Gothic 3 - Review @ Gamespot

Gamespot , in a departure from most NA reviews, has posted a fairly 'middle of the road' review of Gothic 3. Handing G3 a 7.6 ('good') rating, reviewer Andrew Park states:

Gothic 3 is also a great-looking game that has detailed character models and interior environments and beautiful outdoor vistas, especially if you have a higher-end computer system and can get away with turning the game's graphics settings up. The game's good-looking graphics go a long way toward making the game seem like an epic adventure in a huge, sprawling world, even if the flat dialogue and issues with characters getting stuck on things sometimes detracts from it.

All things considered, it's unfortunate that the game shipped with its technical problems, and that it shipped in the same year as The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, since it's almost impossible to avoid comparing the two. Gothic 3 doesn't have Oblivion's huge breadth and might not look quite as impressive just because of that difference in scale, but it does offer a fairly well put-together story in its set of linked quests, as well as plenty of freedom to roam. To enjoy the game, you'll need a high-end computer, time and patience, and tolerance for a brisk challenge—but if you have all these things, Gothic 3 could be what you're looking for.

More information.

Ahh, good old level-headed Gamespot. I knew I could trust you. They gave similar scores to the other Gothics, if I recall correctly. It's a pretty reasonable score, with room for tilt values for those who are a big fan of Gothic's strong points (atmosphere, gameplay, story).

Finally, an intelligent score!! Not that I'm in any way biased!!!!

Originally Posted by Corwin
Not that I'm in any way biased!!!!

Nor am I . Pretty good review.

Could anyone explain to me that part about Oblivion's huge breadth? Because I own the game since day 1 and I haven't noticed.

It looks nice on a wide screen!!

Oh I see. Lol. Thanks for letting me know!

Corwin simply knows how to be clear and sound

The review was way too easy on the game's enormous performance problems and crappy combat with animals like wolves and boars. I still agree with the overall score though.

Originally Posted by Corwin
It looks nice on a wide screen!!

I don't think that is what he is talking about … and therefore I disagree with him there. I would agree if the word were 'scope' instead of 'breadth', but I think a great thing about the Gothic games is that they are at once 'world scope' and very intimate. Having the cook on Venguard bring that into context was quite hilarious …

Originally Posted by doctor_kaz
The review was way too easy on the game's enormous performance problems

It made it clear - you need a very powerful system, and even then it tasks any available computer to the limit. That is *exactly* what I saw as well.

I think the score is correct, but the review is superficial. I doubt he really played the game for any substantial length of time because if he did, he would have commeneted on even more things.

The biggest problems with many Gothic 3 reviews I see is that they penalize the game for trivial things, but never really get around to explaining its true shortcomings. Vault_Dweller's review at RPGCODEX is the absolute, most detailed and accurate review of G3, but he goes too easy on it IMHO.

Anyone that goes the distance with Gothic 3 will begin to see where it falls short:

1. Lack of quest variety
2. No puzzles or dungeons
3. Experience given too generously (there is almost no need to specialize because you can attain an ungodly character level and master many skills)
4. Rewards from chests not varied enough
5. Melee combat with humans needs major work.
6. A general sense of "breadth versus depth" when it comes to storytelling, details, and character interaction.

If the combat versus humans was as varied and interesting as it was in Gothic 1/2, then the fact that most of the quests are "kill this" would matter less because at least it would be FUN. As I said in previous postings, ranged combat IS better though.

When the next patch comes out I am gong to start over with a brand new game. Hopefully then I can have a better experience.

I didn't read the review but the score is infatuating me

Some good points elkstone.

Wow, 2 reasionable scorces (considering the circumstances) based off the US release in 1 day?
Omg!<faints>

Originally Posted by Danicek
Some good points elkstone.

Some good points Dani !

Originally Posted by Lethal Weapon
Could anyone explain to me that part about Oblivion's huge breadth? Because I own the game since day 1 and I haven't noticed.

Simple. You can play any character you want, how you want.

You don't have to follow the story at all. You don't have to play any one type of character - if you want to play a heavy armoured, mace weilding spell caster you can do. You can go where you want, when you want.

It's a virtual world for you to spend time in as you want. But don't expect it to give it all on a plate to you, you have to use your imagination and put some work into it.

Originally Posted by kalniel
Simple. You can play any character you want, how you want.

You don't have to follow the story at all. You don't have to play any one type of character - if you want to play a heavy armoured, mace weilding spell caster you can do. You can go where you want, when you want.

It's a virtual world for you to spend time in as you want. But don't expect it to give it all on a plate to you, you have to use your imagination and put some work into it.

Oh, come on. You can play any character you want as long as it's essentially a fighter/mage/assassin combination. You can't play a diplomatic character in any way, unless you count the silly mini-game that has little use and even less consequence.

I particularly hate the "virtual world" tag, because that says to me the world is complete and reactive, which Oblivion most certainly isn't. It's a huge combat sandbox…a massive map dotted with monsters and dungeons to fight your way across any way you like — as long as you like fighting essentially the same stuff in similar dungeons.

That doesn't make it "bad" (or even that other RPGs do certain things better) but it isn't half the virtual world that, say, Gothic is. There's no cohesion, no reaction.

And the so called world of 'Oblivion' (through the gates) was terrible. Do you know of anyone who enjoyed that dull, boring and totally repetative part of the game?!! No wonder they kept it a secret till after the game was released!!

I enjoyed speedrunning it.