Okay, went back and tried MMR again for a quick compare and contrast, and... nope, you people are still insane. Mini Motor Racing feels awful - these things control absolutely nothing like any real car I've ever seen in my life. They feel like tiny plastic toys, plain and simple. I'm simply unable to understand how anyone can find it fun when any collision brings you to a dead stop for enough time the whole pack goes past you, where turning for more than a fraction of a second flips you through a full ninety degrees (like a small child was pushing you around the track), where another car hitting you practically bowls you over... I do not feel in control of these vehicles at all. And if I don't use the nitro I stand no chance at all - oh, joy! So I have to take my fingers off the controls to boost, when even a moment's hesitation sees me back of the pack again and boosting usually sends me straight into a wall anyway! True, this is just a quick race on the first track in the first car, but why would I bother playing any more when I can't place any higher than dead last no matter how I try? Reckless Racing 2 is simply miles ahead from my way of looking at things - I instantly feel in almost complete control, but with enough cartoon over-exaggeration to the physics to make me screw up if I get cocky or lazy. Turning is a process of fine-tuning my slides, not jerking around the course at right angles. If an AI car tries to tackle me I don't instantly go flying into the sea, but he can force me out of the way and I can do the same to him, with enough weight and impact it feels like two cars trading paint, not that same small child mashing two Scalectrix buggies together. I'm pretty much convinced some people in this thread have just formed an emotional attachment to the first RR based on whatever rose-tinted glasses they had on at the time (would you like to explain precisely what tracks in the original allowed you to take huge off-road shortcuts? Because I don't remember any) and are accusing it of all kinds of craziness just to make themselves feel better because it doesn't live up to their fantasy image of what a 'true sequel' ought to be. I'm still not seeing a thing to indicate Reckless Racing 2 is any grand betrayal of anything to do with the first game or these rules top-down racers are apparently supposed to follow. It features the same kind of environments as the first game, it controls the same way, the cars handle the same or better, they travel as fast, it's more detailed, there's more stuff to do... nothing I've played so far suggests I'm wrong in thinking any of this. But hey, opinions, right?
Buddy, if you can't beat the very FIRST race in MMR, I'm sorry but that can only mean one thing; you suck big time! While the AI in MMR will give you a run for your money in later races, it's very beatable with any car in at least the first 10 races. But on a serious note, Reckless Racing 2 is boring. Pretty graphics and pretty cars but very boring gameplay. Yes I played RR1 and it's 20 times more fun than this. $5 wasted!
Doh! My ipad is in the shop having the screen reattached! Makes the wait all that more frustrating. This will be the first thing I play when I get it back -
Game Impressions I'm not a big fan of the original game, but I'm a big fan of the genre so I suppose any attempts of me trying to talk myself out of picking up this sequel were doomed from the start. I'm glad I did. Here's the key thing about this game: it is first and foremost about racing. Not crashes, or stunts, or running your opponents off the road. Certainly not about weapons. It is about stuff like picking the best lines, slowing down at the correct moments, accelerating when it will give you the most thrust out of a corner. If you are someone who can appreciate stuff like that, you'll find a lot to like here. Lots of content to unlock and online multiplayer provide excellent value. The framerate could be better but it is acceptable.
In other words you are saying this game is very different from the first one; boring! Yes I do believe you are right!
Will probably download this tonight as I love the first game. As for MMR, I was very underwhelmed. It looks great, but the idiot AI use their nitro is stupid places and just knock you off the road, and you spend your time just nudging your car slowly around corners making small adjustments. It doesn't feel like proper racing. I can see why Pocketgamer give it 5 out of 10.
Maybe this makes me feel a little better about not being able to play this. I liked the first RR. But, for me, technical racing where you have to worry about the best lines, etc., doesn't really click with a top down racer. The wild (and perhaps unrealistic) physics of games like RR and Horror Racing are what make them fun to play. Top-down racers generally are arcade racers for a reason. Realistic racing is best left to first/third person games like....well, Real Racing. Anyway, can't judge this game and it does look really good. I'll just stay content with the original.
I've yet to see much criticism that explains why not being like RR1 is bad (and the little that does go beyond that point, is about the only criticism of RR2 that makes sense to me). To my mind, in most or all respects, RR2 is an evolved product which does most things, if not all, better than RR1. Gabrien's mini-review does the game good justice. As someone who has never had almost any interest in the racing genre, neither simulation nor arcade, and who, while appreciating the polish and design that went into the Real Racing series, never found myself playing any of those racing simulations for more than a few minutes, just like MMR didn't stick, having this much fun comes as a surprise to myself Way to avoid meeting EightRooks sentiments and opinions head-on Considering that Gabrien explicitly stated the opposite, your reply was neither as amusing, semantically witty, nor as elegant as I'm guessing you hoped it would be It always fascinates me how people can dislike a product like a computer game to the point that their ability to communicate unravels into either blind rage, or (which admittedly is preferable) this silliness It would have been nice if things were that simple, no? But RR2 actually has a lot of those wild arcade physics as well, in a perhaps uncommon combination. My guess (rather unqualified thought it is) is that the game straddles the line between the two, but without losing many members of either camp.
Have to say I agree with you Gabrien, and Eight Rooks. This has actually pushed Death rally out of the top spot on my list. To me the controls (I'm using Tank) feel great and realistic. I'm not one who necessarily needs upgrades in all my games, but I appreciate them when done well. each time I upgraded I noticed that the new parts took affect. In real life don't race car drivers add and remove parts from their cars? Back to controls, they feel almost perfect for a top down racer. You start to drift when you hit a corner, give a slight tap in the opposite direction, and you're back to business. If people want the same drifty controls, they can customize their cars to be a drift machine. it also doesn't take an extensive amount of thought to upgrade your car, so it's not like Polarbite/Pixelbite is making you do rocket science when you add an upgrade. I hold no loyalty to the first game so... Ultimately, I think this is what they were going for. Like I mentioned already, a few quick modifications to your car can make it drive the way you want it. Personally, I like a level of modification because I hate being told how to do something and RR2 doesn't go OTT with throwing customizations at you either.
So how is that "Reckless"??? "Reckless" is no longer valid for this game. And "Reckless" is what i was interested in
As mentioned before, you can customize your car to make the game more reckless. I don't understand??? People like customizing in shooters, but if you put them in a more realistic racing environment then it's bad?!? If you want to drift make your friggin' car drift. If you want a streamlined racing experience, customize your car that way.
That is exactly my point. In RR1, you can take a corner wildly and bash into anyone near you and feel the inertia colliding. This game however is now about finding best line to start your drift/turn. I already have Real Racing 1 and 2 for that. I want my top down racers fast and wild like Mini Motors, Death Rally and how Reckless Racing 1 are!
That's pretty much on the money. What you actually have here is an arcade driving model (though influenced by realistic physics and inertia; only exaggerated) married to a sim-like strategic approach. In other words: it's fun to drive around, but if you want to win you'll need to apply strategy and logic based on those in the real world. Just holding down the accelerator will get you nowhere fast.
And that is where they went wrong. Reckless Racing 1 was about racing RECKLESSLY. SUre you can customize your car in this sequel to make it drift more, but since your opponents will be holding on to their fine lines, you will find yourself drifting around corners by yourself! To each his own, to those of you who like this, good for you. I however don't like this new direction and further more, the drifting in this game doesnt have that satisfying feel to it like the first game has. The cars simply don't drive the same. It off completely and it's fair to say this is just some other racing game with the "Reckless Racing" label attached to it.
Funny, I see all the AI in my game drifting. And when I slam into them I feel like I'm knocking them out of the way - I've forced my way to winning by doing this multiple times already (and they've done it to me when I've messed up), which is fortunate considering I'm not that great at proper racing and spend most of my time playing pinball with the sides in most racers I play. It feels little to no different to how it worked in the first game to me, but if you're convinced RR 1 played like MMR and its ridiculously over the top lightweight cars bowling every which way then there's probably not much I can say to convince you otherwise. To be a bit more serious, I could definitely level some criticisms at it - dunno who mentioned him first, but Frank is a pain in the ass, isn't he? Note to the devs - it's not really good design to basically have the same driver who always has the fastest car in the race and always drives a near-perfect racing line. I can beat him, sometimes (I've still got dynamic difficulty on so it could be the game taking pity on me) but it's a little tedious to see the same name jammed at the top of the leaderboard either directly above or behind me. Other minor nitpicks; the framerate does drop more than I thought it did, with some noticeable juddering when everyone goes piling round some bends, and I find the music kind of dull... I'm not really into the whole blippy demoscene tunes sort of style. But I don't feel like I'm grinding, or at least if I am grinding I'm still having fun doing it. The handling and physics are fluid enough every race feels a bit different, even with the simple AI, so I don't mind going back and attempting cups or individual races again at all, at least not yet. It's a notch or two off perfect but this is still one of the best arcade racers I've played in a long, long time. As far as I'm concerned it's Reckless Racing with a new coat of paint and a proper campaign mode, which was most of what I actually wanted from it. Whether I get bored or frustrated later I've more than had my $5 worth of entertainment out of it and I'm having to force myself to stop playing some more.
I think part of the issue is how the game is marketed. While I understand playing off of the success of the first Reckless Racing, the sequel really is and could have been a standalone game with a new name. That's where the confusion and expectations are at with many. Don't get me wrong, RR2 is terrific, but it can also be like comparing apples to oranges with the original.
