I love Still Life and I just completed Post Mortem, which isn't bad either. Is Still Life 2 worth buying (and for $19.99 to boot)? Saw screenshots of the game and the graphics look less polished. Also, it seems you can die in this game, which is a bit discouraging for me.

Thanks.

I thought Still Life 2 was an incredible disappointment compared to Still Life 1. And their wrap-up of the mystery at the end of one was basically just "Oh, by the way, so-and-so did it".

Kind of feels like a different adventure game in the same genre that just sort of had the "Still Life" name tacked on. Definitely not worth $20 or even the current price of $10. If you love adventure games of all sorts, it might still be worth playing at a lower price, but if you're attracted to it just because of the Still Life name and how great that game was, I think you're better of skipping this one.

I liked still life 2 actually I think I liked it more except its has a few bugs with the camera movement. To finish the story I feel you need to play it.

Personally I did enjoy Still Life 2 and it was a decent adventure game which had some good puzzles. Some people dislike it, because it doesn't try to be Still Life 1, but instead it tells a new story (with few short flashbacks which tell how story of Still Life 1 ended). Personally I didn't mind, because also Post Mortem and Still Life 1 had different feel.

Dying isn't very serious issue in this game, because game automatically saves at the start of the sequence where you can die. Most of the time only reason why I died was because I wanted to see how the protagonist dies if I fail the puzzle.

Still Life 2 isn't really a sequel to the first. The ID of the killer of the first is dealt with in a few flashbacks, while the rest of the game is a completely unrelated story. It's not bad, but I found it a little hard to take because of the whole angle of being put in the role of the victim and not simply the investigator.

Still Life 2 is imo even better than the first one. Great atmosphere and hard but fair puzzles. You don't have to bake cookies for no apparent reason or waste hours trying to force locks with useless lockpicks. Better voiceacting too as far as I can remember, at least when it comes to the main protagonist.

Maybe in retrospect they should have presented this game without the connection to Still Life. The resolution to the story in that game feels very much like an afterthought and is very unconvincing. But the rest of the (self-contained) story of Still Life 2 works really well.

Don't listen to all those people telling you this game is bad. They are wrong.:)

I would say that it's more a shortcoming of Still Life 1 than Still Life 2. If Still Life 1 had been chapter or two longer no one would be complaining. Only unanswered questions were who was the killer and what happened in Los Angeles and the game established that Gus didn't participate to events of Los Angeles. It's not enough material for a full length adventure game. Still it's something they couldn't really leave out, because then people would have complained that Still Life 2 didn't give any answers which people wanted.

And like I said earlier, I did find it refreshing that they told new kind of story in Still Life 2. Only common things which the 3 games of the series share are McPhersons and serial killers. Post Mortem was an occult murder mystery with stuff like Baphomet. Still Life 1 removed supernatural elements almost completely and told more mundane story about serial killers. And Still Life 2 is about being in a house of horrors with a serial killer. Naturally some people wish that all 3 games would be more similar with each other, but other appreciate the diversity.