• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Jurassic World Evolution 2 | Review Thread

Draugoth

Gold Member



Developer: Frontier Developments

Review Aggregator:

OpenCritic - 86 average - 83% recommended - 8 reviews

MetaCritic (PC) - 85 average - 5 reviews

Critic Reviews

Game Informer - Andrew Reiner - 8 / 10

This is a game that is worth struggling with to unlock new dinosaurs for the freeing sandbox mode
GameSpace - Emily Byrnes - Unscored

Coming up in the next and final part of our review, we’ll have more insight into preparing enclosures for marine dinosaurs, genetic modification, and sandbox mode! Sandbox mode really is like an entirely different game since you have access to so many more decorative and theme-park-related features right out the gate, so we’re thrilled to see what we can do with those assets. I also just learned that you can press Shift + C to take some incredible screenshots…so expect some dynamic shots of my dinosaurs being lazy next time.
GamingTrend - Holly Hudspeth - 95 / 100

Whether you're a seasoned Jurassic World Evolution player or brand new to the franchise, I can guarantee you that you will have a blast with Jurassic World Evolution 2. While I think a couple of things could be tweaked to make certain things more obvious, it doesn't stop you from having an absolutely wonderful time playing the game. The addition of the flying and aquatic dinosaurs has been excellent, and I really hope for more content and DLC to go along with it!
PCGamesN - Richard Scott-Jones - 7 / 10

Improves on its predecessor in clever ways and still boasts the most gorgeous dinosaurs ever made in a game. But dealing with disastrous events beyond your control still isn't any fun, even if it's thematic for the Jurassic Park IP.
Polygon - Ryan Gilliam - Unscored

The message of the movies is that you can’t control nature, but Jurassic World Evolution 2 hits back by saying, “We’ll let you try anyway.” And I succeeded numerous times over nearly 20 hours with this park builder. Jurassic World Evolution 2 let me correct the sins of the past by corralling loose dinosaurs and building one of the most famous movie settings in history. And it let me do it my way while also making me feel like I’d succeeded where others failed.
Push Square - John Cal McCormick - 8 / 10

If we had to make a list of things that are totally radical then dinosaurs chasing and eating annoying fannypack-wearing tourists while we triumphantly hum the Jurassic Park theme tune would be top ten. Maybe even top five. We're here for that. Minor quibbles with the main campaign aside, Jurassic World Evolution 2 delivers an entertaining if simplistic park builder, that well-utilises the Jurassic World license, and throws in just the right amount of dinosaur-fuelled mayhem to boot.
TheGamer - Helen Ashcroft - 5 / 5 stars

Overall, Jurassic Park Evolution 2 delivers improvements across the board. It takes the best parts of the original game, adds new ways to play, and changes up mechanics to make them feel more realistic and interesting - making everything more engaging and immersive. Building straight paths and fences is easier, keeping dinosaurs fed is a breeze, and even speeding up time is now possible, yet managing those raptors is still a welcome challenge. While I may not actually be the best dinosaur supervisor yet, I can’t see myself putting this game down for a long time.
TheSixthAxis - Dominic Leighton - 9 / 10

Jurassic World Evolution 2 is bigger, better, and bolder, and smooths off some of the original's rough edges. Frontier has tinkered with the management sim aspects, and brought in a canonical campaign into the mix that follows directly on from the events in Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom, but the dinosaurs remain the star of the show. If you're a fan of the franchise – and really, who doesn't love uncontrollable carnivores? – then Jurassic World Evolution 2 is a perfect sequel.
 

skit_data

Member
Seems really good, an overall improvement on the first game. Let’s hope a few more reviews trickle in, though I’ll probably buy it no matter what.
 

Vick

Member
Awesome, D1 for me.
After all the patches and DLCs the first one became a completely different game, truly one of the best post-launch support i've ever seen in my life, can't wait to see what's to come here.

Shame there's no physical Deluxe Edition, but at least on PSN it's one purchase for both PS4 and PS5 versions.

The latter also saw a massive upgrade compared to previous showings:



Old PS5 Preview:


Old PC Preview:


Retail PS5 (awful video quality):


Ratail PC:
 

jigglet

Gold Member
I’m curious. Probably won’t play it so I’ll buy it when on sale. I want to support dinosaur games fucking love them.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Isa

Bragr

Member
I was addicted to the first one even though it has a lot of issues. I fucking love dinosaurs, what can I say.

I'm skeptical here though, it feels like a cash grab, they made a lot of money on the first and this looks very very familiar with all the same problems.
 

Inviusx

Member
Been playing for the last 6 hours. It's a great sequel. I've completed the campaign and have moved onto Chaos Theory. Playing on PS5.

I'll answer any questions if anyone has any.
 

Bragr

Member
Been playing for the last 6 hours. It's a great sequel. I've completed the campaign and have moved onto Chaos Theory. Playing on PS5.

I'll answer any questions if anyone has any.
Played the first? what's the biggest difference?
 

Inviusx

Member
Can you remove the awful magenta filter in JP era, like you could in the first one?

I'm playing the 1993 Jurassic Park Chaos Theory map at the moment. There isn't a filter like the first game. Looks good.

Played the first? what's the biggest difference?

Played a lot of the first game, maybe 100 hours.

Biggest difference in my opinion is the hatching process. You now have to incubate a dinosaur which has a clutch size. So like 8 dinosaurs in a clutch. When you incubate them you have a chance of either succeeding with the entire clutch or losing a few during the process.

Once incubated you have to pick what dinosaurs from the clutch you want to release based on positive/negative traits they picked up during incubation. Example, my Triceratops clutch had 6 eggs, 3 are neutral (no positive or negative traits) 2 have positive traits only like -30% chance to attack Rangers and the remaining egg has just negative traits like +30% aggression etc. So I can choose to either release all 6 eggs, or just choose the ones with the traits I want.

It's actually a pretty neat system.

On top of that, you can now automate alot of the busy work regarding Ranger management. If you build a Ranger post in each enclosure you can set that as a automated task for your Rangers and Capture team (helicopter). So what happens is that the Rangers automatically patrol those enclosures and provide an update on the dinosaurs, alerting you if they're diseased or injured. If a dinosaur becomes aggressive the Capture team will automatically fly over and tranq the dinosaur.

So yeah, those are the main differences at the moment. There is more but I need to play for a few more hours to get my head around the Territory system etc.
 

SJRB

Gold Member
I'm playing the 1993 Jurassic Park Chaos Theory map at the moment. There isn't a filter like the first game. Looks good.



Played a lot of the first game, maybe 100 hours.

Biggest difference in my opinion is the hatching process. You now have to incubate a dinosaur which has a clutch size. So like 8 dinosaurs in a clutch. When you incubate them you have a chance of either succeeding with the entire clutch or losing a few during the process.

Once incubated you have to pick what dinosaurs from the clutch you want to release based on positive/negative traits they picked up during incubation. Example, my Triceratops clutch had 6 eggs, 3 are neutral (no positive or negative traits) 2 have positive traits only like -30% chance to attack Rangers and the remaining egg has just negative traits like +30% aggression etc. So I can choose to either release all 6 eggs, or just choose the ones with the traits I want.

It's actually a pretty neat system.

On top of that, you can now automate alot of the busy work regarding Ranger management. If you build a Ranger post in each enclosure you can set that as a automated task for your Rangers and Capture team (helicopter). So what happens is that the Rangers automatically patrol those enclosures and provide an update on the dinosaurs, alerting you if they're diseased or injured. If a dinosaur becomes aggressive the Capture team will automatically fly over and tranq the dinosaur.

So yeah, those are the main differences at the moment. There is more but I need to play for a few more hours to get my head around the Territory system etc.

I wonder how many people actually care about those traits and DNA splicing and all that stuff.


Is the stupid sabotage mechanic returning?
 
Last edited:

Inviusx

Member
I wonder how many people actually care about those traits and DNA splicing and all that stuff.


Is the stupid sabotage mechanic returning?

I think if you overwork your scientists you open yourself up to a sabotage attempt but managing them is pretty straightforward.

As for the hatching mechanics, it definitely makes you stop and think. You could get an entire clutch of nasty mofos full of negative traits and then you have to decide if you want to invite that problem into your park or re-incubate. It's a nice little change to the basic 1 click incubate/release of the first game. Also, you can now release multiple dinosaurs at once which is huge and you have the option to hatch + airlift at the same time instead of needing to use a holding pen.
 
Last edited:

Draugoth

Gold Member
I'm playing the 1993 Jurassic Park Chaos Theory map at the moment. There isn't a filter like the first game. Looks good.



Played a lot of the first game, maybe 100 hours.

Biggest difference in my opinion is the hatching process. You now have to incubate a dinosaur which has a clutch size. So like 8 dinosaurs in a clutch. When you incubate them you have a chance of either succeeding with the entire clutch or losing a few during the process.

Once incubated you have to pick what dinosaurs from the clutch you want to release based on positive/negative traits they picked up during incubation. Example, my Triceratops clutch had 6 eggs, 3 are neutral (no positive or negative traits) 2 have positive traits only like -30% chance to attack Rangers and the remaining egg has just negative traits like +30% aggression etc. So I can choose to either release all 6 eggs, or just choose the ones with the traits I want.

It's actually a pretty neat system.

On top of that, you can now automate alot of the busy work regarding Ranger management. If you build a Ranger post in each enclosure you can set that as a automated task for your Rangers and Capture team (helicopter). So what happens is that the Rangers automatically patrol those enclosures and provide an update on the dinosaurs, alerting you if they're diseased or injured. If a dinosaur becomes aggressive the Capture team will automatically fly over and tranq the dinosaur.

So yeah, those are the main differences at the moment. There is more but I need to play for a few more hours to get my head around the Territory system etc.

Kinda sad how this game lacks modes.

At least it's a much better release than the original. I hope the new DLCs are huge like the Return to Jurassic Park one.
 

fatmarco

Member
I just really wanted more detailed/ customisable stores, decorations etc.

And it looks like they've avoided that side of the game entirely.
 
I'm playing the 1993 Jurassic Park Chaos Theory map at the moment. There isn't a filter like the first game. Looks good.



Played a lot of the first game, maybe 100 hours.

Biggest difference in my opinion is the hatching process. You now have to incubate a dinosaur which has a clutch size. So like 8 dinosaurs in a clutch. When you incubate them you have a chance of either succeeding with the entire clutch or losing a few during the process.

Once incubated you have to pick what dinosaurs from the clutch you want to release based on positive/negative traits they picked up during incubation. Example, my Triceratops clutch had 6 eggs, 3 are neutral (no positive or negative traits) 2 have positive traits only like -30% chance to attack Rangers and the remaining egg has just negative traits like +30% aggression etc. So I can choose to either release all 6 eggs, or just choose the ones with the traits I want.

It's actually a pretty neat system.

On top of that, you can now automate alot of the busy work regarding Ranger management. If you build a Ranger post in each enclosure you can set that as a automated task for your Rangers and Capture team (helicopter). So what happens is that the Rangers automatically patrol those enclosures and provide an update on the dinosaurs, alerting you if they're diseased or injured. If a dinosaur becomes aggressive the Capture team will automatically fly over and tranq the dinosaur.

So yeah, those are the main differences at the moment. There is more but I need to play for a few more hours to get my head around the Territory system etc.
The new Ranger system sound great and much more like JPOG. That was one thing I hated with the first one managing the Rangers constantly.
 

Vick

Member


Even in the Launch Trailer it still says "Beta".
Played for about an hour and indeed that's what it feels like.

At least they're transparent. And i know these practices shouldn't be supported, especially at full price, but the blame for a rushed release is 100% on Universal.. and after what happened with the first one i have complete faith in Frontier to totally deliver further down the line.
 

RiccochetJ

Gold Member
The first one was a lot of fun. I hope that Raptors are as much little jerks as they were in the first one. I'll be checking this out for sure!
 

ANDS

Thought gaf was racist. Now knows better, honorary gaffer 2022
Didn't play the first game, but so far enjoying this one. I'd have rather have had no voice acting than the VA for Owen that they got to replace Chris Pratt. Sounds nothing like him. Pratt sounds confident, this guy just sounds like he's doing a bad Nolan North impression.
 

Vick

Member
Played a few more hours. I like it, but damn the herbivores foliage requirements are insane in the Campaign so far.. i'm in Pennsylvania and i simply gave up on the idea of multiple species sharing the same paddock.
Overall, a much less relaxing game than the first one.

I'd have rather have had no voice acting than the VA for Owen that they got to replace Chris Pratt. Sounds nothing like him. Pratt sounds confident, this guy just sounds like he's doing a bad Nolan North impression.
Yeah, luckily in my country VA are the same as the movies (like they were in the first game), and no cringy super heavy accents either. A much more pleasant experience.
 

Kimahri

Member
On the second story mission and the game won't accept my allosaurus enclosure as being safe.

Good lord I'm already fed up with this game.
 

Vick

Member
On the second story mission and the game won't accept my allosaurus enclosure as being safe.
From Frontier:

The game doesn't count the Allosaurus as "safely enclosed" if there's a wild dinosaur running around in the same enclosure. So make sure there's not a rogue Gallimimus in the enclosure before you transport the Allosaurus.

However i actually had a Gallimimus inside his enclosure with no problems.
 

Crocwrangler

Neo Member
Meh, we now know that dinos had at least some feathers.
Some dinos had feather. Yes.
And pteranodons had no teeth, dilophosaurus were tall and did not spit poison, mosasaurus had most likely a forked tongue etc... It's Jurassic Park. They say it more than a few times in the movies, and none better than that one: "What Hammond and Ingen built at Jurassic Park is nothing but circus freaks." (A. Grant, JP3).

The whole Jurassic World's debate about Wu/Masrani and the Indominus shows again that dinosaurs at Jurassic Park are just big reptiles looking like dinosaurs because of some of their DNA. Even the JW Fallen Kingdom part where Blue needs blood tells us that all theropods of the park share the same bloodtype. Jurassic Park's creatures are a Frankenstein monster sewed up on the idea of what is a dinosaur.

People always ranting against the franchise by saying it's scientifically inaccurate simply don't understand a thing about the franchise. I'm a paleontologist by formation, and i never understand that stupid debate. It's not meant to be a documentary. It's a science fiction movie franchise.
 

ANDS

Thought gaf was racist. Now knows better, honorary gaffer 2022
On the second story mission and the game won't accept my allosaurus enclosure as being safe.

Good lord I'm already fed up with this game.

I don't have a safety issue, my Allosaurus fluctuates between wanting more space and more forest. It's really starting to annoy me as there's too many menus to jump through going between building, improving an enclosure and verifying a dino's comfort level.
 

SJRB

Gold Member
I gotta say, this game is pretty rough. Will write in more detail tomorrow, but oof... It's basically the first with some quality of life improvements.


Anyway, am I crazy or does the park never open in the first Chaos Theory mission [the first Jurassic Park]? I now have a mission to create a park tour but the park is completely empty and I'm bleeding money because the park keeps growing in size and upkeep but there's literally zero cash flow.

Is this bugged?
 

Bragr

Member
Some dinos had feather. Yes.
And pteranodons had no teeth, dilophosaurus were tall and did not spit poison, mosasaurus had most likely a forked tongue etc... It's Jurassic Park. They say it more than a few times in the movies, and none better than that one: "What Hammond and Ingen built at Jurassic Park is nothing but circus freaks." (A. Grant, JP3).

The whole Jurassic World's debate about Wu/Masrani and the Indominus shows again that dinosaurs at Jurassic Park are just big reptiles looking like dinosaurs because of some of their DNA. Even the JW Fallen Kingdom part where Blue needs blood tells us that all theropods of the park share the same bloodtype. Jurassic Park's creatures are a Frankenstein monster sewed up on the idea of what is a dinosaur.

People always ranting against the franchise by saying it's scientifically inaccurate simply don't understand a thing about the franchise. I'm a paleontologist by formation, and i never understand that stupid debate. It's not meant to be a documentary. It's a science fiction movie franchise.
True, but it would be cooler if it was realistic, a lot of the material they worked with in the 90s proved to be false and inaccurate, but the dinos become so iconic that they can't change them back now.
 

Kimahri

Member
I don't have a safety issue, my Allosaurus fluctuates between wanting more space and more forest. It's really starting to annoy me as there's too many menus to jump through going between building, improving an enclosure and verifying a dino's comfort level.
The whole thing is clearly bugged. I figured out the allosaurus issue, which was what someone else mentioned, but there's s ton of other problem.

The missions are a mess in that level. First I got asked to inspect the allo, then to heal it, but I hadn't been told to build the correct facility yet. Did it anyway, and after a bit of back and forth got the animal healed. Then after that I get new tasks and after that suddenly tasks roll in that I already did.

It's like the games pushes out tasks in the incorrect order or something.
 

Bragr

Member
Also, it is just me, or is every person in the game referred to as "they"?

We really are at that level huh.
 

fatmarco

Member
I wish they simply just didn't have Deinonychus at all. Jurassic Park Velociraptors are Deinonychus in all but name, so having this runt sized raptor that's smaller than a Velociraptor is just insulting imo.
 

Crocwrangler

Neo Member
True, but it would be cooler if it was realistic, a lot of the material they worked with in the 90s proved to be false and inaccurate, but the dinos become so iconic that they can't change them back .
Velociraptors being too tall and too different, dilophosaurus being what they are, pteranodons looking like they do (in JP3, they switched in World) was a creative choice from the team and Crichton (those details being already known at the time). He did write a realistic dilophosaurus in the book but they went for a more scary, monstruous version in the movies because that's what it is: a monster.

A scientifically accurate dinosaur would be impossible because of paleontology first (no one could ever tell how a dino truly looked and i know far too many fighting over artistic views) and the franchise's logic. They are all hybrids. Not just the Indominus. Indoraptor, Scorpius rex and the rest.

You are acting like we're engaged in some kind of mad science, but we are doing what we have done from the beginning. Nothing in Jurassic World is natural. We have always filled gaps in the genome with the DNA of other animals and, if their genetic code was pure, many of them would look quite different, but you didn't ask for reality. You asked for more teeth.
Henry Wu, Jurassic World.
 

lukilladog

Member
Some dinos had feather. Yes.
And pteranodons had no teeth, dilophosaurus were tall and did not spit poison, mosasaurus had most likely a forked tongue etc... It's Jurassic Park. They say it more than a few times in the movies, and none better than that one: "What Hammond and Ingen built at Jurassic Park is nothing but circus freaks." (A. Grant, JP3).

The whole Jurassic World's debate about Wu/Masrani and the Indominus shows again that dinosaurs at Jurassic Park are just big reptiles looking like dinosaurs because of some of their DNA. Even the JW Fallen Kingdom part where Blue needs blood tells us that all theropods of the park share the same bloodtype. Jurassic Park's creatures are a Frankenstein monster sewed up on the idea of what is a dinosaur.

People always ranting against the franchise by saying it's scientifically inaccurate simply don't understand a thing about the franchise. I'm a paleontologist by formation, and i never understand that stupid debate. It's not meant to be a documentary. It's a science fiction movie franchise.

Nah, the franchise got famous by trying to depict their appearance somewhat accurately, now it lost that.
 

Inviusx

Member
Nah, the franchise got famous by trying to depict their appearance somewhat accurately, now it lost that.

Palaeontologists knew about feathers when the first JP came out but the public would have revolted if they made a movie about giant birds. They made their dinosaurs look like what the general public thought dinosaurs looked like.

Despite the feathers information being around now for decades, the media still doesn't depict dinosaurs based on science because it's kinda boring compared to what's ingrained in our heads.
 

Crocwrangler

Neo Member
Palaeontologists knew about feathers when the first JP came out but the public would have revolted if they made a movie about giant birds. They made their dinosaurs look like what the general public thought dinosaurs looked like.

Despite the feathers information being around now for decades, the media still doesn't depict dinosaurs based on science because it's kinda boring compared to what's ingrained in our heads.
People need to stop thinking that dinosaurs were fluffly. A small number of dinosaurs had feathers. Mostly late theropods.

Imagining all dinosaurs having feathers is not only contradicting knowledge on their phylogeny, but also on evolution of the whole group itself, including their modern day parents. People like Lukilladog complaining about the fact that franchise isn't depicting dinosaurs accurately (which, as explained before, makes no sense) would only be able to complain about the velociraptors' look. Jurassic Park got famous for its amazing special effets and puppets that made millions of people fell in love with dinosaurs, myself included (even chose my career out of it). Yet everyone was knwoing what they were doing when they conceived the raptors, dilophosaurs and all the rest as shown in the movie.
 

Bragr

Member
Velociraptors being too tall and too different, dilophosaurus being what they are, pteranodons looking like they do (in JP3, they switched in World) was a creative choice from the team and Crichton (those details being already known at the time). He did write a realistic dilophosaurus in the book but they went for a more scary, monstruous version in the movies because that's what it is: a monster.

A scientifically accurate dinosaur would be impossible because of paleontology first (no one could ever tell how a dino truly looked and i know far too many fighting over artistic views) and the franchise's logic. They are all hybrids. Not just the Indominus. Indoraptor, Scorpius rex and the rest.

You are acting like we're engaged in some kind of mad science, but we are doing what we have done from the beginning. Nothing in Jurassic World is natural. We have always filled gaps in the genome with the DNA of other animals and, if their genetic code was pure, many of them would look quite different, but you didn't ask for reality. You asked for more teeth.
Henry Wu, Jurassic World.
Yeah, but Jurassic World came up with a lot of this bullshit to explain what fans have been annoyed over, in the 90s, sure it was still hybrid-ish, but the collective understanding of dinosaurs was so bad, that everyone thought they were real. Now, it's a different world, and everyone knows this is fake, it would be cool if they listened to that and tried to make it feel authentic.
 

Crocwrangler

Neo Member
Yeah, but Jurassic World came up with a lot of this bullshit to explain what fans have been annoyed over, in the 90s, sure it was still hybrid-ish, but the collective understanding of dinosaurs was so bad, that everyone thought they were real. Now, it's a different world, and everyone knows this is fake, it would be cool if they listened to that and tried to make it feel authentic.
In the books, Crichton created the raptors to be clearly bigger, more threatening than what they would be. He said he kept the name velociraptor because it sounded nice and created some hybrid monster out of it. It's basically Masrani's vision of things, which also convinced Spielberg for those.

I'd say that Jurassic park has to stay in the realm of the fiction and not be considered as a documentary, because it was never meant to be. Even Horner, wich is head paleontologist consultant on the franchise on the dinosaurs and inspiration for Grant is pushing this weirdness sometimes, while also acting like Dr Wu in his own work (go look at its chickenosaurus project). So some people may want it to be "realistic" (and by this 99% just want fluffy raptors) but it would not be true to the franchise's core, concept and story.

To get back to JW Evolution (as we wandered a bit far from the topic), there was indeed an "outrage" of some fans at the beginning when they released the deinonychus featuring a 1960's look and a crest. I found it brilliant, as it obviously did not look at all like the animal it is supposed to be (just like dilophosaurus) and was shown as a result of DNA combinations. Let Jurassic Park/World creatures be as unique as they are! And if you want to see "scientifically accurate"(yet based on imagination and lots of wild guesses) models, come to a museum where we will show these to you.
 

Vick

Member
Yeah, but Jurassic World came up with a lot of this bullshit
That sort of bullshit was always there. Did you know Spielberg originally wanted to make the T. rex frog-like?

Even maquettes were made at the time:

 

Bragr

Member
That sort of bullshit was always there. Did you know Spielberg originally wanted to make the T. rex frog-like?

Even maquettes were made at the time:

Yes, but I mean Jurassic World made people think about this sort of stuff, in the 90s there was an illusion it was real, that illusion is broken, so you have to do something else to make it feel real. And that something else, is making it more authentic.

What I am saying is, for 99% of people, that was real dinosaurs in the 90s because they didn't know better, now it's not.
 
Top Bottom