Would you play a Too Human sequel if...

...it had Souls-like combat?

I personally can't get over how they messed up such a beautiful premise. Mind you that I eventually enjoyed the game despite its flaws.

Personally I think if they got rid of camera problems and levelling-up enemies, as well as introduced a Souls-like combat, that'd have elevated this IP to the new level. However, I wonder if it wouldn't clash with loot-heavy nature of the game, because Souls aren't Diablo or Borderlands in this respect, right?

I wonder if Phil Spencer would ever want to see it resurrected, what about you?

I loved the premise of too human but the game mechanics were shit and the gane was not well optimized. The sequel doesn't have to be Soul like just make a quality game with its own merits and worth and I'll defiantly buy it day one.

You mean a more hardcore style combat. In my opinion soul games were always clucky in controls. It makes fighting more tedious than it really is.

I liked Too Human but they would have to make it more fluid for me to buy a sequel.

Oh yeah. I also still had fun with the game. The slide attacking was fun, looting was as well. Premise was great with the Norse Mythology mixed with technology. Real shame what happened with it. Cant be played, period. Would love to see it remade.

How many Demons have you fought?

I loved Too Human, but I wouldn't buy a sequel unless I saw a lot of improvements/polish and more content. Game was a lot of fun though.

All of them except a few in DS2

I skipped the first game, but I would think its' original combat would be fine.

I would play it if they completely changed it and made it a completely different game. Sorry, I thought it was absolutely awful and had high hopes for it. Terrible game, almost a masterclass in 'How NOT to do camera angles for a game'. Also should be studied at Master Degree level for perfect example on how to get just about everything wrong in a game that it's possible to **** up.

No it sucked. Changing whatever u mention makes it a different game. Would you play Vampire rain if it was like legacy of kain? Shouldn't this be under games discussion?

I actually liked Too Human. It was anything but revolutionary but it filled a nice niche on Xbox at the time. Was a 7/10 game for me. I'd love a sequel in general, and while I'd play one with Souls' combat, I'd rather they continued their vision for the franchise.

I was being sarc....................forget it.

No, you would have to change Silicon Knights if anything.

It isn't just the mechanics that make the Souls games terrific, it's the other stuff From Software absolutely nails. Silicon Knights is a joke that got lucky once and made something good in Eternal Darkness. Since then they've had poor mechanics, poor pacing, a lousy understanding of how loot should work, bare bones RPG elements, atrocious level design, fictional universes and story telling that is devoid of any character or personality. Dennis Dyack is a dweeb.

I idea behide too human was to make the player feel powerful by killing wave after wave of enemies and chaining air combos together.

I can't see how that would work with soul's combat system

No

As long as Silicon Knights has nothing to do with it... in that case, whatever publisher or developer would do that should just reboot the series under a new IP, shamelessly take the idea of Too Human, make a unofficial/unsanctioned spiritual successor. Not like anybody has any exclusive claim right to Norse mythology, that seemed to be the main appeal, that and (at the time) Silicon Knights cheerleaders.

Frankly, I didn't see the appeal of Silicon Knights making the last game. Their history is a questionable ones. I often see the "they made Legeay of Kain" argument. Technically, Crystal Dynamics finished it because Silicon Knights couldn't, it was basically same thing that happened between Team Bondi and Rockstar over LA Noire. Afterwards Crystal Dynamics wanted nothing to do with Silicon Knights. And I don't really see them porting MGS to the GameCube to be a major feat, especially with Konami holding their hand every step of the way. And they made Eternal Darkness (not that I thought it was anything great), big woop, they finally finished a game on their own, and about the only memorable moment was the bathtub jump scare. No surprise really Nintendo didn't want to sign another multi-game contract with them afterwards. Then, of course, Too Human happened, not surprised by the delay, goes with their repertoire. Then of course they made that horrible X-Men game and that's all she wrote.

So, what's the appeal this time around. Another RPG rooted in Norse mythology? Or people still cheerleading for another Silicon Knights game?

I loved too human. I remember it was planned as a trilogy and your character progression was to carry through to the next game. I'm still waiting for the sequel.

Dark Souls is my favorite game of all time but the combat wouldn't fit well in Too Human.

It was an okay game, I would play a sequel but not have my hopes up for it being any good.

Nah. Souls has a completely different feel to it. Too Human had the right idea overall, just a few mechanics and ideas were a little wonky.

Respectfully, no... I want to play something based off the first game, only really well made. I enjoyed my time with too human despite its flaws. Coop had so much promise, if it only didn't have so much holding it back...

I'd rather Platinum make a MGR-like successor. The game seemed to need more over-the-top action rather than purposeful, "heavy" combat. They are gods for fucks sake.

Norse mythological games are always welcome.

I agree. It's not that it was wrong from the start. In fact, it showed flashes of brilliance. It's just that there was so much wrong that those flashes were more like torture, just teasing you with what could've been...