2005 in Review at RPG Codex

Remove all ads!

RPG Codex has published a long and exhaustive review of the past year, calling it one of the worst for the cRPG genre and explaining why. BioWare isn't exactly being worshipped and neither is Obsidian. Here's a little excerpt from what's said about the former developer:

It just wouldn't be right to have one of these articles without bringing up BioWare, who are probably the biggest RPG developer out there and also probably partially to blame for the dismal state of the genre. It was their Baldur's Gate series that set the trend all the way back in 1998 for flashy RPGs with linear plots, cliche stories, terrible combat--and blockbuster sales.

But apparently BioWare has gotten tired of catering to the difficult PC market, what with demands for interesting plots, NPCs that aren't a pain in the ass and hey, maybe something without elves in it for a change? No, it's much easier to pander to console kiddies whose idea of RPG gameplay is collecting multicoloured ocarinas or watching twenty hours of FMV cutscenes. BioWare's forthcoming projects are mostly to be released on the Xbox 360 and include a whole trilogy of sci-fi "RPGs" called Mass Effect (colloquially known as "gravity" to those of us with a clue), which might be interesting if they weren't more FPS than RPG, according to press releases.

Read the whole thing at RPG Codex.

 

What a terrible and overly negitive review of the year. It had a snarky "why didnt they do it my way. Please me in everyway shape and form or Ill be mean" tone. Sure not everything is perfect but the article makes it sound like the games out this year were hell on earth. It just goes to prove my theory that opinions are like a$$holes. Every one has one and the same stuf comes out of both.

 

That's the specific atmosphere of Codex. Part of it is the style (grumpy, badass, although witty and smart at the same time), but there's also the specific vibe of the community. It's not exactly a forum like everyone and the review looks different when viewed from that perspective. I don't like that kind of atmosphere when it's overdone, by which I mean there being too much of it and it not being natural, but Codex seems to keep proportion. I could name a community that fits perfectly as an example of the opposite but let's give it a rest.

 

Pfft - the Codex, as they say, 'is known as the best place to be miserable about RPGs'.

Also, you may have missed:

Codex is excellent because it's so damn negative - therefore, anything which gets a positive review is going to be good (assuming you agree with their assessment on what is 'good', which I happen to do). They also tend to be a good deal more honest than other places when it comes to pointing out a game's faults, rather than just going 'T3h gr34test!'. Very valuable as counterweights to mindless adoration from other places, who, if you read the Codex's front page every now and then, will see that these other places have no clue about what they're talking about in most cases. Very valuable bull**** detector

Consider also that maybe it's negative for a reason (rather than just grumpiness) - because the year sucked.

 

Ok sure the thier thing is to be negitive and snarky and not overly prase everyone, however, that isnt real reviewing or giving real critiques, its opinion with the criteria being "Please me". There is nothing wrong with that, only dont package opinion as a 'review'. Actual reviewing is to look at what the creator wanted to create and seeing if they accoplished that goal. Im not saying that they should overly prase everyone, Im saying that it is not actual reviewing. My review of their site is that they are acheving thier creative goal. My opinion is their methods suck.
And now Im done with this thread

 

It's kinda funny that this line: 'There is nothing wrong with that, only dont package opinion as a 'review'', with a few words changed, is almost exactly what they say about the state of RPGs...

And your definition of what a 'review' is sucks - if reviews merely consisted of going 'hey look, they achieved their creative goals' - they would be *absolutely useless* at actually informing anyone about it. Who cares whether they achieved their creative goals, I want to know whether the game is good or not in the mind of someone who thinks at least somewhat like I do about the subject matter.

 

If I where a publisher I'd be very hesistant to do an isometric PC CRPG.

Reviewers and gamers had a field day tearing apart ToEE and POR2. Guess what? Publishers have decided to minimize risk by dumbing things down. Hardly a surprise. How many gamers have never tried ToEE or POR2 based on what they have heard? Too many I'm afraid. Great games too - especially ToEE. Its a shame really. Gamers like to put nails in their own coffins I guess. Me? I'll take a bug ridden CRPG over a useless console title.

 

Both are now patched and fully functional. Too late though of course - all the damage is done and Dragon Age is the only thing on the horizon that even remotely resembles...

 

I gave up on PoR 2 for a number of reasons but one of them was indeed the lack of playability striking me from the beginning. I didn't like the inability to select my own feats. Plus, it was weird to have a very restrictive point-buy (realistic, hardcore roleplay-ish, whatever) together with said inability to control feats and skills. Not a big fan of Action RPG unless they are handed to me as action games with an RPG flavour, sort of.

As for ToEE, bugs were there but I could cope. I didn't like the huge loading periods between turns. And I hated the lack of balance in combat. You really could end up being unable to do anything despite having actually created a strong team. In my perception, you should never end up stuck in any game when you have a wizard, a rogue, a cleric and two tanks, which is about the most conservative build possible.

I might be willing to replay ToEE now that I have a better computer to play it on, but I'm not sure if I want. There will soon be NWN2. Maybe even Dragon Age. I still haven't got Jedi Academy yet. I have the whole Morrowind saga unplayed yet. And Fallout Tactics and the Emperor city sim. Wish I had more time. ToEE isn't really so exceptional, after all...

 

ToEE is exceptional - especially as a D&D combat engine. Its easily the most robust implementation of D&D combat ever produced. The fact that your party got smacked around tells me you werent utilizing all the combat options and tactics. As far as role playing - its weak.

POR2 is a less robust version of ToEE, but its far longer and if you stick it out for the long hawl the story is better.

Based on what you are saying I can't believe you havent played Morrowind. I've played about 70% of the original campaign and its just amazing and incredibly strong as a real RPG. Combat is so so.

 

Well, I did like the ToEE tactics but my dead end happened when I crossed paths with Belsonirg, Belsornig or whatever his name was. I think I would have figured it out if I had given it enough time but the difficulty level sucked. It wasn't even omniscent/cheating AI, it was just numbers. The amount of damage done, the to hit rolls of the enemies. That sucked. And my party was quite a powerful one, actually. The wizard and the rogue had the best AC in the party, so they didn't end up dying and preventing me from sneaky tactics or magical assistance. Actually, they were also capable melee and ranged fighters (it's possible with the right build if we're talking about low-level characters where BAB differences aren't so great) and the cleric wasn't much different from the other two plate-wearing guys, when it came to combat. So no weaklings. And still couldn't do anything.

 

Is that before or after Balor (looks like a Balrog)?

Balor took me 3 consecutive nights to defeat. Hugely difficult but so rewarding.