on Raditz.
Other issues can be more problematic like fighting the same opponent 5-7 times. I argue BT3 improved this aspect by having the event triggers, it makes the story battles feel more dynamic, more faithful to the series and cuts down on fighting the same opponent multiple times.
Playing fights from the villains perspective in BT3 also makes more sense than having to win against a character where you ultimately lose in a cutscene. It happens so many time where you need to win a battle but lose in a cutscene.
The HP some opponents can have, fighting with weaker characters, some characters being invunerable to your melee hits on top of being forced to beat them even though you lose in a cutscene makes me want to abuse lift smash since more aggressive enemies will use it on you, line of sight is lost when it connects and is a great combo which can work on bigger enemies making it a go to cheesing tactic.
Rush moves are also based around RNG by comparison to later Tenkaichi games. Them connecting at all feels like a dice roll.
Overall, BT2 is a solid sequel but the more I played, the more I wanted it to end. I prefer a game leaving me wanting more than wish it ended sooner.
The final positive depending on who you ask is the sheer amount of content in BT2. The story mode can take you about 20-25 hours to finish which is pretty crazy for a fighting game story mode especially for it's time. Kid me most definitely loved the length since I didn't get many games at the time and every new game was basically an event.
This is where the positivity ends, BT2 is a very good sequel but my big issue is how long the story mode is. There are a good number of people who criticize BT3 and especially Sparking Zero for how short their story modes are but I argue BT2 can feel too long and padded for it's own good.
For one, the overworld doesn't really add much to the game and just gets in the way of the pacing. It is a fighting game so I just want to cut to next fight. On top of this, does it really make much sense to be exploring when a major story beat is about to happen. I don't really want to cut to Piccolo flying around the open world before he meets Imperfect Cell.
Another issue is that doing the movies is mandatory and part of the beaten path in order to get to the "canon" sagas and GT. This is like making side missions part of the main story since the DBZ movies were esstentially side missions to begin with. The Garlic Jr. filler arc is also on the beaten path.
This in turns leads to my next issue is that the cutscenes aren't very well made. Budokai 1 had far better in engine cutscenes and that was back in 2002. There are some sequences in BT2 specifically that are well made even at the time I played the game I found the cutscenes to be bad. The Goku vs Vegeta fight in the mountains and the Android 18 vs Vegeta cutscenes are standout examples. Problem is that scenes like this are too few and far between. Most BT2 cutscenes will play out like this:
Characters either fly in, lying down on the ground, or holding their arm with all of the stuff that caused them to end up that way happening off screen with the most amount of camera composition you will get is the camera moving up or down and a close up. That's how most of the cutscenes will go.
Some can complain that BT3 removing cutscenes makes it worse, I argue that the devs just didn't try and expected you to know the story. They knew these games aren't a good jumping on point for DB.
The cutscenes of the movies are quite poor since some movie specific characters don't pop up like the most of the henchmen of Cooler and Bojack and Broly has no Paragus in the in in engine scenes. It makes me wonder why the movies are on the beaten path when they aren't even good retellings especially when the movies themselves are less than an hour.
Some of the gameplay issues I have with the story mode can be a little nit picky like Goku being able to use Kaioken or Spirit Bomb on Raditz.
Other issues can be more problematic like fighting the same opponent 5-7 times. I argue BT3 improved this aspect by having the event triggers, it makes the story battles feel more dynamic, more faithful to the series and cuts down on fighting the same opponent multiple times.
Playing fights from the villains perspective in BT3 also makes more sense than having to win against a character where you ultimately lose in a cutscene. It happens so many time where you need to win a battle but lose in a cutscene.
The HP some opponents can have, fighting with weaker characters, some characters being invunerable to your melee hits on top of being forced to beat them even though you lose in a cutscene makes me want to abuse lift smash since more aggressive enemies will use it on you, line of sight is lost when it connects and is a great combo which can work on bigger enemies making it a go to cheesing tactic.
Rush moves are also based around RNG by comparison to later Tenkaichi games. Them connecting at all feels like a dice roll.
Overall, BT2 is a solid sequel but the more I played, the more I wanted it to end. I prefer a game leaving me wanting more than wish it ended sooner.
No comments:
Post a Comment