RPGCodex Review #1 - Hŵrpa Dwrp

[GrinningReaper659]

 

No. What are you even talking about. You don't know where I got the idea from, I was directly quoting his review. He says, and I quote (again): "The game abandons established settings and rulesets in favour of ones developed at home by Obsidian, whose one big purpose was to differentiate it from Dungeons and Dragons." He then goes on to make snarky, sarcastic comments about how everything is "not-D&D" such as the amaua which are "not-orcs," the orlans which are "not-halflings," etc. In other words, he falsely presupposes that the point was to differentiate from D&D, and then criticizes the game for not doing so. So, I don't know what you're on about, but it's not my first paragraph that's been invalidated here.

You said this in your first paragraph of your last post

 

This is where he declares that the one main goal of the setting (and ruleset) is to be as different as possible from D&D.

Your key mistake here is that you think the reviewer thinks that what Obsidian created is 'to be as different as possible from D&D' when he is actually saying it's trying to be 'not-D&D', which is basically D&D stuff with slight variations. He criticizes them for being unoriginal/boring. Part of Obsidian's goal was to make the game feel a bit like Forgotten Realms / D&D and this is what they did to an extent, but the reviewer wanted them to take more risks, to be a bit more inventive.

 

The exact opposite of what you said.

 

Seriously, I think you need to reread what I'm talking about here. It's not a mistake on my part, but maybe on yours, because he clearly states it and I'll quote it one more time as I try to explain. Roxor said "The game abandons established settings and rulesets in favour of ones developed at home by Obsidian, whose one big purpose was to differentiate it from Dungeons and Dragons." Here, he is saying that Obsidian's main goal when designing the setting and ruleset was to make it as differentiated as possible from D&D. Read through his quote, that's what he is saying, I'm not misunderstanding him. He's saying that they wanted to make a setting that was as distinct ("differentiated") from D&D as possible, and then he goes on to complain because they failed to do so by making so many things only superficially different. My point is that that wasn't their goal in the first place.

 

 

So, which games that I mentioned have better writing than PoE? D;OS, Wasteland 2, SRR? Do you think that the writing in BG1 and BG2 is better than the writing in PoE? We'll leave the story and plot aside, because the comment was about the quality of the writing. I think that the writing ranges from as good as to better than all of the games I listed, but you're free to disagree of course.

The reviewer compares the writing against Obsidian's other games and not the other Kickstarters, but I'll humor you. There are many aspects of writing and I think Obsidian's writing is nicely written but in Pillars of Eternity specifically the plot is weak, has structural and pacing issues as well as issues with establishing player motivation, and then goes full retard in the last part of the game (which he mentions, where they throw everything including the kitchen sink at you in the last bit of the game). Nothing in the game me even remotely care about the Dyrwood or the antagonist to the point where I stopped playing the game because I simply did not care to pursue the story any further after the Act 2 finale.

 

I have completed Shadowrun Returns (and none of the other KS games) and while Obsidian can write nicer sentences, I thought Shadowrun Returns had a better plot - started out investigating a murder and then evolved into a save the world story, simple, perhaps a bit cliche, but it worked without issue. Obsidian reached for the sky and fell short with theirs. There were several things I didn't like in SRR such as the murderer showing up at the crime scene (derp) and I didn't even like the second part of the story but there was nothing wrong with the plot and I liked the characters, particularly Coyote. Apparently Dragonfall is way, way better. I recently bought that but I've only played the first 10 minutes.

 

I'll take a simpler plot/story that succeeds than one that is underdeveloped/a mess. IMO the most interesting story tidbit was the Hollowborn stuff, I would have rathered if the game was just about that.

 

Roxor says the writing ranges from average at best to abysmal at worst. I disagree, and you defend him but then all you can talk about is the fact that you don't like or care about the plot. You say that SRR has better plot while Obsidian "can write nicer sentences." In other words, the writing in PoE is better and you're continuing to use the fact that PoE's plot didn't draw you in to deflect. --Dragonfall is considerably better than Dead Man's Switch in my opinion, I think you're going to enjoy it.-- Getting drawn into the story or even liking it is a lot more subjective than the quality of the writing, which is what I'm talking about. Say what you want about the plot and story that didn't grab you, but you even admit that the writing itself isn't bad. Also, I wish I had left out the bit about the other Kickstarters (I don't think there's any debate that PoE has better writing than any of them) because you didn't answer about the BG games. I'm really curious about that, how do you rank the writing of PoE vs. BG and BG2 writing (not plot), also against IWD and PS:T?

 

 

Also, you can say that you were determined to enjoy the game, and Roxor can say the same, but both of you hated aspects of it before it was even released.

So did many others, I'm sure. It's not difficult to separate combat from story either. Combat in The Witcher 2 sucks, but the story is quite good and I've enjoyed replaying that a few times and the Rise of the Sword mod makes the combat less insufferable.

 

Fair enough. From what I see you saying about it, it seems to me that you're a bit biased, but I could just as easily be wrong.

 

 

 

That was my scathing summation, a nod to his if you will. Obviously enjoying action games doesn't preclude you from enjoying story-driven RPGs, but he made the initial comparison between the two and my response was meant as a half-joke. Anyway, I just don't think that the review offered anything worthwhile. Furthermore, I think it's ridiculous to call it the worst Obsidian game to date, do you disagree? Do think that Roxor really believes that this is the worst game Obsidian ever made? Do you believe that it's their worst game?

I've only completed one Obsidian game - Knights of the Old Republic 2. I played Neverwinter Nights 2 but never finished it (and likely never will). I refuse to play Alpha Protocol, South Park and Fallout New Vegas because AP is a console shooter, I don't care about South Park and I don't like any Bethesda games (including Morrowind) and I only mildly enjoyed the first Dungeon Siege but do not care to play the second or third. None of those games cater to my gameplay preferences.

 

Out of the games I have played (Kotor 2), NWN2 and Pillars of Eternity I'd say it's worse than KotOR2, but maybe better than NWN2 at least in some ways, but worse in others.

 

 

Most Obsidian games aren't my cup of tea either, PoE is their first game made in a style and genre that I can enjoy. I've played most of their games, but there's not one before PoE that I could actually enjoy enough to finish. That's partially due to my tastes in games (which I think are similar to yours), I don't play first person RPGs and over-the-shoulder stuff is nearly as annoying to me. That being said, I think most who are being honest can look back on Obsidian's rather small catalog and agree that PoE is not the worst among them. Again, it is a matter of opinion, but there's no doubt in my mind that Roxor didn't give PoE a chance, and it's plain to see that it's a list of flaws more than an objective review, and that's not because the game only has flaws. PoE has both strengths and weaknesses and a worthwhile review will reflect that more clearly.

[FlintlockJazz]

Still nobody who explained, what's so important about that ugly ass message board? Is RPGcodex somewhat like the holy grail of CRPGs in the US? 

Nothing, there is nothing important about it, they lost any relevance they had long ago through their own actions.  Now, all they do is wallow in their own hate and spite.

[Sensuki]

Seriously, I think you need to reread what I'm talking about here.

Dude I've read every post he's made about the game on the codex. You are misinterpreting him . He knows that they were deliberately trying to copy D&D.

 

Roxor says the writing ranges from average at best to abysmal at worst. I disagree, and you defend him but then all you can talk about is the fact that you don't like or care about the plot. You say that SRR has better plot while Obsidian "can write nicer sentences." In other words, the writing in PoE is better and you're continuing to use the fact that PoE's plot didn't draw you in to deflect.

I repeatedly stated that he was comparing it against Obsidian's other games. You asked me to make a comparison against another Kickstarter which I did and I stated why I thought the plot in SRR was better than the Pillars of Eternity plot. Obsidian's writers might have a larger vocabulary and more flowery ways of saying things but that doesn't really mean much when the actual content has issues.

 

In my post earlier I linked you to a thread where the Codex discusses the issues with the writing in Pillars of Eternity at extreme length. It's a really good thread and I enjoyed reading it. Every issue I have mentioned is in there, mentioned by others.

 

Here is the thread again: http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/the-writing-in-this-game-is-average.98103/

 

Most Obsidian games aren't my cup of tea either, PoE is their first game made in a style and genre that I can enjoy. I've played most of their games, but there's not one before PoE that I could actually enjoy enough to finish. That's partially due to my tastes in games (which I think are similar to yours), I don't play first person RPGs and over-the-shoulder stuff is nearly as annoying to me. That being said, I think most who are being honest can look back on Obsidian's rather small catalog and agree that PoE is not the worst among them. Again, it is a matter of opinion, but there's no doubt in my mind that Roxor didn't give PoE a chance, and it's plain to see that it's a list of flaws more than an objective review, and that's not because the game only has flaws. PoE has both strengths and weaknesses and a worthwhile review will reflect that more clearly.

Personally I think that it's a very polished game but content wise I think it's a big disappointment. The biggest achievement in the game is the environment art. Everything else they've done somewhere better before. For some people, polish is more important but I don't think that Pillars of Eternity will rank that great on the Codex Top RPG list this year. It will be interesting to see how it does against D:OS, SRD and Wasteland 2 though.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Sensuki

[Shadenuat]

Relative to other FPSs, of course.

 

I understand you can judge something to be old school by the age of the genre, but I don't understand why you would lay judgement on people's taste because they liked a game in another genre that worked instead of something like a broken, bugged and not even really old-school (it's third person action with some abilities) KOTOR2, for example.

[Luckmann]

'Hŵrpa Dwrp'

 

[...]

 

Everything aside, I can't help but to laugh every time I see the thread title either.

[Yellow Rabbit]

Still nobody who explained, what's so important about that ugly ass message board? Is RPGcodex somewhat like the holy grail of CRPGs in the US?

It's just the board for RPGists that has a bad fame exactly for things like this review and overall tending to elitism/loudmouthness/hate (choose what you like) of its inhabitants. It does have its atmposphere, though.

[Gromnir]

'Hŵrpa Dwrp'

 

I try to be fair in all things, and to be fair this is actually a good gag. The po-faced over-seriousness / complexity of the setting gnaws at my patience too.

is not a criticism o' mc, 'cause you are at least consistent.  however, some o' the folks that find fault in poe for taking itself too serious seem to have forgotten their posts and opinions regarding ps:t, a game that could descend to a state o' lugubrious camp.

 

HA! Good Fun! 

[GrinningReaper659]

 

Seriously, I think you need to reread what I'm talking about here.

Dude I've read every post he's made about the game on the codex. You are misinterpreting him

 

 

I believe you, and maybe he's changed his opinion since writing the review, but I'm not misinterpreting that which I keep directly quoting from the review. He declared something as a design goal that never was, and then he complained that the design goal wasn't met. I don't need to know what he's said since then to know that that bit of the review is either intentionally dishonest or, more likely, based on him misunderstanding the design goals. I suppose we should just drop the point, though.

[Stun]

 

 

you gotta learn to read your own posts before posting them.  is wacky. 

 

"I'm talking about the trolls of Baldur's Gate 2, that frustrated everyone the first time they met them, unless you already knew you needed fire or acid."

 

that is his quote.  is a quote where he specific notes that the problem o' trolls evaporates with knowledge.  so, suggesting that the issue presented is Not one regarding unforeseeable defenses is ridiculous.  though why he would choose one o' the best known d&d  critters with a special defense is completely beyond our understanding.  

 

...

 

am begining to think that the reason we have difficulty communicating with you is simple that you don't read posts before responding... or are a bit slow.  the fact that luckman liked your post reveals some peculiarities 'bout him as well.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Why in the world would you bring up "unforeseeable immunities and defenses", when discussing trolls in the IE games?

 

...

 

slow it is.

 

*washes hands*

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Just as I thought. You have no answer.

[Monte Carlo]

 

'Hŵrpa Dwrp'

 

I try to be fair in all things, and to be fair this is actually a good gag. The po-faced over-seriousness / complexity of the setting gnaws at my patience too.

is not a criticism o' mc, 'cause you are at least consistent.  however, some o' the folks that find fault in poe for taking itself too serious seem to have forgotten their posts and opinions regarding ps:t, a game that could descend to a state o' lugubrious camp.

 

HA! Good Fun! 

 

 

Indeed. I've always swam against the tide in finding Planescape inpenetrable (and admitting it on this forum).

[Zwiebelchen]

 

 

 

2) They couldn't. All of these things were stretchgoals that they simply had to deliver due to the kickstarter contract rules.

I'm pretty sure there are no such contractually binding rules. Kickstarter pledges are glorified donations.

 

In fact, Larian didn't hesitate to scrap the 10+ level megadungeon they promised their backers in a reached stretch goal the moment they discovered that taking the immense time and money to put it in the game would cause them to have to cut corners and half-ass everything else.

 

That stuff happens. Intelligent project managers simply take it on the chin, learn from it, and then do what's best for the game, even if it means they'll have to suffer a few whiners complaining about broken promises later on.

 

 

Did they? I don't even remember, and I backed D:OS.

 

The moment the KS ended I knew the megadungeon would be a big problem. But I don't think anyone could reasonably have foreseen that it would be acceptable to tell backers, "hey it's not a good idea to actually make it." 

 

(The problem, arguably, was promising it in the first place. But that's one of the ways all first gen KS's went awry, from physical rewards to megadungeons.)

 

 

This. I'd say they made the right decision lacklustering the stronghold content and instead focused on other core mechanics. The mechanics are there now, anything that further developes it can be done in DLC or expansions.

 

Who can safely say what PoE would have looked like without taking out much needed resources from the megadungeon and stronghold?

Maybe we would still have the crappy early-beta spell effects or combat animations? Maybe we would have much fewer zones in general? Maybe we wouldn't have the same dialogue-choice depth than we have now? The point is: both the stronghold and Od Nua (and also enchanting to some degrees) are optional content that you can skip without gimping yourself. If you don't like this optional content, it doesn't really hurt the rest of the game. And if the rest of the game is better for it, then why not?

 

The expansion will definitely come. And I also highly doubt that we won't see at least a PoE 2 announcement before christmas. PoE was a financial success. Why in their right mind would they drop a successful new franchise with complete intellectual property just because some cRPG elitists didn't like the game? I know I wouldn't.

[Stun]

 

 

'Hŵrpa Dwrp'

 

I try to be fair in all things, and to be fair this is actually a good gag. The po-faced over-seriousness / complexity of the setting gnaws at my patience too.

is not a criticism o' mc, 'cause you are at least consistent. however, some o' the folks that find fault in poe for taking itself too serious seem to have forgotten their posts and opinions regarding ps:t, a game that could descend to a state o' lugubrious camp.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Indeed. I've always swam against the tide in finding Planescape inpenetrable (and admitting it on this forum).

 

Still, there's a ton of humor in PS:T. I don't think the comparison is apt. Maybe if Eder was a talking skull that tried to get into a female wicht's pants....or maybe if Sagani was a modron cube who's viewpoints were 'Logikal', we'd have something there to put up as a "gotcha" to people who loved PS:T's syrupy drama but hated PoE's. Edited April 22, 2015 by Stun

[Kimuji]

Why did Obsidian decide to clone BG1 instead of the clearly superior BG2? Why settle for blatant mediocrity instead of aiming for supremacy?

...

This is literally the worst Obsidian game I’ve played to date. That’s right, I even had more fun with Dungeon Siege 3 - at least it was a fun beat ‘em up, as opposed to this lifeless, uninspired husk.

So BG1 is a blatantly mediocre game and Dungeon Siege 3 was better. Given the author's tastes in video games I'm glad he didn't like PoE.

[Gromnir]

maybe if aloth shared a body with with a possibly bisexual guttersnipe?  that kinda thing?

 

*snort*

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps:t had two ha-ha party companions.  so too does poe.  

Edited April 22, 2015 by Gromnir

[Sensuki]

So BG1 is a blatantly mediocre game and Dungeon Siege 3 was better. Given the author's tastes in video games I'm glad he didn't like PoE.

BG1 is not an Obsidian game. It was made by BioWare. I'm positive that the reviewer likes BG1 more than DS3.

[Luckmann]

BG1 is superior to PoE in every single way expect mechanically.

 

Edit: I actually meant to say "BG1 is superior to BG2 in every single way expect mechanically". When I was going to edit the post to correct it, I realized that I don't actually have to.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Luckmann

[Gromnir]

BG1 is superior to PoE in every single way expect mechanically.

 

see, is these kinda blanket generalizations that make folks look silly.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[aluminiumtrioxid]

The abso-****ing-lutely fantastic part of this is where this critic is posted and what following it reaches (far from all your powerless hooves and bleating).

 

It will affect sales.

 

 

 

 

So BG1 is a blatantly mediocre game and Dungeon Siege 3 was better. Given the author's tastes in video games I'm glad he didn't like PoE.

 

 

Both games are agressively mediocre, in fact.

[Sven_]

Some valid criticism aside, I find it a bit ironic that the review pretty much outs the guy as a min/max powergamer who puts up tanks and super casters (which doesn't work the same way as in D&D by the way as every stat affects every character class there is -- a high int Barbarian for instance has a much bigger range in his AoE abilities as well as a much longer duration of those -- in a typically combat heavy D&D computer game that'd be a complete waste). I thought the Codex was about putting back the "role" back into "RPGs", though.

 

That said, experiences will differ, and so will opinions (as an opinion piece, this is as valid as any -- how much of it is useful is up to you to decide). One of the strengths of RPGs is also their inherent weakness, to a point. Pillars, like other games, doesn't cater to a specific set of party. In a pen&paper environment, a highly intelligent Brute kind of character is atypical but viable, as there is a human at the whelm of the adventure who adapts, and there is the actually activity we use to call, well "role-playing". In the (mostly very combat intensive) computer games, that is a little different.

 

Pillars goes a step further though. F'r instance, I recently saw somebody claiming that some of the skills, such as lore, would be basically useless. Yet without it, I would have struggled more to finish the game, or at least would have to adapt my strategy greatly. My party didn't include one of the classic "casters", only a priest who buffed the damage dealers. Thus many AoE spells and similar were only available to me if my party had that knowledge. In a sense, the pains of making the game viable for any party build (and every character build suffering/benefitting of all attributes), can fire back. In particular as all the levels of difficulty adjust are the number and strenghts of enemy types. That said, the Codex isn't as "elitist" as you think. You don't need to look further than their adventure gaming sections, where there are threads of appreciaation for just about any mediocre adventure game ever released during the adventure flood of the 1990s -- and as there is no type of game that relies as much on somewhat compelling writing as this one, and it was easy even for the best of designers to apply moon logics to their puzzle solutions (GK3's cat hair conundrum being the most prominent standout, naturally), there were a ton of those, inevitably. That is the forum side of things -- on the editors' they could improve on their editorial standards, as the quality of content varies hugely. And in fairness, there's a lof of interesting stuff being covered that isn't covered anywhere.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Sven_

[Elerond]

 

The expansion will definitely come. And I also highly doubt that we won't see at least a PoE 2 announcement before christmas. PoE was a financial success. Why in their right mind would they drop a successful new franchise with complete intellectual property just because some cRPG elitists didn't like the game? I know I wouldn't.

 

 

They have already confirmed two expansions for the PoE, which all those who bought expansion add on or whose reward included expansion will get. So I would not be surprised if announcement for PoE2, if such will ever come (as PoE is currently Obsidian's worst selling game and worst game that they have ever done, if I should believe this thing that is called review from esteemed board of protectors of RPGs) will be sometime of next year or year 2017 or even later date.

[Kimuji]

 

So BG1 is a blatantly mediocre game and Dungeon Siege 3 was better. Given the author's tastes in video games I'm glad he didn't like PoE.

BG1 is not an Obsidian game. It was made by BioWare. I'm positive that the reviewer likes BG1 more than DS3.

 

I know that BG1 is not an Obsidian game, this is not the point here. If even BG1 is mediocre then how many crpgs are worth playing?

[Stun]

<edit>

 

Never mind.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Stun

[Longknife]

That review is ****. It is. Obsidian's "worst game of all time"? Really???

This is kinda my beef with the review. It makes good criticisms but sort of exaggerates the severity. I'm not familiar with RPGCodex personally and only know that some people would say it's a bunch of dudes with excellent opinions on RPGs whereas others say it's cursed with blind cynicism. Reading this review, it feels like a little of column A, little of column B.

 

The complaints are solid, but sometimes it just feels a bit melodramatic. It's akin to if, for example, someone wrote a review of Super Mario 64 and criticized Mario's controls calling it "THE WORST CONTROLS I HAVE EVER SEEN IN ANY GAME EVER," when in reality the controlling of Mario is difficult but consistent, so it adds to the difficulty in a way that some people might like, others might not.

 

Constructive criticism is always welcome and useful, and I would definitely say Pillars could use some. Pillars falls into a strange category for me alongside games like Dark Souls II. These are games that are undoubtedly good, but I also cannot deny my disappointment with some aspects and, at best, award an 8/10. Good games, but nothing to write home about or no-life. New Vegas was hands down my favorite game of all time. Dark Souls was something I sunk dozens of hours into. Isaac Rebirth is the game I bought preceding Pillars, and I find myself STILL playing Isaac more even though I'd already sunk double the hours of time I've sunk into Pillars.

  Having said that, I do read this review and wish they'd toned it down a bit, because it's very apparent why some people are put off by RPGCodex or not quite willing to finish reading the review. Good criticisms, but they won't be heard if you drive people off by whining like it's going out of style.

[Shadenuat]

Some valid criticism aside, I find it a bit ironic that the review pretty much outs the guy as a min/max powergamer who puts up tanks and super casters (which doesn't work the same way as in D&D by the way as every stat affects every character class there is -- a high int Barbarian for instance has a much bigger range in his AoE abilities as well as a much longer duration of those). I thought the Codex was about putting back the "role" back into "RPGs"

What do you mean? That player has to forego character effectiveness in combat in a combat oriented game in favor of flavour options in dialogue?

 

 

 

Wait... how? How did the Lore skill help you finish the game without struggling?

By casting spells from scrolls, that's Lore's combat advantage.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Shadenuat

[Kimuji]

 

BG1 is superior to PoE in every single way expect mechanically.

 

see, is these kinda blanket generalizations that make folks look silly.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Well that's even better, if you summarize people's opinion here you get:

 

- BG1 was crap but better than BG2

- BG2 was crap but better than BG1

- PoE is crap because it's too similar to BG1, which is superior to BG2 but still crap nonetheless even if BG2 was the best IE game.

 

Now I'm waiting for: IWD 1/2 was crap, PT was crap and Fallout 1/2 was crap.

 

And back to RPG Codex review: it is the perfect mix of "my personal tastes are universal truth" and "I can turn every single detail into a critical game breaking flaw".