Saw II doesn't need much explanation

You begin the game with a key embedded in your face, just below your right eye. The key unlocks a mask. The mask is about to snap shut on your face, and that will probably hurt. So you cut the key out of your face with a scalpel (which also hurts) by pressing a button really fast and moving the analog stick. Ew.

From there, you explore, solve things, avoid traps, and defeat psychotic opponents. That's Saw II. See? We told you it doesn't need much explanation.

Ha! We jest! (Kind of.) We actually didn't get to play much of the game, so there's not a lot we can comment on. Is the combat better than it was in the first game? We don't know. Are there elaborate and exciting puzzles? We don't know - the puzzles we did play were pretty mundane, if challenging (we needed help from the guy standing next to us a few times).

Like we said, we know that Saw II is about exploration, puzzles, traps, and scary dudes who want to kill you:

  • Exploration reveals clues that help solve puzzles, as well as the remnants of previous victims and torture devices, some of which trigger scenes depicting their gruesome pasts. You'll also catch glimpses of current victims meeting their fates as you pass windows and fences. 
  • The puzzles we encountered were typical: find a glow-in-the-dark message which reveals a three-digit lock code, rotate concentric circles to line up icons... that kind of thing.
  • Traps are quick time events, though the button press indicators are cleverly integrated with the environment, keeping you as immersed as possible.
  • We only fought one opponent, and it wasn't real combat. He was a spike-headed "charger" who ran toward us and had to be coaxed into an elevator shaft.

Above: See how it says "Watch your step?" A clever investigator will realize that the door needs to be opened, and the opponent lured into the shaft. Pretty deep stuff

If you like torture porn, and the Saw series especially, Saw II is a game based on that. Damn that sentence was informative! The game builds on the story from the first Saw game, and is very similar, so if you liked that game, guess what? You'll probably like this one.

If, however, you have no interest in Saw, this may not be the game to suck you in - we didn't notice any massive innovations. But like we said, we didn't get to play much, and we won't know for sure until we play the rest of the game. Maybe Jigsaw has more up his sleeves than we realize.

Apr 9, 2010

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000
  • GreaseMonkey96 - April 27, 2010 8:30 p.m.

    damn... the first game sucked dirty DICK!! it was so bad now a second?
  • shpongled - April 16, 2010 5:57 p.m.

    Looks like a complete load of shit. You are demented if you enjoy playing toss like this.
  • mdiaz033 - April 13, 2010 6:09 p.m.

    @TheIronMaiden - ironic? no. relevant? yeah, sure.
  • sveini22 - April 12, 2010 5:43 a.m.

    i agree DOCCON. but did I say it looked like shit ?
  • D0CCON - April 12, 2010 1:52 a.m.

    I'm still trying to figure out why anybody can give a rat's ass about this awful crap. What's the point in watching torture?
  • DriveShaft - April 11, 2010 3:32 p.m.

    I actually like the Saw movies, although they've been going downhill since the 4th, that first game was supposed to answer questions and didn't, so unless this one does, I won't even rent it.
  • sveini22 - April 11, 2010 3 p.m.

    looks like shit
  • G_R7 - April 10, 2010 2:24 p.m.

    So we are getting crappy yearly games to go with the (since Saw 5) crappy yearly horror movies...? Just what the gaming world needed...
  • TheIronMaiden - April 10, 2010 7 a.m.

    agreed with the comment above. HA captcha: "blood and" ironic no?
  • allthegoodnameswheretaken - April 10, 2010 5:33 a.m.

    I can't believe that they're actually making another one
  • TheTygerfire - April 10, 2010 5:28 a.m.

    I was absolutely shocked by how passable and not sucky the first game was. Now I have another game to get 1000 GS in!
  • reaperman22 - April 10, 2010 4:41 a.m.

    wow it sounds the exact same as the first game :0 but i liked the first one so that's ok. If they improve the combat and vary the challenges a bit more (maybe make some of them less frustrating) it might turn out to be a great game, they already had a great atmosphere and classic saw gruesomeness so it shouldnt be to hard for them to improve on the other stuff. I still remember nearly falling out of my chair when i was playing the first game alone in the dark with the speakers turned way up and i walked into a cleverly hidden shotgun tripwire.
  • crumbdunky - April 10, 2010 12:20 a.m.

    I played a bit of the first one at a mates(having always found the films as dull as dishwater)and was surprised that it wasn't totally unplayable and merely a bit frustrating. Oddly, I felt there was more potential for a god game than a god set of films n the subject matter but they'd probably lose a lot of the fans of the films if they were to implement the things needed to make the game sing:properly tense exploration and slick,gritty combat sections punctuated by devilishly tricky puzzles that tax the mind as much as disgusting it. I can agree, partially, with the above sentiment that it feels like a collection of mini games as much as anything as it is:there's certainly something to be said for the argument anyway. However, I think it's a little sad that there's prolly a very good game in the bits and bobs at their disposal but finding them and bringing it all out in game form would also probably displease the schlock loving SAW massive. So, they COULD make it god but at the risk of it selling like turd flavoured crisps. Or Okami.
  • michaelmcc827 - April 9, 2010 11:25 p.m.

    I'd rather be "scared" by a tense premise, great characters, twisting plot lines, etc...these torture machines really don't do it for me, since it's just a minigame meant to make you queasy. No depth for me there.
  • ventanger - April 9, 2010 9:42 p.m.

    Wow. I thought this was a review.