Arcania - Interview @ Hooked Gamers

Anderson said:

I'm not getting the positive wibe. I think most people are like you, "troubled" by what they hear (or don't).

Click to expand...

From the stuff I see in various forums and such, it seems to me that a lot negativity comes simply from the fact that PB is not doing the game which I feel is a little unfair, especially considering PB completly dropped the ball with Gothic 3 IMHO.

But from my point of view really, I just don't see how Arcania could end up being more dissappointing that Gothic 3 was.

-Sergorn

Personally I'm negative because I don't like the design decision I've heard until now.
They reek of another generic fantasy action-rpg instead of a Gothic game.

Sergorn said:

From the stuff I see in various forums and such, it seems to me that a lot negativity comes simply from the fact that PB is not doing the game which I feel is a little unfair, especially considering PB completly dropped the ball with Gothic 3 IMHO.

But from my point of view really, I just don't see how Arcania could end up being more dissappointing that Gothic 3 was.

-Sergorn

Click to expand...

I don't agree. I haven't seen this great footage, so my impressions might be out of date but my concerns come from:

- Very different art style
- Non-continuous world and may not be able to return to old areas!
- Combat I've seen looked very hack'n'slashy, like Two Worlds or Divinity II
- Mini-maps and quest markers
- Lack of convincing information, such as empty "atmosphere" trailers

All of these are based on early videos, so I'm happy to acknowledge I may be wrong. I still stand by the comment that Gothic needs an open world and a "survival" feeling to be a real Gothic. Mini-maps and quest markers will undermine one of the basic gameplay pillars.

Dhruin said:

Mini-maps and quest markers will undermine one of the basic gameplay pillars.

Click to expand...

I've heard that you'll have the option to toggle them off.

Yes, you can. But I think the presence of these UI elements will fundamentally change how they design the game. Will the quest dialogue and logical map design allow me to find stuff on my own, or will the designers assume the presence of these helpers?

It's not impossible to support both - I just doubt it. I'm also not saying games with quest markers are bad: they're just not Gothic.

Note that I wasn't referring to RPG Watch when I mentionned people bashing the game solely because it isn't from PB - but it is an attitude fairly common at some other places, notably in Gothic forums when you have people constantly saying how Arcania is gonna suck ass and how Risen is the true Gothic 4 and so.

I was as dissapointed as any one by PB's losing the Gothic license but I'm trying to look at the bright side, rather than one potentially great Gothic IV from PB, we had a great Risen and a potentially good Gothic 4 - that's two games rather than one, so it's all for our benefit I think.

Dhruin said:

- Very different art style
- Non-continuous world and may not be able to return to old areas!
- Combat I've seen looked very hack'n'slashy, like Two Worlds or Divinity II
- Mini-maps and quest markers
- Lack of convincing information, such as empty "atmosphere" trailers

Click to expand...

I sorta disagree about the art style... again the early videos and screens felt different, but I do feel the latest feel Gothic-ish. Also there were obvious different in style between Gothic I/II and Gothic III and G3 still felt Gothic-ish to me so it's not that much of an issue if it feels a bit different.

Regarding the continuous world, from what the IGN preview says, it appears to me that the area that get closed off is just the "turorial island" and that the rest of the game is one big continuous world comprising of two Islands. That sounds ok to me.

I'll admit my skepticism about combat though - however it can't possible be worse that Gothic 3's clickfest IMO.

I'm not saying Arcania is gonna be a great game for sure, and I have my doubt about it being as good as Gothic I&II were in their time and with a new developper at the helm it is bound to be somewhat different anyway - but it looks like a good game, which I feel it the most important.

My hope is that it end up being better than Gothic 3 - if it is it'll be enough for me even if Arcania is not an instant classic.

-Sergorn

Dhruin said:

I'm also not saying games with quest markers are bad: they're just not Gothic.

Click to expand...

With a little bit of bitterness I'd almost say that quest markers have become sort of an "industry standard". Even the old school game of Drakensang had them.

Did Dragon Age have them, too ?

Alrik Fassbauer said:

With a little bit of bitterness I'd almost say that quest markers have become sort of an "industry standard". Even the old school game of Drakensang had them.

Did Dragon Age have them, too ?

Click to expand...

Yes, though you can turn them off completely.

I don't mind quest markers really - I do believe these sort of thing should always come with an option to turn them of though, this way people can play the way they prefer.

-Sergorn

WorstUsernameEver said:

I remember reading about an area system similar to the Witcher (can't return to old areas after you've completed a chapter), a character development system that lost all its flavor (there are a lot of ways to make it more accessible without killing its Gothic soul. Then again.. I still have a slim hope that it will turn out a fine game.

Click to expand...

The best is probably to see it as a separate game, not so much as Gothic 4. Otherwise its gonna be like FO3 all over again. Just like for that series I think there are too many, sometimes very subtle expectations that simply won't be fulfilled by a different developer under publisher pressure to "make it accesible".

The whole locking previous areas thing is what lowered my expectations. Roaming around the world is essential to the Gothic series.

GhanBuriGhan said:

The best is probably to see it as a separate game, not so much as Gothic 4. Otherwise its gonna be like FO3 all over again. Just like for that series I think there are too many, sometimes very subtle expectations that simply won't be fulfilled by a different developer under publisher pressure to "make it accesible".

Click to expand...

Maybe you're right, but the only thing I'm looking forward is its visuals.. everything else doesn't grab me, Gothic or not.

Dhruin said:

Yes, you can. But I think the presence of these UI elements will fundamentally change how they design the game. Will the quest dialogue and logical map design allow me to find stuff on my own, or will the designers assume the presence of these helpers?

Click to expand...

I see. Yeah, you're right, good point.

I will probably play with quest marker and mini-map on, since that is how the game is designed. I might toggle them off for a while, just to see what it's like, but I won't expect to have the same experience exploring as I would in Gothic/Risen.

I like the mini-map, actually. I kind of missed that, playing Risen recently.

GhanBuriGhan said:

The best is probably to see it as a separate game, not so much as Gothic 4. Otherwise its gonna be like FO3 all over again. Just like for that series I think there are too many, sometimes very subtle expectations that simply won't be fulfilled by a different developer under publisher pressure to "make it accesible".

Click to expand...

Yeah the thing is that all people have different feeling or expectation as to what a license should be, which is why when you change the formula a bit you always get controversial opinions from people.

I mean you just need to look at Gothic 3 - it took a very different design philosophy from Gothic 1&2 and ended up very controversial amongst fans ranging from people thinking it was a great Gothic but flawed because of its bugs and balancing issues, to people who thought it was a terrible Gothic which ruined everything that was good about the first two episodes.

And that's obviously the reason why PB decided to play it safe with Risen and basically create a "Gothic II redux" (and even that didn't satisfied everyone but I know some hardcore Gothic fans who really disliked Risen because they felt it was just a poor rehash).

The Spellbound guys did say they were going back to the Gothic II formula as well… but they're on a different shoes than PB as well because the thing is that Gothic 3 also brought a lot of new people to the series (especially in Europe) so they might not be willing to completly drop the G3 design choices.

I don't think it's gonna be a bad game by any means - they have too much at stake to release something shitty, but the way people feel about this will probably depends as to what each feel a Gothic should be.

But as they say wait&see…

-Sergorn

A good compromise IMHO would be giving you the minimap only after you've acquired a map of the area. Maybe you could have the mini map for the starting area (hometown and all that stuff.. if you lived there all your life you should know everything about it more or less) and have to acquire it for new areas? In Risen it was a bit of a hassle having to take out your map every 5 steps (especially for someone like me who has problem even remembering how to return to the starting area after I've reached the first farm ), but having to acquire it and gaining a new, more detailed, map later on, added a lot to the game for me.

I like the minimap. I don't like the quest markers ... I think I'll turn those off.

I'm curious, which Gothic 3 ending do you think they're going to acknowledge as being storyline canon?

I'm not too concerned with minimaps, markers, or clickfests (as long as combat is balanced).

To me, Gothic was always about a living breathing world - with believable characters in a believable setting. Beyond that, it was about meaningful exploration - that gave you rewards for your curiousity - if you were careful.

If they manage to preserve those things, then I'll be more than happy.

My biggest beef, so far, is what we originally heard about areas being closed off AFTER having been there. That's a HUGE no-no, from where I'm sitting - in a Gothic game. It goes directly against the living world aspect, because it needs to feel open and you need to feel free to explore, at will.

But if it turns out that was false info, I can start being cautiously optimistic.

I could even live with closed off areas (after all chapters in Gothic II closed off areas for a considerable part of the game as well), as long as it makes sense, story wise, and the individual areas are large enough.

GhanBuriGhan said:

I could even live with closed off areas (after all chapters in Gothic II closed off areas for a considerable part of the game as well), as long as it makes sense, story wise, and the individual areas are large enough.

Click to expand...

I'm probably not going to die because of it, but I hated it in Gothic 2 as well.

I actually prefer Gothic over Gothic 2

Then again, I was always more about freedom and exploration, than semi-linear storylines. Gothic 2 WAS great, though.

If Gothic 3 had actually worked as intented, with balanced classes/combat - and a somewhat stronger story presentation, it would have been my favorite Gothic by far.