Two Worlds II - Content Clarified @ Joystiq, Eurogamer

TW had a far more interesting world than Oblivion which was basicly one big forrest + Oblivion itself (which was extremely bland). In games like this exploring is probably the most important thing to keep it interesting and TW and Morrowind succeeded in that in a much, much better way.
 
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
673
That's an excellent point about Morrowind. It was a well designed landscape with enough variation that I wanted to see over the next hill.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
3,593
Location
Boston MA
ToddMcF2002 said:
That's an excellent point about Morrowind. It was a well designed landscape with enough variation that I wanted to see over the next hill.
Click to expand...


The only thing I didn't like about Morrowind's landscape was the color pallette. It only featured brown, brown, and brown. ;)
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,417
Location
Florida, US
I´m going with brown, grey, brown, grey on this one.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
2,437
Location
Prague
Dhruin said:
I know this is an unpopular view but I think Oblivion beat the hell out of it. I just don't get the love for TW. I wish them every luck but ffs, stop talking about new parallax mapping and concentrate on better content, like decent writing.
Click to expand...

Agreed. To be completely honest, I didn't get very far in either game, and consider both to be pretty bad, but where Oblivion is just bad, Two Worlds is atrocious.

There are little things that Two Worlds does well, and I think I get how it draws some people who felt disappointed at very specific points Oblivion didn't do well (such as crafting an interesting world)...

I mean, I could get past the horrible dialogue and hilariously bad animations, because they were funny. When the PC said "I do not have sufficient time" in that faux-dramatic tone I just LOL'd and decided I'd consider this good camp fun from there on out...

But when I first got on a horse, I freaked out and Ctrl+Alt+Del'd out, figuring something must be about to explode in my computer due to Sheer Horrifyingly Terrible Design (SHTD syndrome).

Ah well. At least the sequel will have parallax occlusion mapping. Hurray.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
1,558
1.5 version which I played I had no problem with the horse. The only thing I remember noticing was that it refused to run towards walls or big rocks but thats just realistic. I dont expect horse to run max speed at wall just because the rider tells it so. It will turn or stop for sure to avoid a fatal accident.

Later they did som tweaks to the horse to make all the complainers happy (there were som) but I dont remember what.

I do wish they would concentrate on the content more than the graphics. It seems like the devs are on som eyecandy trip or somthing. They simply cant have enough of it.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
3,160
Location
Europa Universalis
It was good for what it was, people expecting deep dialogue and interesting characters has only themselves to blame. I mean its just not that kind of game, its more like a free roaming Diablo and if you expected that it, and appreciate those kind of games, it was fun for a few days. I liked how you could craft the same weapon types together to create a more powerful weapon, it made the looting (one of the main points in games like this) more rewarding.

The first version of the game was horrible, but the devs really fixed a lot with that 1GB+ patch..
 
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
673
zakhal said:
1.5 version which I played I had no problem with the horse. [...]
Click to expand...
It was a lot worse in 1.0 I guess that's why people were disappointed.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2008
Messages
1,718
Location
Dear Green Place
Kostaz said:
It was a lot worse in 1.0 I guess that's why people were disappointed.
Click to expand...

Yes it got a lot of bad rep because they released it in a horrible shape, horse riding included. Many people have based their opinion about the game of that first version (especially those people who prefter to, ehm, download their games for free ;) )

I'm really looking forward to TW II, i hope to see at least some dungeons this time around, they didnt seem very finished in TW.
 
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
673
I've read that the XboX version was buggy as hell.
Performance-wise the game was quite good even @ 1.0 but there was absolutely no balance.A hell lot of things were fixed in the patches,If I recall 1.5 even changed all the faces in the game,and doubled the inventory space.

I might reinstall it after I finish my rerun through Vampire :D
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2008
Messages
1,718
Location
Dear Green Place
zakhal said:
1.5 version which I played I had no problem with the horse.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about the latest version. I still thought it handled like arse. If this is improved handling, I shudder to think what it must've been like originally.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
1,558
bemushroomed said:
It was good for what it was, people expecting deep dialogue and interesting characters has only themselves to blame.
Click to expand...

Sure - it's our fault they can't write for shit. I interviewed Miroslaw Dymek and Jörg Schindler - would you like me to point out where they promised deep roleplaying systems with strong dialogue and choices and consequences? Sure, I didn't really think they'd pull it off but there was little reason to think it was Diablo. You might have come along later with the knowledge of reviews and/or other comments but Diablo isn't what they communicated during the development.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
11,842
Location
Sydney, Australia
Dhruin said:
Sure - it's our fault they can't write for shit. I interviewed Miroslaw Dymek and Jörg Schindler - would you like me to point out where they promised deep roleplaying systems with strong dialogue and choices and consequences? Sure, I didn't really think they'd pull it off but there was little reason to think it was Diablo. You might have come along later with the knowledge of reviews and/or other comments but Diablo isn't what they communicated during the development.
Click to expand...

Heh miss coffee today or something? I think this is one of the harshest things you have said about any game. You definately did not play two worlds for deep and meaningful dialogue....to be fair though it was a decent diablo style game...and had some neat areas. Really looked like they were trying for an oblivion but missed the mark. The good thing about oblivion is that it came with a good modding tool and if you go and try and play the game now you spend hours just deciding what you want to add:) Really gives the game legs. Two worlds unfortunately had nothing of the sort.
 
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Messages
5,749
rune_74 said:
Heh miss coffee today or something? I think this is one of the harshest things you have said about any game. You definately did not play two worlds for deep and meaningful dialogue....to be fair though it was a decent diablo style game...and had some neat areas. Really looked like they were trying for an oblivion but missed the mark. The good thing about oblivion is that it came with a good modding tool and if you go and try and play the game now you spend hours just deciding what you want to add:) Really gives the game legs. Two worlds unfortunately had nothing of the sort.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but the devs made it very clear that Two Worlds was to be a 'Oblivion Killer' and take the open world 3D RPG to a whole new level.

I liked TW quite a bit, more than it deserved as I say, but there is little doubt thta the devs set it up for failure through expectations.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,953
Now that you mention I remember that my bad....heh the opening scenes turned me off the game the first time I tried it...came back a year later and played for a month or so....got its fair share of play...more then it deserved like you said.
 
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Messages
5,749
I don't care what the devs promised, it was easy to simply look at their track record and be skeptical, which is exactly why I didn't buy the hype before TW was released.

Reality Pump Studios had developed all of Seven games prior to Two Worlds, and Six of those were futuristic real-time strategy games. The other was an obscure RTS\RPG hybrid called Knightshift 2.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,417
Location
Florida, US
Another coffee never hurts. ;)

Sure, I didn't believe Reality Pump could pull it all off but someone saying a gamer has "only got themselves to blame" rewrites the facts just to protect a shitty game.

I couldn't even enjoy it as a Diablo clone. I didn't find the interesting locations everyone talks about and the combat was hideous. It looked nice enough and the skill system seemed interesting until I actually tried to build an interesting character -stealth seemed to suck, archery sucked, only a couple of spells seemed worth it (which is probably good since the interface limits easy spell access as I recall).

I'm sure I just don't get it - which is fine - that happens...but I'm convinced some people pretend to like it just so they can say it's better than Oblivion. Which it isn't.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
11,842
Location
Sydney, Australia
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom