2/5 ★ – UpwardBoss's review of Senua's Saga: Hellblade II.

Okay before we start, some brief housekeeping. Firstly, despite this review being categorized under Hellblade II, it's sort of a review of both this game and the original Hellblade, as I played them back-to-back, and I think the contrast between them is... much more interesting than anything else here. Secondly, as I will be talking in depth about the narrative of both Hellblade 1 and 2, there will be major spoilers. So, with that in mind, SPOILER WARNING for the entirety of Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice, Senua's Saga: Hellblade II, and The Last of Us Part II. Now, on with the review: Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice is very, very good. Senua's Saga: Hellblade II absolutely is not. Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice is a focused, impactful game with one of the best narratives ever told in the medium. By narrowing its scope and focusing on one character, it was able to tell a very poignant story focusing on Senua's personal struggle with psychosis. It had flaws, the combat was mediocre and the puzzles were downright awful, but it was paced very well and the level design was excellent. Hellblade II, on the other hand, struggles immensely with its pacing, has no major improvements to the gameplay, is somehow even shorter than its predecessor despite an infinitely larger budget and development staff (about 7.5 hours to 100% instead of 9), and most critically, its narrative completely falls flat. On the plus side though, the graphics are absolutely stunning. The structure of this review will be a bit different than usual, as since it's such a narrative-driven game, the vast majority of critiques I have are either of the narrative itself, or gameplay elements that are directly tied to it. There is not much to talk about that is not related to the narrative in some way. Having said that, let's talk about the technical state first as it's essentially the only thing I have to praise about Hellblade 2 (for the sake of consistency I will not be using roman numerals beyond this point, as I refer to Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice as simply "Hellblade 1"). This is not remotely a secret at this point, it's been obvious since the initial reveal at The Game Awards 2019 (which was alongside the reveal of the Xbox Series X, to give an idea as to how long this game has taken) that this game is absolutely stunning. The level of graphical detail on display here is truly remarkable, be it environment design or facial animations, and it's one of the few games this generation that have felt truly "next gen". It is, absolutely, one of the most impressive showcases of graphics technology ever made to this point, possibly the best. However, there are some caveats. For one, the game runs at a letterboxed aspect ratio at all times. Hellblade 2 does not render the entire screen at once, at any point in the game. This is almost certainly a creative decision, to make the game look more "cinematic", but it is worth pointing out considering that, while the game looks incredible, it is not rendering in 4K across the entire screen, making it less taxing to deliver incredible graphics. In fact, it isn't rendering at native 4K at any point, as, like almost every game on the Series X or PS5, Hellblade 2 uses a dynamic resolution, only rendering up to 1440p natively. This, frankly, doesn't really matter, since upscaling techniques have gotten a lot better over the past few years, but it is considerably less forgivable given my next point. Hellblade 2 is the third major Xbox exclusive in a row to only have a 30 FPS target at launch. This... really sucks, I understand that it might not be a big deal to some people given the gameplay formula (I'll get back to that) but even while walking the lower frame rate is *really* noticeable to me. There weren't any major frame drops, but a consistently bad frame rate is still bad. This was obviously by design, sacrificing performance for incredible visuals, but frankly... I don't think that's a good trade. The first game already looks very impressive even today, and that ran at 60 FPS on the PS4 Pro! Obviously Hellblade 2 looks leaps and bounds better, but at least give us the option for a performance mode. Microsoft's lack of commitment to 60 FPS modes has been a real issue over the past year or so, and it needs to change, particularly given that they aren't doing a mid-gen refresh (in fairness, all three of these games were 30 FPS for different reasons, so I doubt it's a conscious mandate, and I expect that Avowed and Indiana Jones will run at 60 FPS). Also... the visual *design* here is, in my view, weaker than Hellblade 1 by a significant margin, but that's mostly down to storytelling decisions so I'll get back to this. Regarding bugs, I didn't notice any in my playthrough. Very solid from a polish perspective (Hellblade 1 had a fair few technical issues, so this is a nice improvement). Beyond the technical aspects, Hellblade 2 is, in my view, a huge step back in every other regard. The gameplay in Hellblade 1 was... very middling. It wasn't awful by any means, but the combat was just okay and the puzzles weren't anything special. It was, however, very well paced, with a lot of visual variety and a good balance of gameplay, combat, and walking. Hellblade 2, on the other hand, completely ruins this balance. I would estimate well over 80% of the time actually *playing* the game (which isn't much, frankly) is walking, with occasionally some light puzzle solving or, even rarer, combat. This utterly kills any replay value that this game might have had, as, shocker, holding the left stick forward and holding the sprint button isn't particularly engaging. Walking is used as a pacing mechanism in most games, but Hellblade 2 completely overdoes it, and as such I have no interest in ever playing this game again. Speaking of replay value, assuming you got all the collectibles on your first run, the only incentive the game gives you to replay the game are two alternate narrator tracks that play during cutscenes or walking sections, which, obviously, doesn't change the actual gameplay formula. I, frankly, could not be bothered playing this game two more times given that nothing on a gameplay level would change and the only changes are on a presentation level either during cutscenes or walking, so I simply opted to listen to the alternate audio on YouTube, as there is no functional difference between doing that and actually playing the entire game two more times. Not much new information is shared during the new narration anyway, so frankly, don't waste your time. The two aspects of gameplay that are... actual gameplay, are combat and puzzles. The combat in Hellblade 1 was... fine, it wasn't particularly good but it was a serviceable pacing mechanism. Hellblade 2's combat only makes one major change (aside from removing a guard break attack that would be unnecessary here due to the enemy design). You only fight one enemy at a time now. Enemies in an encounter simply wait for their turn. This, like most design decisions in this game, is a clear choice to make the game more "cinematic", as these fights are *incredibly* well animated. The combat in this game feels *heavy*, your attacks and parries have a realistic effect on you, and it always feels like Senua is fighting to survive, even when you're winning a fight, and that's a big improvement this time around. However, this is an illusion, as combat is now *laughably* easy. Hellblade 1's combat could be quite challenging at times (especially during bosses, which... Hellblade 2 doesn't have any, actually), but here it's a cakewalk. I only died a couple of times, and I don't think I ever died more than once during an encounter. It's much better animated, sure, but I don't think the combat in Hellblade 2 is *better*. I think the decision to only have you fight one enemy at a time was a mistake, and frankly, I would prefer they sacrifice a bit of realism in favour of player agency, as it feels like you don't have much. The Last of Us Part II did this already! You can have weighty, desperate combat that is also quite realistic! (This will certainly not be the last time I compare these two games). Most critically, though... there simply isn't very much combat at all. I would estimate an hour at most of this game's runtime is actual combat, and with the lack of a dedicated combat mode, there simply aren't many combat encounters to actually play. Hellblade 1 had a lot more, and for that reason (along with other aforementioned reasons) I think the combat in Hellblade 2 is a step back. The puzzles... exist. They're a fair bit easier than the first game's puzzles but they're very boring. They were boring in the first game too, to be fair, so this isn't something that Hellblade 2 does worse, but making the puzzles easier doesn't inherently make them more interesting. They feel like filler, in a very short game that already has a lot of filler. Hellblade 2 is 7 and a half hours long (and that's including going out of my way to get all of the collectibles), considerably shorter than the first game (which took me about 9 hours, while also getting all of the collectibles), and Hellblade 1 wasn't particularly long in the first place! This would not inherently be a negative if not for the pacing problems and the narrative itself (which I'll get to), but if your game is short, pacing becomes absolutely crucial. If the game is paced too slow, if there isn't much that the player actually *does* during the 7 and a half hour long runtime, it feels like a waste. Hellblade 2 might have some of the most padding I've ever seen in a game that's as short as it is. And given the circumstances around this game's development, where Ninja Theory are now owned by one of the biggest corporations in the world, have a significantly higher budget, a development team four times as big, and as much time as they need to make it, that's very disappointing. I expected Hellblade 2 to be much bigger in scope, and while bigger doesn't always mean better, I am shocked at how much *less* actual game there is here, particularly given the significantly higher price tag of $50 USD as opposed to $30 USD (Hellblade 2 is also, like every Microsoft game these days, on Game Pass, but it costs $50 USD to buy). None of these things (except the price tag) affect the game itself, as they're external factors, and if Ninja Theory want to make a smaller game under Microsoft, they can do that, but it is still disappointing. Presentation aside, Hellblade 2 feels very unambitious, and I certainly believe Ninja Theory can do a lot better than they did here. That doesn't mean that what is here is bad (it is bad, but for other reasons), but it certainly isn't what I was hoping for. I also wonder how much development time was spent on the aforementioned graphics. They look incredible, as mentioned before, but given that the rest of the package is significantly worse than the first game, I wonder if development resources weren't allocated properly. I've heard people refer to Hellblade 2 as a "tech demo" and while I don't agree with this (Hellblade 2 has a clear vision, I just don't think that vision is very good) it can certainly *feel* like a tech demo, in a way that the first game never did. Frankly, however, none of this would really matter if the narrative was even close to as good as the first game. Hellblade 1's gameplay wasn't anything spectacular, but it was the narrative that really made it work, telling a very personal, impactful story that focused entirely on Senua. If Hellblade 2's story was even close to as good as the first, I would be recommending this game to you right now, despite all the other issues I mentioned. Unfortunately... it's a bit of a mess. Hellblade 1 had a definitive ending, and despite a line of dialogue near the end hinting at a sequel, there wasn't an obvious direction for the sequel to go, as Senua's story had wrapped up. Senua had accepted her lover's death, and while her psychosis was never going to go away, she had come to terms with it. Hellblade 2... has almost nothing to do with the first game beyond the presence of Senua. This time around, she's off to Iceland to kill some Viking slavers and free her people. That's right folks, Hellblade 2 inexplicably turns Senua into an action hero, despite that being a complete tonal departure from the first game. Once she arrives, however, she discovers that the slavers are sacrificing people to "giants" in an attempt to appease them. So, naturally, she pivots to trying to kill the giants, as one of the slavers says that will stop the sacrifices. After seemingly killing two of the giants, they (Senua, the slaver, and two others who I'll get to) go off to the Viking base, as the last giant is supposedly near there and the slaver can convince his father, the leader, to stop the sacrifices. Naturally, the last giant isn't real, the father refuses to stop the sacrifices, and Senua has to stop him. I have so many problems with all that I just mentioned that I'm not even sure where to start. Firstly, this is all completely irrelevant to the events of the first game. Senua suddenly being an action hero, and killing real human beings only dampens the effect that the first game had, which almost entirely took place in her mind. Now, you may think that, like the first game, this is all a hallucination, but this time around Senua has three companions that completely remove any ambiguity this story might have. Which brings me to my second point... these companions are all incredibly one-note and cliched. You've got the son of the slaver leader who follows his orders but is conflicted, you've got the civilian... dude, who's just kind of there, and the female warrior. None of these characters have any depth to them at all, they're simply there to push the plot forward. Senua herself doesn't fare much better. You could remove her from this game entirely and replace her with any random person and not much changes. There are a few trippy hallucination moments, but there are much fewer this time around, and the voices in Senua's head (a key feature of the first game) are also just kind of... there, acting more as a tutorial to the player than delivering any narrative substance like they did in the first game. Senua herself also doesn't go through any sort of definitive arc throughout the game, and the few bits of character development she does have are mostly a retread from the first game. They simply had nowhere to take her character after the first game ended. Which brings me to the giants. Hoo boy. Here we go. The existence of the giants in a real world that is inhabited by other people is not only a complete tonal shift from the first game, where any supernatural events that occur are in Senua's mind, but it also ruins a lot of the impact that the first game had. The way they die is also... very lame, as they simply die when they have their name said to them (yes, this is actually how they die). The final giant not being real (as mentioned before) might make you think that these fights take place in Senua's mind, but the other characters react to the "giant being dead". You might think that is also a hallucination, but nope, the other characters confirm "seeing the giant" on the alternate narrator track. I've heard theories that the giants aren't real, they're weather events, and Senua's psychosis portrays them as giants and the others go along with it because it's medieval times, but that doesn't make any sense as those "weather events" stop when Senua supposedly kills the giant. Senua, obviously, cannot control the weather. The final giant not being real would lend credence to this theory though. Why would the first two giants be real but the third one isn't? That would simply be inconsistent. My theory is that the "weather events" theory is actually what Ninja Theory were going for, but it completely falls flat due to the huge plot hole of Senua not being able to control the weather. The entire plotline around the giants is just a mess, and none of the theories as to what they actually are make any sense. Either they're weather events and Senua can magically control the weather, they're hallucinations (proven false by the other characters responding to it) or they're real the first two times and fake the last time, which would not only ruin a lot of the impact the first game had, it's also downright inconsistent. None of these theories work. And then we get to the ending. After Senua and gang get to the Viking base, the leader (shocker) doesn't want to stop the sacrifices. The last giant isn't real, he's been lying to his people to maintain control (which is why I don't think any of them were real), his son betrays him and stays with Senua, and the leader kills him. Senua sees her father in the Viking leader, and after a fight, Senua overpowers the leader and... decides in her head not to kill him as that would make her like her father? At this point, Hellblade 2 thematically pivots *once again* to a core message of "we are not our fathers, we can choose our own path". Which, sure, fine, thematically that's not a bad concept, but it's so out of left field that it feels completely disconnected from the events of the rest of the game. The Viking leader ritually sacrificed her people, that's why she's here, so to not kill him after all that, after he just killed his own son, is downright silly. No, Senua, you're not going to "become like your father" because you killed a literal slave leader. It also blatantly rips off the ending of The Last of Us Part II, where Ellie decides not to kill Abby because it would "perpetuate the cycle of violence", despite killing literally hundreds of people trying to get to her. Even the framing of the shot where Senua decides not to kill the Viking leader is remarkably similar to the same shot where Ellie makes that decision. And while I don't like The Last of Us Part II, it at least has a clear, consistent message, and tries to humanize Abby to convey that "cycle of violence" message. I don't think it succeeds, I think it honestly kind of ruins the core themes of the first game, but it at least tries, and is consistent with that attempt. Hellblade 2 starts off as a cliched war story about saving her people, pivots to... whatever the hell that storyline about the giants was, and then pivots *again* with a message of "we are not our fathers, we can choose our own path". It's so narratively disjointed that I wonder if it's because of development issues. There were two different writers for this game, and one of them was Tameem Antoniades, the writer and director of the first game, who left the studio around 2020. I wonder if the direction of the narrative changed after he left, because what we have is so disjointed that it feels like two completely different games, awkwardly combined into one. I'm going to wrap this review up by going back to the initial reaction to Microsoft acquiring Ninja Theory back in 2018. The general sentiment after that acquisition was "Xbox finally has their Naughty Dog equivalent". In a way, they were right. They just got the wrong version. Unlike its excellent predecessor, Senua's Saga: Hellblade II is horrendously paced, makes no meaningful improvements to the gameplay formula, and the narrative is an absolute mess. I do not recommend it. 4/10.