Serious Sam II PC
  • Publisher: 2K Games
  • Release Date: Oct 19, 2005
User Score
7.1 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 59 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 36 out of 59
  2. Mixed: 15 out of 59
  3. Negative: 8 out of 59

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. LukeK.
    Oct 20, 2005
    4
    Fun old time game, but thats just it its time for somethin new.
  2. Jinko
    Mar 9, 2006
    10
    Wonderfully chaotic. A pleasure to unleash the day's frustrations on never-ending hoards that truely deserve to be rendered.
  3. Paul
    Nov 3, 2005
    7
    Great Fun! AD you are reviewing the wrong game, you are thinking of Serious Sam: The Second Encounter release ages ago. This is Serious Sam 2.
  4. K.Dep
    Nov 7, 2005
    9
    If this game sold for $60, it would get a 2. The price is good, and so is the game. The value is excellent. It's not HL2 or Quake 4 people, get used to it. It's funny, entertaining, and wildly fun. It's one of those games where holding down the trigger for 5 minutes is actually the strategic way to win. Simple, yes. Easy - heck no. I really enjoy this game and the laughs it brings. It's refreshing.… Expand
  5. ZB
    Oct 18, 2005
    8
    Fun game, but the orignals were more ground breaking.
  6. CapitanCrasy
    Oct 8, 2005
    10
    Finally Sam the serious one and returned... Great!!!
  7. AD
    Sep 21, 2005
    5
    Same as serious sam 1. Same monsters, same guns etc.. But is quite an enjoyable FPS shooter. a time of writing you can buy the game for around £6, which I think is worht a look.
  8. JesseC.
    Jan 16, 2006
    5
    Budget price tag aside, Serious Sam II relies too much on simple, silly fun to keep your attention longer than a few minutes. Even with the extreme lack of depth in the game, killing hundreds or even thousands of enemies is a good premise, but poses a problem when the core combat of the game isn't enjoyable or satisfying at all. I don't want to sound repugnant or anything, but when you shoot somebody in a game you want feedback, explosions, you want the enemy to fire back a few feet, and blood shooting everywhere. You want a sense of actually hitting something. In Serious Sam II there is none of that. When you shoot somebody it feels like you are just taking away his health and when his health hits zero he'll die. Vechicle segments are simple and would be much more satisfying if they were treated the same way. One of SS2's strongest features are it's graphics. It may not be a F.E.A.R or Quake 4, but alot of outside environments are massive (though not as massive as the original's levels) and extremely colourful. Thank god there are no dark corridors in this game. Serious Sam II is a one trick dog, and when that one trick is pretty lame in the first place a game like this can't succeed. This is a below average title.… Expand
  9. Eon
    Jan 18, 2008
    10
    [Real score 92/100] It has some things that I think game industrys is seriously lacking, like creative level design and lots of humor. This is game is so serious it kept me laughing or smiling throughout entire playthrough. Gameplay may seem monotonous, but who cares if you are having so much fun. It kept reminding me of Psychonauts with it's humor. Recommended for everyone that don't take games too seriously.… Expand
  10. Warmonger
    Oct 15, 2005
    5
    Pretty mediocre stuff!... I found it fun and frustrating all rolled into one. I think that they could have accomplished so much more (graphically) after three years, and because of this, it does not compare to the original or look that much better in fact! What a shame!!...save your $$$.
  11. Joe
    Nov 15, 2005
    9
    This game looks sweet, even with my only decent system. My friend has a top spec pc & on that it just looks awesome. It looks like this game scales really well depending on the pc you have. I had heaps of fun playing this game. Th enemies can be really funny & the action just doesnt stop for the most part.Also there is the biggest baddest level bosses any game has ever seen here. All in all its a 2005 game of the year contender, for those who like non-stop shooter fun.… Expand
  12. spartan-117
    Mar 12, 2011
    5
    The first one is way better this one just goes boring...
  13. LonelySheep
    Feb 25, 2012
    10
    I got this game after having played First Encounter, Second Encounter, and then Serious Sam 3 BFE in that order. I'd watched youtube videos of gameplay and my first impression was that it looked silly, stupid and easy, and wasn't worth my time. But then there was a steam sale and I picked it up for 3.5 bucks and thought: what the hell, I wouldn't be a true fan unless I'd played every game. The result startled me. I found this game really fun, and very true to the Serious Sam formula with a few additions. The game looks great, almost as good as HD, but what it lacked in the minor graphics department it made up in design and color. There's twice the variety of enemies in SS2 vs other titles, and also many more locations which keeps things interesting and fresh. The difficulty is what you'd expect from a Serious Sam game, however it is a touch easier, so I recommend bumping up the difficulty one more notch than what you are used to. There's a life system, which i assume is left over from consoles, but ignore it and use the traditional quick save and quick load feature that the PC version has. The jokes are very hit and miss. Some are laughable, and some don't even make sense. Yes the game is very silly if you watch the cutscenes, and a lot of the enemies have silly designs like clowns, footballers and witches, but these are very easy to look past if you want to, or you could embrace and enjoy the silliness, but you quickly forget it anyway when being attacked by 50 units at once. The levels are shorter, approx 25mins per level as opposed to the hour long grinds of the originals, but there's also a lot more of them and in total the single player campaign is a few hours longer than originals. The levels are also smaller, with less space to run, and there's a lack of those iconic vast battlefields, however this is balanced by your character running slower than in the original games. Wrapping things up, Serious Sam 2 is an underrated and unappreciated classic that is very much worthy of the franchise and should be played by all those that loves things Serious Sam. It's louder, it's more colorful, it's sillier, but it still packs plenty of punch and kicks your ass. Go play now,k?… Expand
  14. ThoughtWolf
    May 10, 2013
    4
    It feels like a sequel made by a contracted out of house studio that had no design restrictions...
    While the level and weapon design may be unique from other shooters the overall feel of the game is unpolished at best. There are obvious breaks in the map design where you can see places you aren't supposed to, the cut scenes look terrible and have obvious consistency issues (part of the ma    p doesn't look the same as it did while you were playing) they are boring and just something you want to skip in general. Most of the combat is really easy and there are places where you can literally just stand still and hold fire and you'll win, none of the "run and gun" that made the previous title great is really necessary...
    The game tries to break up some of this monotony with vehicle "mini-games." I call them that because the vehicles are overpowered and usually instantkill death machines that win you the game instantly... but try to run through the same scene without the vehicle and you'll be put up against an unwinnable battle, so it leaves you little choice in the matter. Overall if they had at least tried to stick to some of what made The First/Second Encounter good they might have made a good title, but in the end it feel flat on it's face.    … Expand
  15. Pandarve
    Mar 31, 2013
    3
    Serious Sam 2 looks colourful, has a lot of weapons, the environments are large and even throws a bit of humour into the mix which is all good. However, the premise of the game is far too simple, there is no character development and the weapons just lack that special something that makes you want to fire them. Given that the game revolves around almost non-stop shooting, presenting the player with weapons that don't feel right is a cardinal sin. The enemies do not seem to be too deterred by anything you do to them, which makes it very easy to shoot friendlies during a co-operative game because the enemies get close to you no matter what. Co-operative play works well but it doesn't take away from the fact that Serious Sam 2 is a highly mediocre and boring shooter. Playing it several years after its release doesn't help either as this game, unlike many other FPS games, hasn't aged well. Not recommended unless you'r a serious Serious Sam-series fan.… Expand
  16. digdilem
    Jun 5, 2012
    9
    An all-time classic. Expanding on the first with better graphics and great humour. Can't call yourself an FPS gamer until you've completed this. Get it and complete it.
  17. kbilsted
    Mar 29, 2013
    1
    Cool game back when it was released. In 2013 it is much out of date. The viewpoint is clunky and the graphics are bad compared to modern games. Not a good buy for a first-time play.

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
74 out of 100

Mixed or average reviews - based on 31 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 16 out of 31
  2. Mixed: 15 out of 31
  3. Negative: 0 out of 31
  1. Game Chronicles
    88
    I had almost forgotten how much fun I had playing the original Serious Sam, but it only took one level full of laughter and insane action to quickly remember why Sam is still the best FPS game in its class since the original Doom.
    Read full review
  2. AtomicGamer
    84
    Still, Sam nails exactly what it's aiming to do, which is to throw scores of enemies at you in some of the most frantic firefights you'll ever experience.
    Read full review
  3. Edge Magazine
    70
    Few other FPS titles can match the intensity of this nitrous-charged shooting gallery, but plenty of them offer the kind of less that feels like much, much more. [Nov 2005, p.104]
See all critic reviews »