This game is significantly more polished than the first game, but I think they need to trim some of it. The puzzles are generally a little easier, which is okay, but there were too many of them given how easy they are. By the end of the game, I was ready for it to be done, and not in a completely good way. I like the final pass getting the golden doors, but leading up to the golden puzzled, I felt like I was doing chores more than engaging in puzzle solving.
On the other hand, the game introduces some fascinating new tools. The different types of beam connectors are fascinating and have so much potential. I absolutely loved the body switching mechanics. I wished they would have gotten more devious with their puzzles to really probe the depths of what you can do with them. It sounds like there will be a dlc which does that very thing. Even though I wanted to be done with the base game, more difficult puzzles in the dlc that take advantage of the fascinating new mechanics will definitely bring me back to the game.
The philosophy of this game has an interesting premise, but I think they tried too hard with it. The game has a lot more dialog partners built into simply because there is a whole community of npcs that you hear from. The community of npcs is both a strength and a weakness. It is a weakness because it ends up connecting some of the thoughts for you. The first game does an excellent job of letting you explore a multitude of options at your own pace with your own reactions. The Talos Principle II sometimes gets in its own way of letting you make the connections. At the same time, the multitude of npcs allows more views to be expressed and different angles to appear in the game.

The philosophy of the second game is more pragmatic than the first. It struggles through ethical questions regarding resource consumption and proper treatment of the earth. I think it strawmans the side that says we need to limit our resource consumption, but that might be because of the choices I made. The middle road was not appealing to me, but the road that embraced human growth was also too anthrocentric for me. I don't find humans to be the epitome of the cosmos and the ones who need to reshape everything. Other animal consciousness deserves more consideration in their own unique ways of knowing. I still wouldn't say that a frog is a personbecause personhood is an anthrocentoc concern. A frog's life is valuable and needs to be respected for the life it is, not how similar a frog is to humans.

Because I am a biblical scholar, I have to mention the biblical imagery. The first game relies heavily on the Hebrew Bible. I was pleasantly surprised when the second game makes clear references to the New Testament, even as it maintains respect for the Hebrew Bible in its context. The myth of the found and the twelve first companions hits really close to home with biblical scholarship's questions around the historical Jesus. The way the game talks about the power of myth is fascinating.

All in all, though the premise of the second game is more grounded, it's conclusions seemed too transcendent and disconnected. On the other hand, the premise of the second game was more abstract, but the conclusions were much more direct and relatable. I'm glad I played the cm second game, but the first is the true masterpiece.

Shout out to Miltohim. I am now a Miltohim stan. I don't usually play games for humor, but I laughed hard when I found him. It was completely worth plugging myself into the somnodrome.