Which Upcoming RPG Are You Most Anticipating?

human_male said:

How about Age of Decadence? Anyone anticipating that? Or know anything about it, like when it will be released?

Click to expand...

Not really "anticipating", but still interested in it. Same goes for Broken Hourglass.

I voted other.

Its definitely witcher 2 for me. I enjoyed first game a great deal. it was a breath of fresh air to the classic setting. Writing and storytelling set a new standard for rpgs. It was one of the best rpg experiences I've experienced…right there with baldurs gate 2, deus ex and gothics.

DX: human revolution is a good number two. I just have a really good feeling about this game. Everything I read about inspires me and the dev team seems to have taken the challenge seriously.
Gameplay is still a big mystery (for instance how this cover stuff works or whether their augs are fun to use etc), but storyline and setting show promise. Clearly it is going to be a new kind of dx game but what I've read seems to suggest that its very deus ex like. The art style they have chosen has been crticised by some but I like it. It reminds me of bladerunner..and I happen to like bladerunner a lot (top 10 scifi films ever made if you ask me).

Third place goes for the rest of the games on that list. I'm a huge gothic fan so I'm eager to see spellbound's take on beloved setting. It can go both ways.

Fallout new vegas is an obsidian game so there is no valid reason why any serious rpg game fan shouldn't be looking forward this.

Two worlds was a big letdown. I enjoyed exploring the vast gameworld and gameplay was fun enough, but there was no reason to go exploring. Most quests were quite hack'n' slash and horrible main storyline didn't help much either. It had something to do with the main character's sister and some big evil dude in massive armour, but thats all I can remember. The two worlds two tries once again to revamp the whole genre by promising to deliver "everything", so I'm waiting for reviews before making any decisions. I wish they had abandoned multiplayer entirely and focused solely on crafting the best sp experience.

I have become more exited about DX:HR recently, after that stellar trailer, so I voted that. Although as a RPG I still have more expectations for Witcher 2, despite some dubious news recently. I am strangely uninterested in FO:NV, although so much about it sounds really good. I think its the Vegas setting - I visited Las Vegas once and found it utterly uninteresting.
As for Age of Decadence, I have followed that project closely and have high hopes for it, but I am rather in a "patiently waiting for release" than an "anticipating" mood with regards to it.
And I am silently praying for a miracle and a stellar TES V....

bkrueger said:

I completely dropped the habit of anticipating games...

Click to expand...

I have to correct myself:

Now eagerly waiting for DraSa: Phileasson's Secret...

I'm not interested at all in the games listed in the poll. I'm most looking forward to Age of Decadence and Avadon. Elemental is high on my list, too, although it's not really an RPG, but its fantasy theme probably appeals to a number of people here, so I thought I'd mention it.

Elemental looks damn cool. Thanks for mentioning it, I for one, will definitely be on the lookout for that.

Hmm… Gothic 4 that anticipated. I'm a bit surprised after all the hassle.

The whole list of this pool is rather weird for me, the pool should be named what "RPG your anticipate to be the most boring?". To answer this it's quite a dilema, let see :

• Two World II : The I had been for me one of the most void and amateurish RPG I played those last years. Only the landscape was nice but that's far to be enough. On such base, poor fights, bad writing, very poor exploration design, I can't expect much.
• Gothic 4 : Common, Gothic 3 was a lot less good, and its addon even worse. The logic is the 4 will be a disaster. I don't remember so many series suddenly become better after a long drop down of quality.
• Fallout New Vegas : Well well, I'm worry to even try play Fallout 3 that tells how much I could expect from New Vegas, even if I'm wrong, the point is that my expectation is very negative.
• Deus Ex 3 : Same problem than Gothic series, the 2 was a failure it's difficult to expect a miracle that suddenly they catch the spirit of the 1 so many years later.

There's only one CRPG I'm anticipating, The Witcher 2.

I don't understand huge appreciation for The Witcher. I found it very uneven, tedious, and plain boring at times.

High point was the cut scenes at the end of chapter 1. Fantastic! Yet followed with a horrible boss battle. The rest of the story was OK, but got progressively squirrelly. And the end segment was a WTF moment.

Also, fantastic was the atmosphere, music, and general world design.

Low points: infinite monster spawning, limited inventory, super slow loading times, lots of back and forth, simplistic combat and character development/skill set. All of this is 80% of the time playing the game, sadly….

Some interesting choices and consequences help to fill in the middle ground.

The sex cards were mildy amusing in a very sophomoric fashion, though just a gimmick.

Technically, I experienced very few glitches and bugs with enhanced director's cut version.. So I rank very good there, but the terribly LONG load times drops it down notch to just good.

In summary, artistry - mostly great; gameplay - mediocre; technical - good.

Since I haven't played G3, Fallout 3, nor Two Worlds, that leaves DX:HR as the one from the list to anticipate most.

Don't worry about it. Heck, I know people who don't like ice cream.

Thrasher said:

I don't understand huge appreciation for The Witcher. I found it very uneven, tedious, and plain boring at times.

High point was the cut scenes at the end of chapter 1. Fantastic! Yet followed with a horrible boss battle. The rest of the story was OK, but got progressively squirrelly. And the end segment was a WTF moment.

Also, fantastic was the atmosphere, music, and general world design.

Low points: infinite monster spawning, limited inventory, super slow loading times, lots of back and forth, simplistic combat and character development/skill set. All of this is 80% of the time playing the game, sadly….

Some interesting choices and consequences help to fill in the middle ground.

The sex cards were mildy amusing in a very sophomoric fashion, though just a gimmick.

Technically, I experienced very few glitches and bugs with enhanced director's cut version.. So I rank very good there, but the terribly LONG load times drops it down notch to just good.

In summary, artistry - mostly great; gameplay - mediocre; technical - good.

Since I haven't played G3, Fallout 3, nor Two Worlds, that leaves DX:HR as the one from the list to anticipate most.

Click to expand...

My god, I thought I was the only person alive who didn't like The Witcher. It just bored me to tears. The quests were boring, I HATED the endless monster respawn and it crashes nearly constantly. I finally gave up after one crash too many. Not that I was enjoying it anyway.

I... I've never told anyone this before.

I've stated many times that I'm not a fan of The Witcher. I still manage to be objective though, and it's easy to see why so many enjoy it.

It's just not a game for me.

I changed my mind after E3. It's the Witcher 2 now. I wanted to play the first but I'm stuck on console; looking forward to seeing the Witcher 2 on consoles eventually.

I heard it is in development for xbox 360?

I see you are talking about the Witcher, well i personally don't like that game and here is why:

1. it fails at the most basic principle of all rpgs - character specialization. It doesn't have any, you play a witcher (witch by itself is really not the problem) but there is no possibilty to specialize him. You will need all the sword fighting techniques to win the game, you cannot just focus on one of them. At the end of the game you will always be more or less the same witcher. Even the most mediocre action rpgs beat witcher at that.

2. character development and the rules the game is based on are very shallow and on top absolutley nontransparent, it greatly subtracts from any serious planing or tactical decisions during the course of the game and your character growth.

3. combat is just about clicking at the right time with some magics (aka signs) and alchemy. Alchemy is the only thing that adds some kind of tactical depth to the first parts of the game, but later on it becomes very stereotypical.

Sure it has a decent story, some nice choices and consequences in dialogues, but all in all I was very disapointed after finishing the game. I was expecting a decent rpg, but i ended up with something that from my point of view doesn't even deserve to be allowed to put the term rpg on its box.

For me personally it has ruined the book saga, witch I used to love. Real shame that it didn't go in the steps of Betrayal at Krondor, which also was a fantasy book adaptation and that still today in my eyes beats the Witcher game in every single department.

I didn't mean to turn this into a Witcher bashing thread. I thought the game was OK, just not great. Maybe we should move this to the Witcher thread?

Kulgan said:

1. it fails at the most basic principle of all rpgs - character specialization. It doesn't have any, you play a witcher (witch by itself is really not the problem) but there is no possibilty to specialize him. You will need all the sword fighting techniques to win the game, you cannot just focus on one of them. At the end of the game you will always be more or less the same witcher. Even the most mediocre action rpgs beat witcher at that..

Click to expand...

Why would you focus one just one sword technique? The point is that switching between them on the fly is part of the strategy to combat in the game. And no, you will not always be more or less the same Witcher at the end of the game, because you don't get nearly enough talent points to get all the skills, magic, etc.
You also seem to assume that character specialization is that important to everyone. While I enjoy building a character, it's nowhere near as important as the story and atmosphere to me.

Kulgan said:

2. character development and the rules the game is based on are very shallow and on top absolutley nontransparent, it greatly subtracts from any serious planing or tactical decisions during the course of the game and your character growth.

Click to expand...

Have to disagree. Take magic for instance: you have 5 schools, all of which are *very* different from each other, and you only get enough points to max out 2 of them during any given playthrough. Your tactics can vary greatly depending on which signs you choose.

Anyways, The Witcher was never intended to be the pinnacle of character development, it was meant to be a story driven action-RPG, and it succeeded beautifully in that department.

Kulgan said:

3. combat is just about clicking at the right time with some magics (aka signs) and alchemy. Alchemy is the only thing that adds some kind of tactical depth to the first parts of the game, but later on it becomes very stereotypical.

Click to expand...

What difficulty level did you play on? I'm guessing 'Normal', right? CDProjekt made the mistake of making Normal too easy imo, The Witcher is really meant to be played on Hard. You have to use tactics to a much greater degree on Hard, and the sword timing icon, which was a terrible idea to begin with, is not present on that difficulty level.

Kulgan said:

Sure it has a decent story, some nice choices and consequences in dialogues, but all in all I was very disapointed after finishing the game. I was expecting a decent rpg, but i ended up with something that from my point of view doesn't even deserve to be allowed to put the term rpg on its box.

Click to expand...

Well to each his own, every great game has a harcore minority dissenter.

I still hold that alchemy is only critical in the first chapter or so before you can beef up you magic skills, even in hard difficulty. WITH exceptions being the required cat potions in dark caves/dungeons, and a few boss encounters. Your mileage may vary, depending on how you build your character. Mine was more focussed on mage skills, that made potions that help with close melee combat in 99% of encounters unnecessary.

Sure, it was very story driven. Some good twists, too. It's just that the story fell apart at the climax, for me at least (in particular, the motivations of the main antagonist). And what happened to Alvin? However, the little sub-plots and characters along the way were fun, except for the despicable community in the outskirts village.

JDR13 said:

…
What difficulty level did you play on? I'm guessing 'Normal', right? CDProjekt made the mistake of making Normal too easy imo, The Witcher is really meant to be played on Hard. You have to use tactics to a much greater degree on Hard, and the sword timing icon, which was a terrible idea to begin with, is not present on that difficulty level.
…

Click to expand...

Yes the timing icon was an ugly blund in the design of this game. Myself I don't think that hard is enough to solve the fight design problem. The point is even in hard it's easy to learn synch on sound for a blind (and boring) focus on timed hit chained. You won't win the most difficult fights with this technic but you'll did it for most fights. That's enough to make fights somehow boring.

The key is to go further and try explore differently the fights. Mix movements with sword and magic attacks, apply the best fight technic for the situation, don't hesitae switch the technic during a same fights, use potions at key points. That totally change the face of the fights and that's a key point to enjoy the whole.

Myself have this approach with fights was a key, but it's the writing, the humor and the management of player choices that made me enjoy so much this game. For example on writing and humor the whole Gothic series is just pale in comparison.

Another weak point of the design is the exploration, only few area are really fun to explore from a pure exploration point of view and the exploration of most area take its fun from story evolution and NPC. Also clearly there was some load behavior not working well but the special edition improved a lot this point.

JDR13 said:

Well to each his own, every great game has a harcore minority dissenter.

Click to expand...

It is far to be a perfect game but most best RPG have major weakness when compared to all other RPG available. It's also a matter of what is more important or less important for you, that's the main reason of preferences differences.

Thrasher said:

I still hold that alchemy is only critical in the first chapter or so before you can beef up you magic skills, even in hard difficulty. WITH exceptions being the required cat potions in dark caves/dungeons, and a few boss encounters. Your mileage may vary, depending on how you build your character. Mine was more focussed on mage skills, that made potions that help with close melee combat in 99% of encounters unnecessary.

Click to expand...

If you focus heavily on Mage skills then you can rely less on alchemy. Regardless, you can't slash your way through the game with just swordplay.

Thrasher said:

Sure, it was very story driven. Some good twists, too. It's just that the story fell apart at the climax, for me at least (in particular, the motivations of the main antagonist). And what happened to Alvin? However, the little sub-plots and characters along the way were fun, except for the despicable community in the outskirts village.

Click to expand...

Most would agree that The Witcher had one of the better crpg endings in recent memory. The fact that you're asking about what happened to Alvin leads me to believe that you might have missed or misinterpreted a few things.