Hard West is one of those deeply niche experiences that I never thought would get a sequel, but I'm happy that it did. Unusually, this time-conscious sequel isn't content to simply be "more Hard West ," but also doubles down on some design decisions from the first game and abandons others to create a thoroughly disparate game experience despite having the same art design and world, likely owing to the franchise being adapted by new developers, Ice Code Games. Unfortunately, this iteration is something of a "two steps forward, one step back" affair. Hard West was already a very cleanly designed game, and Hard West 2 doubles down on "gamey" elements not entirely to its own success. The Basics The DNA that Hard West 2 shares with its predecessor is considerable. Both games are Wild-West "Firaxis XCOM"-alikes, with the standard isometric tactical gameplay, move-and-shoot actions, and contextual, flankable high-and-low cover that have become de rigeur for all games of this pedigree. The major innovation of the first game, for better or for worse, was the "Luck Pool," a kind of shield that could be depleted either by activating various magical abilities or by being shot at. More likely-to-hit shots (like, say, a shotgun flank at extreme close range) would deplete more luck and allow a character to take damage and die, where less-likely shots (like pistols behind cover at extreme distance) would barely tickle the luck pool, leaving the character's health safe. In this way, Hard West was a very nonrandom, "gameable" tactics game, with exact and telegraphed outcomes where the player need never fuss with randomized chance-to-hit. I liked this, but it did render the strategy of the first game somewhat simplistic and very non-simulationist by tactics game standards, with the only "messy" part of the first game's design being its massive array of gimmicky firearms with different gameplay effects. Changes from Hard West 1 Playing Hard West 2 as a veteran of the first one, some of the first changes I noticed were that the firearms array was considerably more streamlined, and the logic of Luck has been retooled entirely: now, XCOM's "chance to hit" is back, in 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% increments, but Luck is used proactively not just to use special character abilities, but also to 'rig' shots to guarantee that they'll always hit. This is a stark departure from the first game where Luck was used reactively to prevent characters from getting shot, and makes the gameplay cadence of this game much more aggressive than its predecessor, something which is reinforced by several characters getting gameplay bonuses when they're out of cover and exposed. It's a design philosophy which mimics the development of Firaxis' own XCOM: Enemy Unknown to XCOM2 : both sequels seem to have independently come to the conclusion that players will only attempt the strictly optimal strategy of inching up the board only taking shots from full cover if given the chance, and so took different mitigating strategies to force players to act aggressively. Where XCOM2 opted for strict mission turn limits, Hard West 2 doubles down on its 'get out of cover and get more accurate shooting' gameyness by having a system called 'Bravado.' 'Bravado' allows a character to immediately regain their full activation upon killing an enemy, further reinforcing the intended aggressive playstyle. However, the game is very balanced around players mastering this feature: enemy counts throughout the game are massive compared to the first Hard West , with some missions pitting the player against an initial onslaught of up to 15 foes all of whom have similar damage profiles and health pools to the player's own characters. Strategic use of Bravado to thin the herd is often the only thing that can prevent the player from getting completely dumpstered in the very first enemy turn, giving Hard West 2 a very prescriptive, very intentional, and very limited gameplay loop compared to the first game, one that often veers entirely out of the tactics genre and straight into doing geometry puzzles. I found this extremely mechanical, 'playing the systems' game loop to be interesting enough to compel me through the game, but it's very different from the first title and I can see why more devoted fans of the tactics-strategy and tactics-RPG genres would feel that this is too much of a departure. The rest of the game is something of a wash compared to its predecessor. The story and characters are better than the first game, but are still fairly bare-bones when compared to tactics-RPGs like the Wasteland franchise, although whether this is a necessary consequence of Hard West 2 's approachable length is a matter one could discuss. The art style is more appealing than the first game's, in my opinion: it's mostly the same style in the same low-fi engine, but features more diverse environments and color choices with less 'let's just slather an old west boomtown in gore and pentagrams and call it a day' laziness. Lastly, the soundtrack is unfortunately a huge step down, substituting in generic, unobtrusive "Wild Westy" motifs to replace Marcin Przybylowicz's powerful Mad-Max-meets-Ennio-Morricone bombast from the first game. In Conclusion At the end of the day, I'd say that like its predecessor, Hard West 2 is a game that you can probably safely skip unless you're a tactics game junkie or looking for material within the underserved horror-western genre niche. It's more polished than the first Hard West , but some of the janky character of that game has rubbed off in the process, leaving a very polished game that's nevertheless more of a horse-drawn carriage than a freight train. An "interesting 7/10" title that would be best purchased on sale.
Read more