RPGCodex Review #1 - Hŵrpa Dwrp

[Gromnir]

There are 11 pages of replies, so this review obviously struck some chords. 

don't read too much into it.  bad reviews often inspire such reactions.  also, the codex is tending to be extreme in ways more than merely their reactionary gaming pretensions.  generating controversy is kinda a goal for codex as somehow that is a validation o' their existence.  

 

*shrug*

 

also, please note that there has been, for a LONG period o' poe development, a small segment o' malcontents that voiced their concerns that obsidian were doing it wrong. such folks felt increasingly marginalized as their complaints were largely ignored.  a review *gasp* is an excuse to resurrect the mouldering corpse o' long dead arguments.  a review, oddly enough, is also taken by some as proof that marginalized were right when they complained even though all we got is a review by a random guy.  

 

 

as we noted in our first post in this thread, we don't get the fuss regarding reviews, particularly for games we has already purchased and played our self.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited April 22, 2015 by Gromnir

[Luhaja]

That turned out to be a lot longer than I anticipated.  I guess I'm going to go back to Arcanum, or F:NV, or maybe Kotor.  But, I've probably played THROUGH those games a total of roughly 10 times.  BG?  Wow, that would probably make it about 15 total playthroughs.  P:OE?  1.3, or something like that.  Maybe I'll finish my 2nd playthrough in the future, when I forget the game a bit.

 

May I suggest trying a solo charecter playthrough in PoE? 

[Valmy]

It is sooo good to see all these nutjobs getting their come-uppance for totally screwing up the game with their Baaaa-ing during the Kickstarter/Backer phase.

 

You *points finger* demanded these screwed up dumb-ass add-ons to the game and now...

 

It is too late.

 

I lament the game it could have been.

 

So yeah, I am immensely enjoying this.

 

You Baaa-ers are like the proverbial masses that tried to convince Moses that he was crazy/wrong/whatever, and now you are having to face reality.

 

Some of us tried to change this.  You baaa-ed us down.

 

Nice to see that the sane world realizes this too.

Wait what? There was only a small group posting here during production of the game and we were hardly a furious mob (and even if we were there were too few of us to intimidate you into stopping...whatever it was you think was stopped). Most of us were cautiously optimistic and lots of us were cheering on Sensuki and the betas. You are talking about a group of people that never existed except in your imagination. I am sorry those imaginary people ruined your game and i am glad these fantasy people are getting their comeuppance.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Valmy

[Longknife]

 

What's up with this smilie?

 

Register on 'dex and find out for yourself. I promise it would be a wonderful and unforgettable journey.

 

 

 

Can you not explain it? Now I'M curious.

 

If it's one thing I do remember RPGCodex for, it's their habit of mocking various devs in various ways. For example I remember bucket head Todd Howard leaking onto the Bethesda forums with people who disliked Skyrim making that their avatar. I wanna hear their hilarious opinion of Sawyer too.

[Valmy]

I am so glad the defenders of traditional RPGs vigorously go after the few devs we have on a personal level. That is sure to get more of these made.

[lordkim]

2nd edition AD&D....



Say no more...

[Dadalama]

there's something that can be said about stretch goals though. Usually if something isn't quite working yet you drop it. But if it's already been promised than there'd be a backlash. 

 

Also, on an unrelated note, please no more opening dungeons. It could be the greatest dungeon ever but because you have no agency on when you take it people are going to get very bored of it.

[Valmy]

Also, on an unrelated note, please no more opening dungeons. It could be the greatest dungeon ever but because you have no agency on when you take it people are going to get very bored of it.

Obsidian has done this a few times haven't they? At least it was short.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Valmy

[Legbiter]

I believe Sensuki must share most of the blame for failing his Codex brethren in how the game turned out. It was nice knowing him.

[Michael_Galt]

If I solo it, I will be having to use some pretty clever meta-knowledge to survive. AND I won't have anyone to interact with at all, besides for the quests (like I said, I wanted a full party from the very beginning, since the last RPG to really offer that was BG2).  It doesn't appeal to me.  If I wanted to solo, I'd maybe play F:NV for that (though I always had as many followers as I could there, as well).  Sounds unnecessarily difficult and not very enjoyable.

[Valmy]

I believe Sensuki must share most of the blame for failing his Codex brethren in how the game turned out. It was nice knowing him.

Let me know if you need any sort of protection Sensuki. Us Texans are heavily armed.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

2nd edition AD&D....

 

 

 

Say no more...

 

...What about it?

[Elerond]

 

2nd edition AD&D....

 

 

 

Say no more...

 

...What about it?

 

 

It would allow us to use this again

[Longknife]

I just went to RPGCodex to try and find the source of that Sawyer picture and instead found people ****ting on Fallout New Vegas because it's not isometric.

 

Let's not go to RPGCodex again. 'Tis a silly place.

[Srex]

I hate to be this blunt, but...

 

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

 

There are plenty of problems with PoE. Plenty. I'm not denying that. But it is a very good game nonetheless. This isn't a review, it's a rant. It's rife with misunderstandings of basic game mechanics, which makes all his criticisms of the mechanics suspect at best.. and the fact that he couldn't think of a single thing to praise other than the aesthetics and the music is silly. This is a troll review at best. It's very clear that the reviewer went into it looking to take every single complaint he had about the game and magnify it to the point of ridiculousness.

 

Sorry, Sensuki... I've gotta disagree with you 100% here. This review is the Codex at its worst. And I say that not in a "the Codex is terrible" sense, but in a "this is the kind of thing that gives the Codex a bad name" sense.

 

+1

 

He first complains that the races/classes/defenses/etc are too much like dnd, then later complains everything is not enough like dnd.  Considering how incredibly long the review is, it's pretty amazing he never manages to back up any of his points with anything other than some hand waving and his own, poorly-explained opinion.  He never bothers to cite specific mechanics or designs that are superior to the ones in poe, or talks about ways to improve the systems, he just hand waves that "in good games, xyz is not like this."  The game isn't perfect, but it is a good game, and in many ways is better than any of the IE games.

 

I actually like the codex well enough, for what it is, but reposting this review here seems like a child whining for attention.  "I'm mad and I want someone to notice and/or agree with me!"

 

 

 

p.s. couldn't stop laughing at the DoW2 portraits

[archangel979]

It is sooo good to see all these nutjobs getting their come-uppance for totally screwing up the game with their Baaaa-ing during the Kickstarter/Backer phase.

 

You *points finger* demanded these screwed up dumb-ass add-ons to the game and now...

 

It is too late.

 

I lament the game it could have been.

 

So yeah, I am immensely enjoying this.

 

You Baaa-ers are like the proverbial masses that tried to convince Moses that he was crazy/wrong/whatever, and now you are having to face reality.

 

Some of us tried to change this. You baaa-ed us down.

 

Nice to see that the sane world realizes this too.

Hiver, did the codex let you out of you cage?

[NegativeEdge]

The smilie is Josh's face shopped on to the guy in American Gothic, implication being he is a dour puritan and not a cool fun-haver. Not sure who the woman is.

[archangel979]

The smilie is Josh's face shopped on to the guy in American Gothic, implication being he is a dour puritan and not a cool fun-haver. Not sure who the woman is.

that is Roguey, Sawyer's #1 fan from Codex that stalks him everywhere.

[Luckmann]

I just went to RPGCodex to try and find the source of that Sawyer picture and instead found people ****ting on Fallout New Vegas because it's not isometric.

 

Let's not go to RPGCodex again. 'Tis a silly place.

Any non-isometric Fallout deserves to be shat on. Now, Obsidian is not to blame in this case, Bethesda is, and Obsidian did really well with what they had. But that's still ****.

 

The smilie is Josh's face shopped on to the guy in American Gothic, implication being he is a dour puritan and not a cool fun-haver. Not sure who the woman is.

that is Roguey, Sawyer's #1 fan from Codex that stalks him everywhere.

 

[Longknife]

 

I just went to RPGCodex to try and find the source of that Sawyer picture and instead found people ****ting on Fallout New Vegas because it's not isometric.

 

Let's not go to RPGCodex again. 'Tis a silly place.

Any non-isometric Fallout deserves to be shat on. Now, Obsidian is not to blame in this case, Bethesda is, and Obsidian did really well with what they had. But that's still ****.

 

 

This is absurd as it implies isometric gameplay is somehow objectively superior to other styles of gameplay. It's not. There are different genres with different pros and cons and people have different preferences. To say Fallout New Vegas is less of a game because it's not isometric is no different from me claiming Pillars of Eternity is less of a game because it's not a first-person game.

 

It's preference. And while you, myself, and all the people at the Codex have every right to prefer one style over another, it's nothing short of stubborn, arrogant ignorance to try and claim the absolute superiority of one style over another.

 

  Pillars of Eternity is more or less my first isometric game. Aside from Pillars I've only dabbled in the Fallouts (1 & 2 and Tactics) so I'm by no means an expert on isometric gameplay. When I first loaded up the backer beta it was a bit overwhelming for me because this was a style of gameplay I was completely unfamiliar with. I did not however make the ridiculous claim that "this game sucks," shelf it and never attempt to even understand it. I knew a good game can come from anywhere and sometimes getting adjusted to some is more difficult than others, but that the reward for doing so can be very much worth it.

 

  So to hear ANYBODY claim they couldn't play New Vegas because it's not isometric, I find nothing short of ridiculous. I would hope we could agree that New Vegas' gameplay style is far more straightforward and easier to understand than that of Pillars, so a difficulty to get into it or understand it? I find that ridiculous.

  When I read those comments, I fear I'm reading the opinions of someone who held themselves back from enjoying a game, which is their own tragedy to deal with, because mark my words: the roleplay aspects seen in New Vegas are stronger than those of Pillars, Fallout 1 and Fallout 2. Superior choice and consequence, superior amount of such content, superior storyline and writing, superior character customization and variance....everything. It has it's blemishes (skill gain clearly balanced out pre-DLC), but that's every game, and I would rather not focus on those when it seems clear this is a community that houses some people who would take a portion of lackluster design and run with it.

 

Having an opinion is fine. Casually expressing a clear opinion as though it were objective fact and not being able to recognize the absurdity of that...? It becomes painfully obvious why some people would discredit the opinions of RPGCodex.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Longknife

[Amentep]

RPGCodex just released their first review (there will be another one)

Are you sure that was the Codex? I didn't see the words "Incline" or "Decline" used anywhere...

 

I kid, I kid.

 

Kinda funny we have 13 pages (and counting) of reviews of a review.

 

I guess I should get in on that action.

 

FWIW, I think its a fair review of someone who didn't like the game. While I recognize some of the things he classifies as a fault as faults (others didn't bother me but I can understand how, him not liking them, would help ruin the experience) I've probably had an over-all stronger experience than he did.

[Varana]

This is absurd as it implies isometric gameplay is somehow objectively superior to other styles of gameplay. It's not.

Are you really just trying to reason with the Codex' most cherished pet belief that Fallout (the original one) > everything else > everything made by Bethesda?

Good luck.

[Stun]

Are you sure that was the Codex? I didn't see the words "Incline" or "Decline" used anywhere...

 

I kid, I kid.

That's.... a good point.

 

He either didn't think things through, or he still sees the incline but didn't want to admit it because it would clash with the review's message, or else he sees PoE as neither incline nor decline, but rather, a title that's just treading water within the movement.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Stun

[Enexemander]

The review certainly achieved its aim: To generate clicks for RPGCodex.

 

It's a terribly biased review and full of misinformation. Bu that's what generates clicks when you're reviewing a game long after its release and the game is almost universally praised.
 

"Awesome: 9/10!" doesn't generate revenue when it's review #1087745

 

"This sucks! 3/10!" does generate revenue when it's review #1087745 and the metacritic of the game is 90% or higher.

That's all there is to see here.

[Longknife]

 

This is absurd as it implies isometric gameplay is somehow objectively superior to other styles of gameplay. It's not.

Are you really just trying to reason with the Codex' most cherished pet belief that Fallout (the original one) > everything else > everything made by Bethesda?

Good luck.

 

 

 

Nah cause I'm not on that website....nor do I think I have an interest in being there.

 

My point is more: the review of this thread provides good criticisms, but occassionally provides them in the most ass way possible. I am a big fan and a big proponent of constructive criticism, but some of what I've read....it feels like the right answer gotten using all the wrong methods. It's difficult to take a review seriously when the writer seems to stink of bias or cynicism or the like. I find this review in particular to be an interesting case, because I both sympathize with posters who wish to discredit the review as garbage or not finish reading it because it seems overly cynical and hateful, but I also think the review did manage to raise some valuable criticism.

 

All I'm really doing is lamenting that the Codex and some people from it seem so stubborn and cynical that it's difficult to take their often-good criticisms seriously, because that's all they ever seem to offer: criticism, when warranted and when not warranted. They could get far better results and get far more people to listen if they just toned it down and criticized purely when it seems absolutely clear there's a call for it, and not just criticized like it was going out of style or like someone's about to accuse them of not being hipster and pretentious enough AND LORD KNOWS WE CAN'T HAVE THAT.

  Criticize the lack of actual choice and consequence in Pillars, criticize some aspects of the combat you didn't like while offering working suggestions as alternatives. Don't criticize stupid, trivial crap like your belief that the races of Pillars are only pseudo-original and more or less the same as long-time traditional races of RPGs. That's nitpicky as hell. They've got some solid points and opinions a lot of the time, they just gotta be less crappy about them.

 

I know better than to try and bring that up with them though.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Longknife