Played through the game for about three hours and that was enough for me. According to IGN's walkthrough, seemed like I was at about the halfway point. It's no better than a 7.0/10 with the visuals and audio carrying the game. Story and characters through three hours didn't do it for me plus im not into the whole mental aspects and whatnot. Not for me. Combat and gameplay has no depth or substance. Came across one new puzzle with these orbs that you need to place in a pedestal to open up the locked area in order to advance. What makes that cool is that when you focus on these water bubbles, it turns the interior upside down allowing you to reach the orbs and get back to where you started. There is more combat that I expected in those almost three hours but it's exactly the same as the original game which makes it worse because as a sequel, there should be depth and substance. There isn't any.
For reference, I rated the original game an 8.0/10 because it was unique and innovative at the time plus it was a new IP. However, since then, a similar IP being A Plague Tale Innocence and Requiem simply blow away Hellblade 1 and 2 because it's far longer, has a deeper story, more depth to the combat, actually requires strategy at times and you feel like you're always progressing. I also think Requiem looks far better and the puzzles were better.
I know majority loved Alan Wake 2 but for me, that was one of the most boring games that I have ever played (dropped it when you first control Alan Wake) and while it's not by much (more of a 1A and 1B type thing), Hellblade 2 bored me even more. And it is perhaps the best definition of a walking simulator. With that all said, to each their own.
