og:image:,

The original Valkyria Chronicles was an incredibly smart, turn-based strategy game. It got rid of grids and replaced them with grandiose maps with free movement governed by action points. It did away with tedious leveling systems and focused on the importance of the collective whole, while still having individualistic character traits. While it might not have been the most well written game, it more than made up for it with its strong character personalities that shined through gameplay. Needless to say, it is a hard act for Valkyria Chronicles II to follow.

Valkyria Chronicles II (PSP)
Developer: Sega
Publisher: Sega
Released: August 31, 2010

The story’s premise for the sequel is quite interesting. In wake of the revelations made in the previous game about the leader of Gallia, the imaginary alt-European setting, a civil war has broken out pitting a rebel force against the established government. The themes that are present like race relations, are generally interesting but they go almost completely untouched beyond superficial levels. The bigger issue though is the perspective and consequential focus chosen for the story: generic high school tropes. Everything from the loners to the peppy kid to the “you just don’t understand me” angst. It wears incredibly thin.

Thankfully though, the very essence of what makes Valkyria Chronicles distinct from a gameplay perspective is present. The systems of movement and aiming perspective all remain the same. There are a few balancing changes and new classes that add an interesting dynamic to the play but there are missteps too. The maps are now segmented into different areas that can be moved between by certain camps. Many of the areas that comprise the maps get reused far too often, making the maps feel like more of the same, only in a different combination.

While the addition of more classes is a good thing, the way those class trees work is incredibly tedious. It ignores the advancements made by the group experience system and instead bases it on individuals. A single character (out of many) must get certain number of credits to improve their class. Those credits are rewarded randomly. Missions will indicate what credits will be given out but when it comes to who will receive those credits, it is unknown. It requires players to continuously replay missions until their desired character, by chance, gets the ones they need. These upgraded classes aren’t needed to complete the game but not having the tactical abilities that they provide is a hindrance.

For all the bad design choices in Valkyria Chronicles II, it can still be enjoyable. Like when the main character isn’t doing his terrible laugh, or when the supporting cast aren’t being borderline offensive, or when the maps connect in a more logical sense, or when grinding isn’t needed to get better classes, or when the AI isn’t being completely moronic. This sea doesn’t entirely drown what essence is left—it is still there even though it is heavily distorted.

Score: 55


(50-59%: Mediocre - A mixed bag, both the good and bad are about equal here)



Comments

  • Avatar
    mgs2master2
    14 years, 2 months ago

    really school? 55/100?

    I agree with most points on your review, but 55 seems a bit wtfish to me.

    i wouldve at least shot it around 70-80 range.

  • Avatar
    PancakeChef
    14 years, 2 months ago

    Yeah, that does seem a bit low especially since even with it's faults it retains the great gameplay mechanics of the first one.

  • Avatar
    Brad Simons
    14 years, 2 months ago

    Maybe he didn't like the original much. Some of the changes are annoying, but seeing a score this low must mean the core experience was pretty un-enjoyable.

  • Avatar
    nikki n fargus 4ever
    14 years, 2 months ago

    Originally I had similar feelings about the game. Though as I progressed I really had to ask myself are my problems more with the game itself or with the fact I wasn't happy the game was a PSP title (I didn't even have a PSP when I learned this). Once I started looking at the game for what it is and not what I ideally wanted it to be I realized how great a game it is. Besides some of the annoying characters I really don't know what more I could ask of a portable game (well except a way better save system). Regardless i'm enjoying it immensely and if VCIII is more of the same but better then I'm all for it.

  • Avatar
    Brad Simons
    14 years, 2 months ago

    Listen to my thoughts on the show we recorded tonight. This game has grown on me quite a bit, and I'll explain why.

  • Avatar
    TemjinZero
    14 years, 2 months ago

    School/Ben,

    It really feels like you missed out on the VC2 experience because of your bias against the stereotyped characters. Though I'd even argue that eventually, every type of character eventually becomes some sort of stereotype over time.

    Your review would seem a lot less biased if you bothered to mention the developer's reasoning for the class setting, IE, War with Empire ended thus militia disbanded since militia can only be used during invasion as per Gallian law, and the fact that the army is in total disarray since they were totally destroyed at Ghirlandio. Twice., plus the rebels are composed of a lot of army deserters and former militia, thus Recruits are more or less the only forces left availible. Then allowing the reader to decide whether or not they accept this as a plausible setting rather than just say "boo, not serious, therefore bad".

    I agree with what Brad said on the show. EVERY CLASSMATE I felt was well developed and even characters I started not liking, I grew to like a lot, whereas other characters that looked good initially, I dumped because I learned more about them.

    Nowhere in your review does it mention the myriads of strategical improvements to the battle system as weather has many effects that weren't there in VC1. How Snow affects time before a character becomes hospitalized or is treated as 'off-road' terrain that affects vehicle movement, or how Tanks can be customized into APCs, or even made to consume only 1 CP rather than 2, and the variety of vehicle equipment that makes Tanks such a great asset in VC2 whereas you almost never used them in VC1.

    You also made no mention of the rebalancing of classes so Scouts are no longer god like, and that you need a real mix of units to handle situations.

    It feels like... you played up to March. Didn't do March's story mission, and have been playing nothing but repeated side missions which aren't classmate missions. This doesn't seem like a review. This is a first impression.

  • Avatar
    Tommy Testosterone
    14 years, 2 months ago

    I never played the first VC because I suffer from a case of not owning a PS3 so I don't really have anything to compare VCII but after some hours I've put into it I'm digging it. MC's laugh clip is awful that's true and the maps rotate A LOT but it's still enjoyable even with all the cliche anime stuff. There's some funny moments and the combat is still very enjoyable.

    I'm confused about the credit system part though. I thought characters get credits and whatnot for captures and normal kills, ace kills, leader kills, tank kills etc.

    But yeah, pretty low score IMO.

  • Avatar
    mgs2master2
    14 years, 2 months ago

    i honestly say i think this calls for another review. Like i said while i agree with most of your points, that is a low score. The game has its challenges and to me got a bit repetitive. I, however, got sidetracked upon the release of Birth By Sleep, and starting my Final year in college so i left off around the month of July, where the game was getting great in terms of story. My score i quoted above really isn't a final score, just impressions of how far I got so far.

    In short, while I respect your opinion school, I would love a detailed review (like most reviews are on this site) or another person to review it because it seems you just rushed through without enjoying the experience.

  • Avatar
    dae
    14 years, 2 months ago

    55/100 is fine if that's what you feel it deserves; but that score means it's a failure of a game, and i didn't feel the review reflected the score. all your points are there, but they didn't sound like game-breaking obstacles. i'm all for precise reviews with no fluff, but elaborations would help me more here.