Two Worlds - Interview @ IGN

"A better Gothic 3. A worse Oblivion."

DOES NOT COMPUTE for those who think Gothic 3 is better than Oblivion. But thanks for sharing your opinion, I'll wait for the demo :) Shame about combat, it seems it's very hard to do it right.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
589
I have to agree with Elwro - the things I'm looking for in an RPG is simply not present at all in Oblivion, while present in an abundance in Gothic 3. To me, Gothic 3, patched up, is top ten material - Oblivion wouldn't make my top 50.

So, basically, if Two Worlds is closer to G3 than it is to Oblivion, I will probably like it. If it's closer to Oblivion, I will most likely only play through it once and then never pick it up again(like I did with Oblivion, Gothic 3 I've completed half a dozen times already).
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,578
Location
Bergen
Grrrrrr.....................I've just fixed it AGAIN!! I've also tested it and it works for me!! If it happens again, I'll have to log it as a bug in our editor!!
The editor only updates a newsbit if it notices at least one change in the actual newsbit. Maybe a different link doesn´t count as a change in this context. To be sure insert and delete a space somewhere in the news body. Same for modifications of the formalities above the newsbit.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
7,830
Thanks Gorath, that's likely what happened, I just changed the link target the first time. This time, I deleted the original link and then added a new one!!
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
12,805
Location
Australia
I don't ever use it, as it takes exploration opportunities away in most cases, and as you say - it is generally crap.

I dunno... I thought it was handled rather well in Sacred. Had a few neat features like making you tougher, charging through enemies and knocking them down was fun, out-running those annoying "ever-spawn" mobs, making you way faster in combat than on foot allowing for some different tactics especially for spellcasters, etc.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
850
Location
CA, USA
Thanks for the insight Rendelius. You've just confused me a lot! Lol
Half of what you said I like, and the other half I hate. does that mean I will rate this game a 50%?
So what do you think of the art and design, Rendel? Are the characters cool looking - nice armor and weapons to outfit with? Is the scenery believable? The architecture imaginative? (other than not having a second floor).

You mentioned the engine isn't "pretty." What exactly do you mean by that?

Art and design is nice. Very moody. Have a look at the screenshots.

The characters look good, but faces are rather simple. One thing that is extremely annoying is that lip movement and audio is completely out of sync (and I mean by one or two seconds).

What I mean by "the engine isn't pretty" is that the view distance for grass, for example, is very low. And the trees lack variety. And the engine doesn't allow AA and HDR at the same time. Sometimes, things look a little bit blocky. It's hard to explain, really.

And about my statement: Better than Gothic 3, worse than Oblivion. That's of course my personal taste, and my Oblivion is heavily modded :). I just like the pace of Oblivion, the artwork, the mood, the freedom. It's still my favorite RPG out there. And being better than Gothic 3: well, Gothic 3 is a bug infested nightmare with a unlovely engine :). If Gothic 3 receives a major update, things might change for me, but I stopped playing it app. 5 hours into the game.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
96
"A better Gothic 3. A worse Oblivion."

DOES NOT COMPUTE for those who think Gothic 3 is better than Oblivion. But thanks for sharing your opinion, I'll wait for the demo :) Shame about combat, it seems it's very hard to do it right.

There won't be a demo.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
96
Thank you for your ingame reports. If it wont be too much for ask, keep them coming:) .
 
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
211
I dunno... I thought it was handled rather well in Sacred.
That is probably the best implementation ... I just didn't use it much at all. (I'm now officially banned from complaining about the time it takes to traverse areas in Sacred :D )
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,912
I started out using horses a lot in Sacred, but after I reached a certain point I needed the special abilities that I just couldn't use while mounted(higher difficulties especially). I still don't think it adds a whole lot to the game - I doubt many gamers would be devestated if the horses weren't there. Horses, especially the combat part, takes a lot of work to get right. There are quite a few balancing issues related to it, and from my point of view, the effort needed makes it a waste.

In general, there are more important things to worry about.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,578
Location
Bergen
And being better than Gothic 3: well, Gothic 3 is a bug infested nightmare with a unlovely engine :). If Gothic 3 receives a major update, things might change for me, but I stopped playing it app. 5 hours into the game.
Well, since patch 1.12 it´s no longer buggy, and 5 hours are not really enough time to judge an RPG of this scale. IMHO the game gets much better when you´re away from the coast and have access to more cities and NPCs. It offers way more freedom than the older Gothics - on cost of the great NPCs and the compact atmosphere which made Gothic and G2 great.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
7,830
Well, since patch 1.12 it´s no longer buggy, and 5 hours are not really enough time to judge an RPG of this scale. IMHO the game gets much better when you´re away from the coast and have access to more cities and NPCs. It offers way more freedom than the older Gothics - on cost of the great NPCs and the compact atmosphere which made Gothic and G2 great.

Dunno... Aren't there still a lot of things that are not working as intended? I kinda got that impression from when I read through the forums on RPGwatch...
 
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
758
Don´t work as planned in the design document or don´t work as implemented in the later stages of development? ;) I think most things work as designed - but maybe the design wasn´t always as good as it could have been.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
7,830
There is always a lot of cut content in games. In Gothic 3s case, the problem is that PB didn't remove the most obvious traces, such as the various skills in the skilltab that didn't make it into the game.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,578
Location
Bergen
I started out using horses a lot in Sacred, but after I reached a certain point I needed the special abilities that I just couldn't use while mounted(higher difficulties especially). I still don't think it adds a whole lot to the game - I doubt many gamers would be devestated if the horses weren't there. Horses, especially the combat part, takes a lot of work to get right. There are quite a few balancing issues related to it, and from my point of view, the effort needed makes it a waste.

In general, there are more important things to worry about.

I'm suppose I'm a bit slanted as I used a Battle Mage who gets to use pretty much all his heavy artillery from horseback and is more effective/faster with his sword chops to boot.

It's a tough call on whether it's worth it. Obviously, I have no idea what percentage Ascaron spent on honing the horse riding, but I can say that I found it an important element in setting Sacred apart from it's action-RPG competitors.

txa1265 said:
I'm now officially banned from complaining about the time it takes to traverse areas in Sacred

Hear! Hear! BANNED! :lol:
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
850
Location
CA, USA
I think horses are really an afterthought in most games. It seemed to be the buzz-phrase for a while - "travel by horseback." I remember quite a discussion months ago about whether or not Gothic III would include it. In reality, for it to look right, and play right, it has to be a top priority of the designers. Mount & Blade is the only game I've seen pull it off completely, and that's not what I would consider a full blown RPG. (I mean it is,... but.. well you know what I mean)

Overall, I'm getting the sense of the RPG gaming industry going through a regrouping phase right now (or, maybe it SHOULD be going through one.) I think that technology is at the point where games can actually meet or exceed the expectations of most people, but in order to do so, it's taking longer for them to develop. Whether this is feasible or not depends on the ole 'profit justifying expense' problem, but that's the bottom line. Too many games are promising more than what they can deliver in the current time allowed for completion. How many times have we played RPG's lately that seem, as Rendelius put it, "un-polished?" Either they have to spend more time on them, or not brag about features that aren't there so we are not disappointed.

Okay, I'll get off the soap box now... sorry
 
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
1,081
Location
Midwest, USA
Back
Top Bottom