RPGWatch Feature: Dark Messiah Review

P.S.: It is indeed sad that an independent developer like Arkane Studios is the one getting the "unfair" (at least according to the "community vote") score, while other games seem to be rated normally. Shame on you! :thumbsdown:
I'm not sure what this means?

Look at the three biggest 'meta-score' sites coverage of Dark Messiah:
- GameRankings: 49 reviews, Average 7.4, Range 4 - 10 / 10. (1Up is low score)
- MetaCritics: 44 reviews, Average 7.2, Range 4 - 9.3 / 10. (1Up is low score)
- GameStats: 26 reviews, Average 7.5, Range 5 - 10 / 10. (I am the low score there)

That is a *huge* range of scores. Compare that to Half Life 2, with 95 scores between 80 - 100%, 93 of them 90% or higher. Similar things for BG2 and other highly ranked games. It is this whole question of "is this a good game that is flawed or a lousy game with some good moments" that tends to really broaden the spectrum of scores.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,938
@Mike: I am sorry for the misunderstanding - my post scriptum was not really serious. Sure it is kind of sad when promising young developers get a score which barely tipped over to 'bad' in the eyes of a reviewer when the game has both good and bad sides, but it is also not the job of the reviewer to try to control the market. I do not see anything wrong with the score in this regard.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
471
I'm not sure what this means?

Look at the three biggest 'meta-score' sites coverage of Dark Messiah:
- GameRankings: 49 reviews, Average 7.4, Range 4 - 10 / 10. (1Up is low score)
- MetaCritics: 44 reviews, Average 7.2, Range 4 - 9.3 / 10. (1Up is low score)
- GameStats: 26 reviews, Average 7.5, Range 5 - 10 / 10. (I am the low score there)

That is a *huge* range of scores. Compare that to Half Life 2, with 95 scores between 80 - 100%, 93 of them 90% or higher. Similar things for BG2 and other highly ranked games. It is this whole question of "is this a good game that is flawed or a lousy game with some good moments" that tends to really broaden the spectrum of scores.

All those scores were given to the original pre-patched game. While they might have been fair then, I wouldn't recommend them to people trying to decide if they want to play the game now.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,142
Location
Florida, US
All those scores were given to the original pre-patched game. While they might have been fair then, I wouldn't recommend them to people trying to decide if they want to play the game now.

Only based on the amount of bugs ... the rest is the same. So that might clear a couple of the lows. But anyone rating the game >90% within the first few days when there were massive bugs is every bit as much of an outlier.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,938
I agree, I don't think I ever saw the game getting that high of a review though. I must admit however that I don't really pay that much attention to reviews, I prefer to hear about a game from a friend I trust, or play a demo if one is available.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,142
Location
Florida, US
i just fond this site and i have to say the dark messia review is interesting.

first i have to say i don't care about the score, i can read what the reviewer has to say. who needs numbers really?

so first: i just played through the game, basicly as a fighter, because that is how the game just feels right. (environment, being close to enemies, etc) sometimes i tried to be an archer, spended experiencepoints on archery and got it up to level 3 but it was no fun. for example i tried to shoot down mages in the epilog from up on some ledge: i could not reach this guy at all, though the distance was not that big.
same with most magical attacks: there just was no place to run backwards while activating spells.
the whole game screams "melee" to me so hat is how i played it.
that is the biggest flaw in this game to me:
i thought to be able to play with different styles (system shock 2).

as a mage, an archer, etc. but ithe game never gave me signals or clear opitions.
for exapmle you can't kill the cyclop as an archer, you have to kill it wit the sword. You cannot really sneak by some guards because levels are linear.

that makes the skilltree pretty useless to me. It is all about getting points to enhance in the skilltree to be allowed to use better weapons. what is the difference to the standard shooter where you get a new weapon at a specific point? does a new skill really make you better? does it directly change he way you fight? absolutley not, in my opinion: the longer you play, the better your weapons get: standard.

recently i played through jade empire. i call it an acton-rpg. what i liked about it, that you spend your points on diferent fighting styles (weapons...), so: nothing new ode better here, but you also used gems to enhance strength, chi and focus: this realy gave you an option, because you need chi for magic and you need focus to fight with weapons or to be more efficient in fighting. this really made a difference.
the whle sklltree in darkmessiah felt like a pretty simple diagramm with (at least) a few options when to get allowed to use which weapon. initialy i liked it, but in the end i thought his could have been so much better, if it really changed the way you play he game. but most of the time you are only asked to kick and slash.

the other point i want to discuss is the leveldesign. actually i enjoyed some levels a lot (the whole part on the island), while other parts of the game like the burning city and especially the temple of ashes seemed rushed. textures or materials did not fit to each other, it looked uninspired. the only thing i liked about the last thrid of he game were the big halls where you had to jump dow somewhere, look up to find a new spot to shoot with the ropebow and so on. but also i totally got lost in this epilog level and fear that i forgot a lot of spots.

opposing to he reviewer i do not find the houses at the coastline unlogic, i did not think about it really i had to much fun with kicking down enemies or feeling the fresh air, after "days" in the temle. the island part actualy was quite immersive.
the proble for me was the bad quality of oher levels (temple of ashes).

about linearity: i think it was okay. a few more extra 'secret areas' would have been nice, but it was okay like hat. the most linear pat in this game actualy wa the most mmersive i think: he race over the roofs in he early game.
i do not want to damn all the leveldesign, because some where super beautifull: the temple area with the worm, the caves and the big area with the cyclone and the cyclone fight at the end of the first temple before you get to the coast.

what i would like to see in upcoming games like this (dark messiah2?):
-more choices (dialogs probably)and no boring, schematic characters.
-leveldesign-quality-controll
-make the player feel the difference (skilltree), the game has to give you ptions in your play, unless archery and magic are only for support.
 
as a mage, an archer, etc. but ithe game never gave me signals or clear opitions. for exapmle you can't kill the cyclop as an archer, you have to kill it wit the sword.

Errr... what? I played the entire game with a pretty heavy focus on ranged combat (archer) since it is my preferred style in most fantasy games and I killed every cyclops (as far as I can remember) with the bow. You just get him stuck on something in the level (yeah the AI is that dumb unfortunately) and then shoot a bunch of arrows in his eye. Worked fine every time. Piece of cake :) .
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
3,201
So...you can use a bow because the game supports it through an exploit? Good stuff - I always like multiple solutions.

I hate to repeat myself :) but... Errr... what? First of all, look at what I replied to (I even highlighted the quote to make it more clear what exactly I was replying to). The statement that you can not kill the cyclops (there are several in the game by the way... three or four?) as an archer is 100% wrong. You can. And not only by using an exploit.

Secondly, I really wish that the damn cyclops wouldn't have gotten stuck on stuff in the level but that's how it turned out in all fights. Lousy programming and pathfinding is not my fault ;) .
Besides, the alternative "legit" fight would have been to do hit and run attacks on the cyclops. Run out of cover. Shoot an arrow in his eye. Run back to cover. Or run in circles around the guy. Repeat until cyclops dies. Yawn. So all I did is when he got stuck in a rock or wall, I just stayed out of range where he couldn't hit me and killed him from there. Big deal.
The third method would have been to hit that golden moment when the cyclops does not get stuck for a change but actually manages to follow you and then to use one of the environmental traps on him at the exact right point in time (nearly impossible thanks to the retard AI).

These boss fights aside, I did use the bow (as I said it's my preferred style of play) and melee combat alternatively all the time. Used the poison bow for a looong time. Then later the bow that would freeze enemies. I used them all the time, especially against those undead critters and spiders that were best kept at a distance to avoid getting poisoned. Against orcs, goblins, humanoids etc I used the bow only for the first strike and then switched to melee or just kicked them to death.

So, yes, I would say that depending on the type of enemy that you were dealing with (including the cyclopses) you did indeed have a range of multiple solutions by either keeping them at a distance with the bow or by engaging them in melee combat (or using a combo of both). I'm really not sure what you were trying to allude to with your post(?) Only trying to accuse me of using an exploit? Which matters how in a single player game? But OK. If it is of any comfort to you, I'll admit it. I cheated, I suck and I have a small weenie ;) .
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
3,201
Asbjoern
"Ah, come one. You can do better than trying to victimize independent developers.
"
You clearly don't understand the way the system works, right or wrong, then.
They are the ones whom suffer in most cases, sort of stunning you didn't know that, yet you seem more than willing to make cuorsory judgements about them. :S

"Why would I create a scoring system out of protest just because I think the average gaming scoring system is flawed?"
You are the one advocating it, I am just pointing out the blantant flaws, becasue they damage the industry at it's core.

"It is these websites own responsiblity and if they think a website has an out-of-sync......."
I have no idea where you get this idea, a website responsible for gathering reviews can pick an choose which reviews it wants to inlcude or exclude?
You got to be joking, right?

" They are judged by the quality of their games not by the single fact that they are independent."
No one said they were judged by being independent, and hell no they are not being judged by there work but the product that is many times pushed out the months early, by publishers.

txa1265
"That is a *huge* range of scores.".
Not really considering the game was shipped out buggy, unbalanced and had a weak story.
Unless I am reading these wrong it's 3 or 4 reviewers tanking by rating with scores lower than 60 out 40+ reviews and no one gave it lower than 60 in the GameStats, addtionally the fans out ranked the reviews average for the most part for an average of 80%.

Clearly if any one ranked the game less than 60% there is some wierd and unfair curve/bias present.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,772
You clearly don't understand the way the system works, right or wrong, then.
They are the ones whom suffer in most cases, sort of stunning you didn't know that, yet you seem more than willing to make cuorsory judgements about them. :S

Yep, it's stunning how ignorant I am.

You are the one advocating it, I am just pointing out the blantant flaws, becasue they damage the industry at it's core.

So you postulate.

I have no idea where you get this idea, a website responsible for gathering reviews can pick an choose which reviews it wants to inlcude or exclude?
You got to be joking, right?

And I would like some argumentation to why you think, that a website in a liberal society can't decide what websites they choose to gather information from and which they don't?
And I think you misunderstood me. I didn't mean that Metacritic can arbitrarily choose what REVIEWS to include or exclude.
I meant that Metacritic can choose which SCORING SYSTEMS to include or exclude. So they can say we choose not to include any reviews from that website no matter their quality because we can't transform their scores to something coherent to our scoring system.
That is their FREE option!

My argument and evidence to back up that Metacritic interprets the scores still stands. Especially if it's a score from a 5/5 star system. So what exactly is the problem?
And as I wrote before one low score from one company doesn't influence the Metacritic score in any significant way. And if it does then it is because all the other websites has given the game a low score too and again: What is the problem then?

No one said they were judged by being independent, and hell no they are not being judged by there work but the product that is many times pushed out the months early, by publishers.

Those big, bad publishers. And oh those innocent independent developers. Is that really the reality?

You have a very black/white view of this. Independet developers accept a contract and then it is their obligation to fulfill that contract or else they should've said from the beginning that with the current funding and time period we can't fulfill the proposed contract. Is it that hard to demand that from independent developers?
You also have to see the publishers point of view in this regard because with every game they fund they run a risk. And it is not in the publishers best intention to send a game on the market with flaws because they lose money then. But obviously the independent developers couldn't manage their funding in a rational way so the publishers had to send a flawed game on the market otherwise the publishers would lose money.
Publishers look at it from a rational and financial stance. Not a "we want to send half finished games on the market".
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
720
Location
Denmark
ok, so it actually is possible to kill cyclopes with the bow, i guess i did not try hard enought.
what i tried to point out, is that the game does not support such killing techniques really. take the fight near the end of the temple on the island, you stand in a window, far up, the cyclope travells through the room, loking up sometimes. how much is it to kill it like that? probably i should try to get through the game ith archery only to learn to use it properly, but (that's my point) the game feels like it is not intended to be played that way.
i don't want to argue against exploiting bad ki, when it gets stuck somewhere, but all the traps and obstacle one could use seemed to me like a gimmick. strafing left and right, hitting this beast in the eye every time it tried to crush me. three to four hits and it was gone. the whole leveldesign doues not lead you to another fighting style (for example there where no sniper spots or anything else to get cover for more than a few seconds. so, you can play archer, you can fight as a magican, but the does nit support that aus much as it leads you to use your sword.
that means: tthe player lost a lot of options to use the skilltree, because of lacks in leveldesign.

one more point: the skilltree: i leveled up archery, strength and all the fighting skills to max and i can aim, at least at a slow target as a cyclope or an enemy that is standing around because it did not spot me: why did i not it my victim from far up? i tried it several times and i fear there are a few bugs left..
 
one more point: the skilltree: i leveled up archery, strength and all the fighting skills to max and i can aim, at least at a slow target as a cyclope or an enemy that is standing around because it did not spot me: why did i not it my victim from far up? i tried it several times and i fear there are a few bugs left..

Hmmm... I still disagree about the level design + cyclops bit. Every level/area where you had to fight a cyclops had an area/niche that you could hide in for cover. That's how I did it. I ran to cover where the cyclops could not pass through, reach me or hit me and then I shot a few dozen arrows at the thing (it was sometimes hard to hit the eye from a cover position since you often needed to wait for the cyclops to bend down or you wouldn't have an angle where you could aim/shoot at the eye... so that's why it took a lot of shots at times).

Regarding the quoted bit above, did you take the trajectory into account? The Source engine has fairly reaslistic physics so for enemies at a distance, you need to aim above their heads to hit them. Higher the further they are away from you. If you shoot down at someone from a higher position, you have to factor that in as well and you need to adjust your aim accordingly. I will admit though that arrows could be hard to spot, i.e. you could at times not really see where the arrow landed or hit since it was a bit small. I sometimes had to put my nose two inches from the screen, too, to tell where an arrow went and then adjust my aim.

Seriously, I overall found the bow to be a very good companion in combat though. As I said it was most effective against the spiders and undead. But it was also at least a good "opener" for all of the other fights. Head shots cause more damage so I usually opened up almost every fight with an arrow to the head, then switched to the sword and slashed or kicked the enemies to death. I think it's obvious that you aren't supposed to go through the game as a full archer. You get way too many points for that. You can max archery very early on. But if you wanted to restrict yourself to archery only for some strange reason then I'm sure that it could be done. It would just mean a lot of kiting and running (backwards and in circles) and kicking.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
3,201
seems like we come to a conclusion ;)
you are supposed to play as a warrior (for example look at all the different animations/moves when you use the sword, kill enemies, especially the undead when they are down).

one question concerning bossfights: the dragon just before you start the epilog was fairly easy to beat with 3 shots, it did not do any damage to me. also the last fight against the undead dragon was boring as hell, i did not see any special options, so i randomly cut around in the air with the dragonsword when it came near. this sceleton-beast lost some bload o_O, then arantir paused, i atacked him and this wa repeated several times. was there a funnier way to win the fight? if there is one, just answer yes, so i can find out by myself except it is extensive archery ;)
 
Clearly if any one ranked the game less than 60% there is some wierd and unfair curve/bias present.
Playing devil's advocate and assuming some statistical sense of normalcy, then you would surely agree that using an IQR (inter-quartile range) approach that anyone who reviewed the game above 80-85 (depending on the source, and an aggregate of all 3 sites would say 80) has "some weird and unfair curve/bias."
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,938
So, yes, I would say that depending on the type of enemy that you were dealing with (including the cyclopses) you did indeed have a range of multiple solutions by either keeping them at a distance with the bow or by engaging them in melee combat (or using a combo of both). I'm really not sure what you were trying to allude to with your post(?) Only trying to accuse me of using an exploit? Which matters how in a single player game? But OK. If it is of any comfort to you, I'll admit it. I cheated, I suck and I have a small weenie ;) .

No, no - that wasn't it. Look, I didn't bother finishing DM (even though it is apparently quite short) and certainly didn;t replay with different builds, so I didn't know if you could use a bow or not. When you posted about them getting stuck on geometry, I thought you were literally saying "you can kill a cyclops with a bow because they get stuck" - or in other words, you wouldn't be able to kill them if the game didn't screw up.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
11,842
Location
Sydney, Australia
I heard that he does have a small weenie though. :lol:

[FourYearOldMode]HAHAHA d00d!!!!111 compared to urzzz mine is still of the shock and awe size, d00d!11!!![/FourYearOldMode]

No, no - that wasn't it. Look, I didn't bother finishing DM (even though it is apparently quite short) and certainly didn;t replay with different builds, so I didn't know if you could use a bow or not. When you posted about them getting stuck on geometry, I thought you were literally saying "you can kill a cyclops with a bow because they get stuck" - or in other words, you wouldn't be able to kill them if the game didn't screw up.

Ah, I see :) . Well, I hope I was finally able to clear up that archery is indeed a totally viable combat style in Dark Messiah. BTW, I didn't think that the game was quite short (only gaming "machines" like Mike seem to feel that way :) ) but then I don't have the stamina for really long playing sessions anymore. The max I can do is about three (maybe four on a good day) hours in a row and then I need a break of a couple of days or so. That might be why most games seem pretty long or even too long to me ;) .
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
3,201
Ah, I see :) . Well, I hope I was finally able to clear up that archery is indeed a totally viable combat style in Dark Messiah. BTW, I didn't think that the game was quite short (only gaming "machines" like Mike seem to feel that way :) ) but then I don't have the stamina for really long playing sessions anymore. The max I can do is about three (maybe four on a good day) hours in a row and then I need a break of a couple of days or so. That might be why most games seem pretty long or even too long to me ;) .

Glad to see I'm not the only one around here who doesn't finish 7-8 games a week.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,142
Location
Florida, US
Asbjoern
"Yep, it's stunning how ignorant I am."
I don't agree that is an accurate assessment of my comment or that many would interpret it in such a way. :)

That being said, I know am ignorant about everything till I learn about it and afaik, no one is born with knowledge which makes us all ignorant of knowledge, until we learn it.
Hell I am perpetually ignorant, now I think about it and I wouldn't want it any other way, afaik the human brain and spirit withers, when learning is ceased.

"And I would like some argumentation to why you think,............"
To the best of my knowledge GameRankings includes all reviews they don't pick an choose site or rating standards/systems and I honestly don't know much about the two listed.
I had to go to their sites, to verify what I thought was true. i.e. "90%+ reviews did NOT tank the game" which I knew GR did not.

I certainly could have misunderstood you, but to me it's the same difference and if MC & GS pick and choose there reviews and/or scoring systems, that’s fine, if true gives me a reason not to use their sites.
Sure they have a right to do it, but are the rating accurate they pick and choose, how could it possibly be?

"Those big, bad publishers. And oh those innocent independent developers. Is that really the reality?"

Personally I see it as a case by case issue, nor did I use the word innocent and in this case it's very clear Ubi pushed out the game for the holidays, are you suggesting otherwise?
If you have some publisher(s) whom you believe are innocent and you want to speak about them, list names or instances. :)

If you think I always blame the publisher about problems, then you don't know me as well as you presume/think, within the last week I blamed Illusion for game design flaws in Mafia, I have done the same for Crytek and others, so your whole basis is incorrect.

"Independet developers accept a contract........"
Of course but it's case by case, and not to mention the fact that technologies change during development cycles, which you don't seem to factor in or are excluding.
I.e. would be new/updated Dev kits from m$ or sony if it's a console game, or does the pub decide it wants to reach the same audience it did three years ago in the original contract?
Do you know how many changes just in technology occur in three years?
How about international laws regarding rating systems change?
Is 4 examples enough cause I got plenty more. :)

Give me specifics; generalities do us no good, here. :)

txa1265
"......then you would surely agree that using an IQR....."
Yes, I agree with you and logic that some high scores are bias or using some curve. :)
However that does not make me want to cast the lighting bolt of doom and it’s certainly possible this was the type of game they really enjoyed.
Especially if it's from a very small number of dev that have RPG potential, as an example, to the best of my knowledge the script/story was given to Arkine to make a game around the new licensed and vision of Ubi after they acquired M&M universe, yet Arkine is being blamed and punished for the quality of the story by some reviewers. :(

In regards to the Bow issue, once you find the first Fireball bow, most anything will fall and you certainly have it for the last undead Cyclops, iirc there are about 3 Fireball Bows with one in the tombs before you fight your way out of the temple, so really you never have to fight a Cyclops without a good bow.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,772
Back
Top Bottom