RPGWatch 2008 Game of the Year Vote!

Dhruin · December 20, 2008

We don't want to "promote" anything. If you notice, we run zero ads, get zero sponsorship, have zero affiliations. Our volunteer nature means sometimes things are overlooked or sometimes we don't get around to polishing the database. This doesn't represent an agenda - it just represents the reality of a small amateur site.

Prime Junta · December 20, 2008

A small, non-commercial, amateur site having an agenda? The very idea is shocking. I move that RPGWatch immediately send Reyla her money back.

GothicGothicness · December 20, 2008

If their is any RPG site on the internet who I trust to not be biased and give subjective reviews it is RPGWatch. [sarcasm] Hmm wait a moment, the site has no adds, and full of volunteers, who would do something for free??? they MUST be bribed to write reviews, especially by the spacehack developers! They are one of the few sites who spent enough time to properly review the game! [/sarcasm]

xSamhainx · December 20, 2008

blatantninja said:
I think my nerd card needs to be revoked. I have literally not played a single game on that list! (Though I did play through BG I & II again!)

revoked? Nay, I say that your nerd membership is if anything fully validated due to your conquering of the mighty BG series!

txa1265 · December 20, 2008

I am rather surprised to hear folks saying, in effect "I am enough of a 'graphics over gameplay' person to have skipped some of the best games of the past several years because they don't look pretty enough'.

Of course, you are now unable to ever cite 'gameplay is more important than graphics' again.

Toothpaste · December 20, 2008

Oh wow, this is a crappy GotY vote. It is based entirely on the numbers of votes... so lesser hyped games would probably never win. *thumbs down*

skavenhorde · December 20, 2008

Toothpaste said:
Oh wow, this is a crappy GotY vote. It is based entirely on the numbers of votes... so lesser hyped games would probably never win. *thumbs down*

Sarcasm? I can never be sure on the net.

You do know you are at www.rpgwatch.com? We pretty much hype the lesser hyped games. Last year in a small poll done here (it was a little messed with though) Witcher won, followed by Eschalon (according to Myrthos' he went through the votes and tossed out duplicates to the best of his ability)

So you can't get any less hyped than that an indie coming in 2nd place. The rules of Gamespy don't apply here

and besides how exactly would you do a vote? Please tell me you were joking, because seriously that is sorta lame saying it's a crappy GOTY vote because people VOTED

GothicGothicness · December 20, 2008

I think he probably means they should also have an editor's choice awards, which would be great in my opinion.

Gorath · December 20, 2008

We have an editor's choice award.

JDR13 · December 20, 2008

txa1265 said:
I am rather surprised to hear folks saying, in effect "I am enough of a 'graphics over gameplay' person to have skipped some of the best games of the past several years because they don't look pretty enough'.

I don't think that was what was said at all. Just that if the graphics are that bad, it's kind of a turn-off.

xSamhainx · December 21, 2008

To me, graphics are part of the gameplay. They dont have to be mind-blowing, but I would like a game that looks decent, lest my random fits of snickering pull me out of the mood.. Older games like Baldur's Gate (which still looks pretty good anyway) or Majesty or something in my opinion have an excuse (it was good at the time), as opposed to newer games like Spiderweb's that have a reason (we're broke!).

Sorry, your lack of funds may be a reason but it's no excuse. If you want to point your finger at me and say that I'm not as RPG as Thou because I wont fire up some modern-primitive title, that's fine. My life's too short and my game backlog too long to play brand new games that look like they were made for the NES.

Dhruin · December 21, 2008

It's your play time - play what you like. I do, however, have a little bit of a problem with the whole "excuse'' thing, because that paints Spiderweb's stuff as some sort of sub-par product rather than just something you don't like.

I'm playing Geneforge 5 at this moment and it offers 5 playable factions...does Mass Effect? Or Fable? What's their excuse? Oh, that's right - it's too expensive to do the assets for more than two identical paths through the game. Sorry, your lack of funds is no excuse.

xSamhainx · December 21, 2008

Since graphics are a big part of the game for me, as far as I'm concerned Spiderweb games are sub-par. I wouldnt pay for them, and i wouldnt recommend them. That's just me.

You probably think my taste in general is poor, as you undoubtedly know my penchant for cult films and corny fantasy metal. And that's fine, it's what makes things interesting, all these opinions. Everyone has them, and to someone else yours undoubtedly stinks.

txa1265 · December 21, 2008

JDR13 said:
I don't think that was what was said at all. Just that if the graphics are that bad, it's kind of a turn-off.

I apologize for starting this ... I originally had a single paragraph with the 'winky' at the end,, then split paragraphs without adding a second wink. I only intended good-natured kidding.

JDR13 · December 22, 2008

txa1265 said:
I apologize for starting this ... I originally had a single paragraph with the 'winky' at the end,, then split paragraphs without adding a second wink. I only intended good-natured kidding.

No need to apologize, I hope my earlier reply didn't seem abrasive. I understand and respect both viewpoints.

kalniel · December 22, 2008

What about Storm of Zehir?

I know it's technically an expansion, but it doesn't play like one, instead it's got as much content as a full game and plays just like some of the old school RPGs that I'd have thought people in this forum quite like.

Prime Junta · December 23, 2008

What about it? It's on the list.

I like the gameplay well enough, but there's nothing there we haven't seen before, and there's not a whole lot to it besides the gameplay. Plus, it has some moderately serious technical issues -- as in, frequent and very long load times, bugged quests, and what not.

It's not bad, and I'm not regretting buying it, but it'd only be GotY material in a very, very, very poor year IMO. It's nowhere near the caliber of MotB.

Maylander · December 24, 2008

Voted Mass Effect. Had fairly low expectations, but was blown away by the characters, story and setting. I know, I know, a lot of it has been copied from other places. That's not exactly new. The point is, it's been put together in a way that really works.

As for 2009 - Risen has the most potential. In fact, it's been at the top of my most wanted list since the day I heard about it. Extremely high expectations might lead to disaster though, but we'll see - I personally believe PB will deliver a great RPG experience in 2009.

Jabberwocky · December 25, 2008

I have high hopes for Risen as well. As far as Gothic: Arcania goes however, I don't see how anyone expects it to be a great game considering JoWood has shown and admitted recently that they don't care about producing a quality product.

txa1265 · December 26, 2008

Prime Junta said:
It's not bad, and I'm not regretting buying it, but it'd only be GotY material in a very, very, very poor year IMO. It's nowhere near the caliber of MotB.

I like it a bit better than you, but at the same time I feel little compulsion to complete it ... it is fun but flawed.

RPGWatch 2008 Game of the Year Vote!

SasqWatch

RPGCodex' Little BRO

SasqWatch

Paws of Doom

SasqWatch

Watcher

Little BRO Rat

SasqWatch

Prime Evil

SasqWatch

Paws of Doom

SasqWatch

Paws of Doom

SasqWatch

SasqWatch

SasqWatch

RPGCodex' Little BRO

SasqWatch

True Synaesthete

SasqWatch