RPGWatch Forums
Page 1 of 2 1 2

RPGWatch Forums (https://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)
-   News Comments (https://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Arcania: FoS - Released on Steam (https://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15189)

Dhruin October 25th, 2011 13:46

Arcania: FoS - Released on Steam
Alistair points out ArcaniA: Fall of Setarrif has been released on Steam (and presumably any other digital vendors):

Fall of Setarrif, an all-new standalone expansion for Arcania: Gothic 4, is now available on Steam!

A new threat casts its shadow over the Southern Isles. A mysterious demon, consumed by hatred, terrifies the population and pools his force against the coastal city of Setarrif. Experience a new, compelling part of the chronicles of Argaan. Face the last challenge - determine your destiny!
Actually, looking at GamersGate, they also have a Gold Edition for $29.99.
More information.

axellslade October 25th, 2011 13:46

Steam also has the Gold Edition for $29.99:

I bought it yesterday and finished the game in like, 5 hours, exploring every nook and cranny. Pretty dissapinting.
Fail of Setarrif indeed.

Couchpotato October 25th, 2011 14:51

Well I knew what to except. Its basically the cut ending that was supposed to be dlc but was released as a expansion.

DArtagnan October 25th, 2011 14:52

It's as if they wanted to be 100% sure they killed this new franchise :)

Roi Danton October 25th, 2011 18:27

I didn't really expect to see that expansion being released ever.

Not that I'm going to play it since I haven't finished Arcania because I got bored after a few hours.

TheMadGamer October 25th, 2011 18:39

Early this year I played Arcania. It was pretty ho-hum - not the worst RPG in the world. But all these months later since I played the game I find it a highly forgettable experience as I can hardly remember anything about it. Doubtful I will buy this expansion.

khaight October 25th, 2011 18:43

ArcaniA is a classic example of what happens when a quality piece of intellectual property falls into the hands of people who don't understand it and can't live up to it. I've got a pile of good games waiting to be played; why would I want to waste my time paying attention to this?

Gokyabgu October 25th, 2011 23:45

I enjoyed Arcania. In order to have fun from this game first you have to forget that it's a Gothic game. I'm going to buy the expansion since I want to see the real ending of the Arcania.

JuliusMagnus October 26th, 2011 01:06

Well I won't buy it at THAT price. I guess I'll wait till this has a 75% off price.

bloodlover October 26th, 2011 01:13

Arcania is so bad I wouldn't get it even for free. It's horrible as a standalone RPG even without comparing it to any Gothic game.

This reminded me of this moron -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCwABcpML48

Khalus October 26th, 2011 01:29


Originally Posted by bloodlover (Post 1061101189)
This reminded me of this moron -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCwABcpML48

So this is why all the great developers have reverted to making severely dumbed down console games.

{Reminds me of this time when I was visiting my friends' game store, back when Gran Turismo II had recently released. Anyway, some yank came storming back in demanding he wanted a refund because the game sucked and was too hard. Then went to the shelf and picked up Dukes of Hazzard and was like, now this is a racing game, bought it and left. Never saw him again…

rich ruffo October 26th, 2011 05:47

2 things you can say good about this game . Runs well and looks good but other than that Khalus said it right . Alot of rpg devs or publishers ,i cant figure out which one, think its a great idea to make a follow up from a great franchise accessable for consoles and ultimatly fail misrabaly . Instead of making a CLASSIC that someone would still buy 5 years from now. And what with this 14.99 pice on 5 hour DLC ? First the Missing Link now this . 2 years ago this would have been 6.99 . The Triple A video game buisness is a complete joke

Sergorn October 26th, 2011 10:48

I enjoyed Arcania very much (I dare say it: more than Gothic 3 indeed), that being said I don't think I would recommend Fall of Setariff even to fans of the game.

I think Couchpotato said it best: you can basically summs up Fall of Setariff as "Hey guys here are the few final hours of the game we couldn't put due to a rushed development, have fun!". This would have been okay as part of the actual game I guess, even perhaps as a small cheap DLC that had been released around the time of the game.

As a stand alone add-on? That's a JOKE. I finished it with 3hours 21 minutes on my last save. Yes it's -that- short. I'm not sure how I could recommend this to anyone. Granted it ties some few loose ends, but then they obviously had not budget whatosever to make proper intro/ending videos. I guess I could recommend for someone who is genuinely enjoying Arcania for the first time and want to play it right after but otherwise… don't bother. And wait till it gets available for a handful of bucks - 15$ is way too expansive for this.

You know for all the criticism Arcania got for being dumbed down, ruined Gothic and what else, I've always felt it mains issue as a game per se was that it felt like a rush job as if someone said halfway through development "Okay guys, time to wrap it up" which left no choice to Spellbound that to rush the rest of the game.

I mean the first "half" of the island is actually very good to me. Sure it feels more like an action/adventure kind of game and is quite different from the Gothic 1/2 or Gothic 3 formula… but in spite of being more linear, you still have rather big areas with quite a lot to explores, cities, NPCs, quests and so on… then once you get to the Monastery, which feels like halfway through the game, all hell break loose: it basically turns into a glorified hack'n slash and the rest of the game (which amounds to a few hours rather than the "second half" of it) basically turns into one long corridor with very few NPCs, very little quests, and the only big city of the east coast conveniently cut off.

FoS is unfortunately reminiscent of this later part of the game, except it doesn't have much of a plot beyond "go get that daemon" and feels just as rushed as well. This is a shame because to be the better parts of Arcania proves Spellbound can do better.

I think that's a shame really, and FoS is hardly a worthy swan song for Arcania. I doubt Nordic Games will make an Arcania 2 (but then who knows, Arcania DID sell well and I never expected Fall of Setariff to comes out), which is kind of a shame because I felt if Spellbound could improve upon it they could do great stuff (and perhaps Nordic Games wouldn't be as dumb as Jowood ? That wouldn't be hard :P)

Oh well, I guess I'll be looking forward to Spellbound's steampunk action fantasy RPG Ravensdale instead, it might be good!


rikus October 26th, 2011 14:55

i guess us few are the ones who enjoyed arcania.. even though it doesn't live up to gothic standards(btw 3 wasn't that good, and 2 was ok compared to 1), it's still one of the better RPG's out there, better than first templar, dungeon siege3, or the cumbersome witcher.

skavenhorde October 26th, 2011 15:12

Did you just play Gothic 2 or Gothic 2 NOTR. There is a HUGE difference between the two. If you haven't, I'd encourage you to play it immediately. Don't pass go, don't collect two hundred dollars, just buy it, play and enjoy the RPG Awesomness :D

Personally, Gothic 2 NOTR is ranked up there with Arcanum, Bloodlines, Planescape: Torment, the Ultimas, the Realms of Arkania series and most of the goldbox games as the best RPGs I've played.

stealth October 26th, 2011 15:41


Originally Posted by bloodlover (Post 1061101189)
This reminded me of this moron -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCwABcpML48

Incredible. This might be the single best video ever released on youtube.

TheMadGamer October 26th, 2011 20:19

The problem with Arcania is that the game is marketed as a 'gothic game' but aside from some lore and a few characters brought over from prior games, Arcania does not play at all like a Gothic game.

The best argument I've seen to counter what I have just written is that Arcania as a game in and of itself is still a 'fun' game. This may be true, but consider this…

In year 1 you buy a nice car, we'll call it a BMW. A few years later, since you liked your BMW you decide to buy another one. You enjoy this BMW as it had everything your last BMW had plus a few more nice features at right around the same price.

The next time you go to buy a car, you decide you're getting a BMW again. You buy the car and pay a similar price. But when you get this car, it has all the appearance, functionality, and performance of a Yugo - but it does have the BMW emblem on the hood.

You complain to the car dealer that hey, this BMW is really a Yugo. The car dealer says, hey man, Yugos are great cars…

And Yugos may be decent reliable cars. But Yugos are not BMWs, which is what you were led to believe when you made the purchase.

Now my analogy is a bit silly but it gets the point across. They put 'gothic' on the box but it is no gothic. It's arguable that Arcania is a decent game, but the cold reality is that Arcania does not have any resemblence, albeit superficial, to the Gothic franchise.

Sergorn October 26th, 2011 20:46


Originally Posted by TheMadGamer (Post 1061101428)
The problem with Arcania is that the game is marketed as a 'gothic game' but aside from some lore and a few characters brought over from prior games, Arcania does not play at all like a Gothic game.

The best argument I've seen to counter what I have just written is that Arcania as a game in and of itself is still a 'fun' game. This may be true, but consider this…

Well, personally I always try to judge the game as a game first, and as part of a series/IP second. I do feel Arcania had some Gothic-ish aspect in its tone and its in gameplay too, though I'll agree it was mostly different. But one could also argue that bringing back the same lore and characters is enough to make it part of the same IP.

I actually feel that the original plan which was to call the game "Arcania - A Gothic Tale" made more sense: it would still have been a part of the Gothic IP, but clearly marketed more as as a kind of spin-off rather than an actual Gothic 4 (though this would probably still have displeased many fans).

But while Arcania might not be a worthwile follow up to Gothic 1/2/3 as far as gameplay goes on account that it is basically a different kind of game that feels more like an action/adventure game than a true RPG - I feel that what it set out to do, it did well on the whole and that… well - it's a good game. *shrugs*

I think this is kind of an issue whenever a series goes into a different direction. Recently Dungeon Siege III is a good exemple - it good a lot of flack from fans of the first two games… but I felt it was a genuinely great Dark Alliance/Gauntlet king of game. It was nothing like DS1&2, but still pretty damn good on its own. (I actually had more fun with DSIII really… I couldn't play past a couple of hours of DS1 everytime I tried it, and DS1 was only worthwile to me because of the Ultima remakes).

Eck to take an even older exemple I could name Ultima VIII, which for good reasons dissapointed a lot of fans back in '94 - myself included. But in insight, while I would't exactly call it a "good Ultima" and I'd hardly consider it a RPG - I felt it was a good game on its own with rather good stuff even it it failed as an Ultima.

As fans we tend to be attached to a game series as it is, universe and gameplay and all - so whenever a series goes into a different direction there's this tendency to reject it but I feel we can sometime be blinded by our dissapointment and not really give the game a fair chance. But just because it becomes something drastically different, or even inferior really, doesn't mean it's bad.

I feel Arcania fell into this category personally - twas a good and fun game on the whole, perhaps not worthy of the "4" on its title, but that's secondary to the fact that I just had fun with the game. I've played games that were far worst than Arcania, so if it's supposed to be the epytome of bad gaming as I've sometime read it, well it'd take more bad game like that thank you very much :O


TheMadGamer October 26th, 2011 21:24


Originally Posted by Sergorn (Post 1061101434)
But just because it becomes something drastically different, or even inferior really, doesn't mean it's bad.

I agree with that. But when marketing does a sort of 'bait n switch' act it isn't right.

If you ordered Lucky Charms cereal from me for breakfast and I said ok I'll bring you Lucky Charms, but instead I bring Fruit Loops… you might say, hey, I ordered Lucky Charms and if I was Jowood I might say hey, Fruit Loops is cereal and a lot of people like it so here's your cereal…

I guess what I'm awkwardly trying to get across is that Jowood used the Gothic name and delivered a very different product - which isn't a good thing in my opinion. Is Arcania itself a 'good' game? Was Ultima 8 a 'good' game? To me, they weren't terrible. Did they live up to their respective series'? Not in my opinion, no.

bloodlover October 26th, 2011 22:55

How the hell was Arcania fun? I really don't see the fun in closed spaces, horrible faces and lip-sync, repetitive quests, no skill variety etc. It's a bad game on its own, without comparing it to any Gothic game. Gothic 3 was a dump when it came out too, but thanks to the CP now it has become an amazing game.

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:29.
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright by RPGWatch