Once bit....

Question: If you had purchased a game that was hyped a bit and you bought into the hype (obviously since you purchased it!) and the game turned out to be complete crap with content that was just glued on (poorly) just so they could put it on the box... say multiplayer, which also turned out to be complete crap, would you try the second in the series if journalists that are "in the know" were claiming that the second was worth a shot even though the first was garbage?

That question smacked me in the face when I realized someone paid Reality Pump money.... REAL WORLD MONEY to publish Two Worlds II. I don't know about any of you, but I played Two Worlds, and.... I wish I hadn't. The only saving grace in that debacle is the fact I didn't pay money for it. When Two Worlds was still in development there was quite a lot of buzz going on around the web about it. Supposedly the "multiplayer version of Elder Scrolls IV" ( it did look quite similar graphically, and yes there was multiplayer, but more on that later) journalist were claiming this game was going to be the second coming and possibly what Elder Scrolls IV could have been.

Anyway, getting back to my point, I played this game that should have never been. Really the only thing this game has going for it, is it sets the bar as to where this generations bottom is. Graphics were a problem, sound was a problem, voice acting was just horrible, AI went from LOL to WTF, and I'm pretty sure they crammed so much bad into this game, the case smelled off. The multiplayer component of this game was "Horse Racing" yes. Horse Racing. Maybe I'm wrong here, but there should be a little more beef to the content than one mode that is pointless and short in order to be able to toss it on the box and trick the consumer into purchasing it.

Now that Two Worlds II is out, the "in the know" journalists (not sure if the same ones or different ones as I'm too lazy to research this!) are saying that the issues from the first have been addressed and this one is worth a pick up and play. Uh... I fear the hypetrain is coming and some folks are tied to the tracks. I just can't seem to get over the fact that the first was so bad, and I just can't see how the second could be much better. Sure games have improved from the first in the series to the second, that's a given. As time passes, new methods, ideas, technology, ect comes about and all of that can be used for improvement.

I don't think I'd have any issue with this game if it were named something else rather than the second. I have nothing against the dev, nor do I think they have never / will never / could never make a great title, I just don't know why they'd wish to associate this "superior title" with the unspeakable one. I guess my question is fairly simple, but I tend to shy away from a second if the first was straight out terribad, but do you?