More Reviews, What to expect

[Starwars]

Innovations, good storytelling, gameplay -- these are things that are already expected in an established company's new game. These are things that are already given in a title. Hence why if they're present, they don't get as much attention spotlit on them by the players. Unless a feature is really revolutionary, a gamer will just acknowledge how it's making a certain game good or great. You won't see them being exalted to the highest level or scrutinized because they are already expected in a decent game.

 

Where on earth are these things in gaming then? I sure as hell don't see it but I guess I have different expectations? People often praise Bioware for good storytelling in games for example but I don't see it. And in my opinion it's either extremely low standards or a severe lack of analytical ability that causes people to *not* point out how extremely stupid some of the plot elements in ME2 are for example. Or the horrendous encounter design in Dragon Age (not really specific to that game, but) I mean, a game like Heavy Rain garnered good to great reviews. What. The. Hell. Man?

 

Bugs, lack of polish, etc. however, now these are being highlighted more often because they detract from the overall package of a game. Dunno about you, but I play a game in order to be immersed and have fun. Bugs detract me from that experience because they annoy me, especially if said bugs occur rather frequently. Overall polish, not so much, but they do lower my impressions of a game.

 

I'm thinking more that bugs, graphics and all that are highlighted because they are extremely easy to notice for anyone whereas if you want to critique the design of the game, you have to put on your analytical glasses. Again, I'm not saying that the bugs should be overlooked, far from it. But it's the easy way out to dismiss a game as a "technical mess".

And to clarify a bit, I would *gladly* welcome more critical reviews in the gaming industry generally speaking. But the trouble with many of low score AP reviews wasn't that they were harsh or critical. It's that they were lacking any sort of substance and meaningful analysis.

[Achilles]

People often praise Bioware for good storytelling in games for example but I don't see it. And in my opinion it's either extremely low standards or a severe lack of analytical ability that causes people to *not* point out how extremely stupid some of the plot elements in ME2 are for example.

I'm thinking a high school biology class would have a field day with Sovereign's line "organic life is a genetic mutation". Drew Karpyshyn is lauded as a "great writer" (mostly, I think, because he tells everyone that he's a great writer) yet he insults the players' intelligence with crap like this and we thank him by purchasing more of his games.

[Volourn]

"But I don't know what to think. Thankfully, this game was released a bit earlier in Europe, so when bad reviews started to drip from the US, a lot of people already knew that the game was much better than what they were being told."

 

This line is a perfect illustration of the arrogance of European and those who like AP. Very hilarious.

 

He might as well just stay 'only stupid dislike AP' or 'Amerikans are dum dum'. Pretty much gets his point across.

[C2B]

"But I don't know what to think. Thankfully, this game was released a bit earlier in Europe, so when bad reviews started to drip from the US, a lot of people already knew that the game was much better than what they were being told."

 

This line is a perfect illustration of the arrogance of European and those who like AP. Very hilarious.

 

He might as well just stay 'only stupid dislike AP' or 'Amerikans are dum dum'. Pretty much gets his point across.

 

No, it doesn't.

 

It just speaks on our total different mentalities and the hyperbole surrouding AP in the USA. Also that there are different reviews around.

 

 

Not to mention he didn't insult anyone. You just did.

 

 

It could have been better formulated though. Especially there was no need to mention the US specifically.

Edited July 23, 2010 by C2B

[Volourn]

Actually, he did insult people. He insulted Amerikans, he insulted reviewers, he insults anyone who disagreed with him.

 

The only difference between him and me is I'm more unfront and honest.

 

At least the people on this baord whoa re pro AP ar ehonest - they believe anyone dislikes AP is dumb. Fair enough.

[HoonDing]

I'm thinking a high school biology class would have a field day with Sovereign's line "organic life is a genetic mutation". Drew Karpyshyn is lauded as a "great writer" (mostly, I think, because he tells everyone that he's a great writer) yet he insults the players' intelligence with crap like this and we thank him by purchasing more of his games.

Did Karpyshyn rape your cat?

[Achilles]

Did Karpyshyn rape your cat?

Do you mean like in a past life? Pretty sure I can't rule it out.

[C2B]

Actually, he did insult people. He insulted Amerikans, he insulted reviewers, he insults anyone who disagreed with him.

 

The only difference between him and me is I'm more unfront and honest.

 

At least the people on this baord whoa re pro AP ar ehonest - they believe anyone dislikes AP is dumb. Fair enough.

 

No, I don't.

 

I think it's too much hyperbole generated through several gaming practices and standards that don't make sense under which AP was seen in the wrong light. Extravagating the flaws was an outcome of it. And there are numeros other reasons. But none of them is that I would judge a persons intelligence. Just their taste maybe.

 

I cannot say if you are dumb or intelligent. I don't know you in real life.

 

 

But, at the moment you are acting extremly ignorant accusing everybody here of something that just isn't true for most of them.

 

And even now I don't have any idea if you just do that because your angry at something and you are a pretty cool dude in reality.

Edited July 23, 2010 by C2B

[Volourn]

All you have to do is look at the reaction AP fanboys (which is not the same as AP fans as AP *fans*a re kewl dewds) have when these review threads come uop with negative reviews on the game. It's all about putting people down who dislike the game.

 

I see AP exactly for what it is. It's a RPG. Just a very poor one, imo. Definitely no MOTB, NWN2, or KOTOR2. That's for darn sure.

Edited July 23, 2010 by Volourn

[kirottu]

I have to slightly be on magical Volo

[Achilles]

I have to slightly be on magical Volo

[C2B]

I have to slightly be on magical Volo

Edited July 23, 2010 by C2B

[qaz123]

I have to slightly be on magical Volo

[Achilles]

Most reviewers will never play the game twice to see how the C&C pan out.

You don't even need to play it twice. Just play it once and pay attention to the perks you get.

 

No doubt it's great to play it more than once and see all the possible outcomes, but that isn't necessary to see that C&C is the touchstone here.

[pmp10]

I have to slightly be on magical Volo

[qaz123]

Most reviewers will never play the game twice to see how the C&C pan out.

You don't even need to play it twice. Just play it once and pay attention to the perks you get.

 

No doubt it's great to play it more than once and see all the possible outcomes, but that isn't necessary to see that C&C is the touchstone here.

 

Yeah, I hear ya. Overall, the game is not as horrible as it is made to seem and the C&C was great imo.

 

Honestly, I don't think all the reviewers finished one complete playthrough. I think they hated the combat/graphics/anims/etc. enough to quit around Saudi Arabia or about half-way through. Personally, I wouldn't play a game I hated either just to finish it, but they are getting paid to play. So... imo, that's why some reviews focus more on the technical stuff and say little to nothing about the C&C.

 

@pmp10

 

Glad to hear gamespot played it twice, but I don't think that was the norm. I can understand why people hate AP, but I think a lot of reviews skimmed over the C&C and focused more on the combat, etc. I would have liked more... "the C&C suck/are great and here is why..." Since choice was the game's tag-line after all.

Edited July 23, 2010 by qaz123

[Achilles]

Yeah, I hear ya. Overall, the game is not as horrible as it is made to seem and the C&C was great imo.

 

Honestly, I don't think all the reviewers finished one complete playthrough. I think they hated its combat/graphics/anims/etc. enough to quit around Saudi Arabia or about half-way through. Personally, I wouldn't play a game I hated either just to finish it, but they are getting paid to play. So... imo, that's why some reviews focus more on the technical stuff and say little to nothing about the C&C.

The thought occurs to me that the ego-stroking in AP might have been too subtle. Rather than dropping an "ooo...you're the most powerful/wonderful/awesome _____________" reveal at the end the 2nd act, MT is built up over time. Sure he's accomplished and he's preventing WWIII, but I wonder if that concept it too obscure for people that weren't around for the RL Cold War. In other words, your "prize" is a collection of perks rather than finding out that you're Revan, The Nerevarine, the Kalach-cha, etc.

 

Hmmm....

[Volourn]

"Consider that the game's tag line is "Your weapon is choice". Very frustrating that the game is not be rated based on the one thing that is unquestionably (trolls need not respond here) noteworthy."

 

Oh, I judge it on its C&C. It's just nothing speacial. It's not noteworthy. AP's C&C pails in comaprison to other games including other Obsidian games. And, the 'decent' C&C doesn't make up for all the crappy aspects of the game including but not limited to story, characters, writing, combat, etc., etc.

 

P.S. There's a guy on the Codex who played the game 3 times and explains, in detail, why AP's so called 'aweosme' C&C sucks. *shrug*

 

 

"- Bloodlines: Rememberd for dialog, the rpg elements, not for the combat system (there were also numeros complaints about shooting) etc."

 

While I personally liked BL, it's a poor example since it failed popularity wise as well.

 

 

"- Kotor II: The dialog, certain parts of the story, not the combat system which was sadly just as broken (due to bugs mostly though)."

 

Majority of KOTOR2 fans ennjoyed the combat just fine.

 

 

"- Motb: The dialog, the story and and and. Again, while it has some nice gameplay elements there is a large controversity about them and there are many players that hate for example the spirit meter."

 

MOTB had good a combat system, and it is just an expansion so no excuse not knowing how the gameplay worked. Who cares if peons disliked the spirit meter.

 

Bottom line is AP's C7C and overall is simply not as good as those 3 games.

Edited July 24, 2010 by Volourn

[Zoraptor]

Oh Volo, you've moved on to quoting Codex posters as authoritative sources? Time to give the internet a rest for a bit.

 

Especially since that guy got things outright wrong (

the one I remember offhand is that yes, you can in fact get Albatross riled enough that he will send guys after you in the end game

)

[Volourn]

Yes, I'll quote Codex posters. More trustworthy than other sources. That's for darn sure. Espicially, since Codex posters btw, post elsewhere. In fact, I'm sure many of them post here, and I'm sure many of them enjoyed AP just fine.

 

P.S. I didn't use him to say he's 100% right but it disproves that theory that by playing the game multiple times that it'll magically be better or the C7C will be magically awesome. This is a guy who played the game 3 times yet criticizes it, and all I can think of is he's a tool who played a game he bashes 3 times. That's a ridiculous use of time.

Edited July 24, 2010 by Volourn

[C2B]

Yes, I'll quote Codex posters. More trustworthy than other sources. That's for darn sure. Espicially, since Codex posters btw, post elsewhere. In fact, I'm sure many of them post here, and I'm sure many of them enjoyed AP just fine.

 

P.S. I didn't use him to say he's 100% right but it disproves that theory that by playing the game multiple times that it'll magically be better or the C7C will be magically awesome. This is a guy who played the game 3 times yet criticizes it, and all I can think of is he's a tool who played a game he bashes 3 times. That's a ridiculous use of time.

 

Codex is the forum with the most hyperbole in the entire internet rpg scene. They are worse than NMA. Sorry, at this point I can't argue with you anymore. You just bring points up that are simply not true or spoken with a extremly narrow view.

 

And "Who cares if people disliked the spirit meter"

 

You know? Who cares if people disliked AP's gameplay.

 

 

Sorry, thats not an argument. That is really downright ignorance.

 

 

Also AP's writing is very. VERY good. Especially dialog and e-mails.

Edited July 24, 2010 by C2B

[qaz123]

Bloodline's C&C sucked. It's true, I heard it on the codex once.

[Volourn]

"Also AP's writing is very. VERY good. Especially dialog and e-mails. "

 

Example of AP's 'very VERY good' writing:

 

Dialogue Choice: Professional = making fun of characters' professional = lolz for all

 

 

"Bloodline's C&C sucked. It's true, I heard it on the codex once."

 

Not all Codexers are created equal. Codexers are just random interent geeks, anyways, nobody special. Just like us peons here.

[qaz123]

"Bloodline's C&C sucked. It's true, I heard it on the codex once."

 

Not all Codexers are created equal. Codexers are just random interent geeks, anyways, nobody special. Just like us peons here.

 

Sarcasm aside, is there even a slight chance someone will convince you AP is a good rpg?

[Overlord Bob]

I just finished my first play through of AP, and seeing as it's created some polarizing opinions I might as well give my thoughts on the game. I've never played anything by obsidian or bioware (unless you want to count fallout 1 and 2), so I suppose I could either be a neutral party or have no idea what I'm talking about.

 

Anyhoo, while I did enjoy the game, I felt like a major problem with the game was that it couldn't decide how serious it wanted to be. The combat is obviously meant to be a stylized spy-action sort of thing, with little regard to 'reality'. The problem is, with the exception of a few characters (Sie, Brako and Steven are the only ones that come to mind. And Omen Deng to a lesser extent), almost everybody is rather serious and normal. Neither of these things are bad on their own, but when you combine them together with a mediocre story, the result is rather messy.

 

In terms of the actual game play, which I imagine is more important to most people, it was decent. The stealth system was solid for an RPG (even if that's not saying much), and I didn't notice anything particularly bad with the shooting mechanics or AI, though neither of them blew my mind. I thought the dialogue system was the best part of the game, and I am kind of confused that most of the reviews ignored or dismissed it. The writing was creative and well done, especially compared to RPGs like Oblivion or Fallout 3; even Mike's snarky, sarcastic comments were usually entertaining to listen to. Plus, it was implemented as a primary aspect of the game play with the C&C, which was very impressive to me.

 

Overall, I liked AP. It had some problems, and the ending was terrible, but I like it enough that I'll probably replay it again. Considering that I rarely finish games, let alone replay them, that's good enough for me.

Edited July 24, 2010 by Overlord Bob