RPGWatch Forums

RPGWatch Forums (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)
-   News Comments (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Two Worlds - Looking Back @ AlloySeven (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19504)

Myrthos February 12th, 2013 02:33

Two Worlds - Looking Back @ AlloySeven
 
AlloySeven goes back in time and reviews Two Worlds on Xbox 360 rating it with 4 out of 5 stars.
Quote:

Two Worlds gets an unjustified bad rap. I've played no other console RPGs this generation that've given me this much freedom to explore and customize my character while managing to keep my attention through the waves of quests and sidequests. As much as I've loved the Elder Scrolls over the years, I actually believe Two Worlds is more fun to play.
Maybe that's because the combat system feels more natural and actually works from the 3rd person perspective. No, the combat system in Two Worlds is not perfect and if you play it now, it will feel dated. But it is functional and I had a lot of fun experimenting with diverse skills, abilities and spells made availalbe by the rich leveling and customization systems.

More information.

Daroou February 12th, 2013 02:33

Agreed. I loved the exploration in TW. Very open ended. I found TW2's exploration boring in comparison. I played the fully patched PC version. which was stable and I noticed only one bug (got stuck in building). Yes, the combat was fun too.

JDR13 February 12th, 2013 06:20

Two Worlds is one of the few open world RPGs that I've yet to play. I was originally scared off by all the negative comments about it from people here, and I never got around to really giving it a try. It's been in my queue for a long time, but there's always something else that seems more worthy of my time.

Corwin February 12th, 2013 06:30

My review of the game was not really negative. I actually enjoyed both. However, somethings in the original were 'over the top', such as the quasi-mediaeval language. Still, a fun game if a trifle easy.

xSamhainx February 12th, 2013 07:23

The man speaks the truth, you can certainly do far worse than Two Worlds.

The game can quickly become quite easy for the experienced rpg player, and it definitely has the most delightfully horrible dialogue ive ever heard. But has very fun exploration up there with the likes of TES games, made all the better by good horseback riding gameplay (which was better than it's rival Oblivion's horseplay). You can attack while mounted as well, which doubles the horseback awesome factor. The combat is decent, but as I said can get easy quick for an experienced grinder and traveling salesman. You can amass cash and upgrade your gear to the point that youre laughing a good deal of enemies off within a few levels of being a runt.

And it's a decent looking game as well, at least if you have realistic expectations for that period in PC game history. I cant vouch for the console version, I played the PC only so I can only vouch for that version when I say I had no real technical issues, other than an occasional crash maybe.

I like the game quite a bit, and agree it's gotten a bad rap. It's got some warts, but for the now-budget price of what is a very huge game, you cant go wrong.

Maylander February 12th, 2013 09:37

My impression thread is still around here somewhere. Fairly certain I placed it somewhere between Gothic 3 and Oblivion back then, which means it's a pretty good game. Not sure how well it's aged though, as I haven't replayed it in quite some time.

rune_74 February 12th, 2013 15:24

The original two worlds was not as good as gothic 3 or oblivion. Hell gothic 3 wasn't that good until a ton of patches.

Dajjer February 13th, 2013 03:52

4 out of 5 is fair. I thought even though it was an open world game, there wasn't much in the open world. And some of the backwoods had absolutely nothing in them. NOTHING. Still, I liked the game a lot (even more than TW2), and will be looking forward to any sequel.

One of the great things the game had was a one hit giant. Just one hit and you were dead. For me it was just as surprising as the deadly skeletons in Gothic 2.

crpgnut February 13th, 2013 04:30

I enjoyed both Two Worlds games and although game one didn't age well, it's still fun to play at the lower levels. It gets easy too fast, but the early parts are somewhat challenging. I thought Two Worlds 2 did a better job everywhere. It's not equal to Bethesda's work, at least to me, but it easily takes second place in the open world segment. It'd be nice if the next TW game is actually as big as they're always bragging it'll be. There was some very good stuff in the game.

DArtagnan February 13th, 2013 10:58

Game was impressive for a relatively small team and their first open world project. But it was hollow and extremely repetitive.

4 out of 5 is very generous. I'd give it 2.5 - personally.

Pessimeister February 13th, 2013 12:06

As I posted when I first played the game, (in the game comments thread) I don't think many people fully comprehend the peculiarly entertaining brand of cavalier and chivalric humour one can find in this game. It certainly made my experience with it quite amusing.
Ultimately like most open world games (save New Vegas!) it is quite hollow story wise yet I found the exploration oddly satisfying. The card based magic system was also unique and reasonably interesting to experiment with.

This thread reminds me that I've yet to pick up the expansion to the second game…should be getting quite cheap by now.

joxer February 13th, 2013 13:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDR13 (Post 1061183977)
I was originally scared off by all the negative comments about it from people here, and I never got around to really giving it a try.

Feel free to ignore my negative comments on Two Worlds 2 as it's just one actually - the game contains annoying endless mobrespawns. Dunno if it's the same in the first game, but it's highly possible.

The only way I'd buy those games is a mod that completely stops respawns. However, I've found a completely different mod - the one that respawns mobs even more frequent than originally. And still can't believe ppl want something like that.

Nameless one February 13th, 2013 13:44

I agree with Darth here but I do appreciate what they where trying to do,despite lack of experience they didn't try to make clone of any game.While Two worlds 2 had it's flaws it's definitively big improvement over original.I do hope they make 2W3 because if they make keep up this rate of improvements they might have viable competitor to Skyrim.

@JDR you can afford to skip it but second one is worth checking out you haven't already.

Ragnaris February 14th, 2013 19:54

My first attempt at the game was fairly short. A second chance really opened me up to it. Learning the card-spell system was interesting, and in time (provided it was your primary investment), you would become insanely strong as a mage character. I found a few one hit creatures along the way that often impeded progress which forced me find a way around. As Dajjer mentioned, one particular woodland area really had nothing interesting to provide for the player. It looked like it was meant to serve a purpose, but I can really only recall one quest that asked you to travel out that way.

And the main quest, while uninspiring, really gave way to exploration. Sadly you weren't rewarded much unless you became aware of the permanent effect herbs needed for certain potions. Loot wasn't hand placed (save for a few, I believe), but whatever you found in chest would almost always be put to use later.

I, too, have yet to pick up a copy of the second game. I heard of the numerous improvements over the original.

Fluent February 16th, 2013 19:13

My dad loved Two Worlds. I thought it was just okay. It's one of the few games I've played recently that I didn't rate above an 8.5/10. I actually rated it a 6.5 and thought that was being generous.

The game isn't bad really, but it's not great either. I remember having some trouble figuring out what to do on quests. This is one game that could benefit from quest markers or at the very least, better direction when given a quest.

The combat was pretty simple. Attack a few times, press the button that does a hop away from the enemy to avoid their attack, go back to attacking, etc. Rinse and repeat.

The exploration was pretty decent and the loot was good too. Best aspects of the game really. I dunno. It had some good things going for it. It's one of those games I will probably replay in the future and appreciate more on a second play-through.

ToddMcF2002 February 16th, 2013 21:54

It was fun for around 10 hours or so but at that point I was essentially god like. Too many areas without purpose and I couldn't be bothered with the plot such as it was. It could have been good with a bit of effort…


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:41.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch