RPGWatch Feature - Divinity: Original Sin II Review

Maylander said:

Already reviewed it here, gave that one a 4 too. The most important part is the verdict though:



I still feel that's pretty accurate, as it's definitely a game that divided opinions, unlike D: OS2 which is very likely to be highly rated all over the place. Hence why I didn't even mention that sort of caveat in this particular review.

Edit: Here's a top 10 list I wrote here way back in November, 2006. It has changed a bit since then, but not much, though I do wonder why I put Gothic ahead of Gothic 2, and MM6 ahead of MM7. I also thought MM7 was in my top 5, not way down on 7th. Strange.



Anyway, maybe I should put that list into every review, so people know exactly what type of games I care about, as this discussion tends to pop up every time, heh.

Not that I mind, I like a good RPG discussion, even if it's a bit off topic.

Click to expand...

funny, not a single Ultima in your list...

Wisdom said:

New rule! Only 5/5 Wombats for studios that are deemed worthy, regardless of the game. This way we get max revenue in their hands.
#MaylanderReviewGate2017

Click to expand...

New concession. Maylander's reviews are right. All other reviews are media hype. If Maylander's review hurts an innocent, tough luck.

__

You know one thing I miss in this game is the lack of huge complex dungeons. I suppose you could say that each area is a 'dungeon' but it doesn't really have that good old fashion cave crawling dungeon (at least so far - maybe one appears later )
-
Btw my earlier comments were not really comments on the review but in part comments on folks commnets.

RPGFool said:

New concession. Maylander's reviews are right. All other reviews are media hype. If Maylander's review hurts an innocent, tough luck.

__

Click to expand...

... hurts an innocent. Lol.
Oh my such drama I honestly can't tell if you are trolling.
Either way you have definitely provided me with a great dose of humor today.

Wisdom said:

… hurts an innocent. Lol.
Oh my such drama I honestly can't tell if you are trolling.
Either way you have definitely provided me with a great dose of humor today.

Click to expand...

Still more chuckles. "hissy fits"… "such drama"…

New concession, Your eloquence is and shall remain unmatched.

__

Just be sure to let us know when the sales plummet from the irreparable damage that's been done.

Easily game of the year for me so far.
Maybe game of all time even but mods and DM mode will need to deliver for that one.

you said:

You know one thing I miss in this game is the lack of huge complex dungeons. I suppose you could say that each area is a 'dungeon' but it doesn't really have that good old fashion cave crawling dungeon (at least so far - maybe one appears later )

Click to expand...

Good point. I didn't consider that, but it's true.

Wisdom said:

#MaylanderReviewGate2017
Revolution here we come.

Click to expand...

Totally. It'll be all over the web soon. This is only getting started it seems!

I was happy with the review. Sure, I would have given a higher note because I can easily forgive most of the negative points mentioned when I see the overall quality of the game.
But, that is a pure personal appreciation, the review itself is thorough and clear. A really beautiful job, Maylander.

If this was the only game I played this entire year, it would not win game of the year from me.

the_dagon said:

funny, not a single Ultima in your list…

Click to expand...

No, I never actually got into them. I'm not even sure why. I think it's as simple as nobody having a copy of the games around here, and it's not like we actually bought games. People talk about piracy as a fairly recent problem, but back in the 90's I barely owned an original copy of anything. It was always X amount of floppy disks from someone's colleague, uncle or something similar.

Great review, I agree with pretty much all of it. I'm not at all a fan of the Diabloesque loot system, and I think inventory is a mess. Oh, and the exponential curve for everything? (1 damage-10 damage-100 damage-1000 damage...). That's just sad. But based on my playthrough so far, this is still a bloody awesome game and I would probably have given it a 5/5 in spite of all those shortcomings.

Thanks Maylander, great work as usual.

Carnifex said:

It was ok, I finished it but seriously doubt I'd ever replay this game, unlike every other Divinity game. I like and enjoy tactical situations, but having to chain break my group for almost every single battle and the fact that the early portion of the game seems to be extremely biased against melee builds would see me playing other old favourites rather than replaying this.

Click to expand...

I beat the game on tactician with a single source point, I never chain broken my group with a rogue and a shield wielding knight, the rogue was easily the most op of the group, he did more than half the damage of the last boss'es damage in the last fight. I did however:

Nice to review. I don't think review scores should be adjusted to meet the expectations of other individuals or to try and increase/decrease sales for a company. From some comments on the thread it sounds like that is the case. That the reviewer should have given more points so as not to harm Larian Studios. Vice versa given less points to MEA to hurt the studio or because some other people thought it was a bad game.

Reviewers should score the game on their own experience and what they felt the game rated and not be influenced by what others think a reviewer should do.

Maylander always gives good solid reviews that I think reflect their experience as well as give some basic solid information on the game. Not all games will please all people and people will have different view points and scores.

I know I give DOS2 a 4/5 as well. I love the game but I do have some quibbles with it. Some folks might find those quibbles to be a pro and others a con - depends on what you like. Course somethings are more objective but game reviews have a lot of subjectivity to them I think.

Course I tend to take all reviews with a grain of salt since my own tastes in games often differs from others. I know I would rate some games very high here that others would rate as very poor.

Anyhow a great and thorough review - I give the review a 5/5

RPGFool said:

43 reviews on Metacritic. Of those 42 rate this game 88-100. One and only one statistical outlier rates the game 80. 658 User Ratings giving 8.7 mean average user score (despite some 0 review bombs averaged into mean).

Game has set crpg records on steamspy for concurrent user players. The CCU rating continues high and undercuts any argument that the massive high ratings for game are just "media hype". Gamers are playing and continue to play in record numbers -- not media hype.

The overly negative rating of this game here is a statistical outlier by any reasonable analysis. Who knows the possible cost to Larian Studios in game sales…

__

Click to expand...

Don't forget, this is the same site that put up a review giving "Realms of Arkania: Blade of Destiny HD" a 3/5. Its Metacritic score is 18 :lol:

Thinking it might affect sales seems a bit over the top. If RPGWatch's scores were published on Metacritic or something, then sure, it might be worth arguing things like how D:OS2 and ME:A could possibly get the same score. (If nothing else, it's probably proof that the score system here isn't granular enough, and thus fairly worthless.) As it is…whatever, it's just one person's opinion on the internet.

wolfgrimdark said:

From some comments on the thread it sounds like [some saying] That the reviewer should have given more points so as not to harm Larian Studios.

Click to expand...

For the sake of clarity, and fairness to Larian. what I thought I said, and meant to say was that reviewers should be fair; that this review numerical score is a statistical outlier. The low score could unfairly hurt Larian.

You want to make fun of me or argue with me; have at it.

But Larian should not suffer for anything I have said, or any mistakes I have made. I have only asked that Larian be treated fairly.

It was my belief that the review wasn't fair to Larian. Mistakes are mine. My problem. Please let's keep it that way.

__

So there is one part of the review which is an error, or at least I'm pretty sure it is. When the reviewer talks about one of your party members killing an NPC and making another party member's quest line impossible, I don't think that's true. Having had important NPCs for a party member's quest chain die, I've found that I can always pick the relevant quest chain up again later on. I can't say for sure that there aren't cases where this isn't true, but so far the game seems to be designed to allow for things like this to happen without screwing you (or your companions) over in the long run.

fadedc said:

So there is one part of the review which is an error, or at least I'm pretty sure it is. When the reviewer talks about one of your party members killing an NPC and making another party member's quest line impossible, I don't think that's true. Having had important NPCs for a party member's quest chain die, I've found that I can always pick the relevant quest chain up again later on. I can't say for sure that there aren't cases where this isn't true, but so far the game seems to be designed to allow for things like this to happen without screwing you (or your companions) over in the long run.

Click to expand...

I killed a character with party that I needed for a companions quest but the companion wasnt with me at the time. Not sure if it was intended or bug but quest never completed or progressed after that. Kept telling me to find/talk to NPC. Maybe it was bug, maybe that's what he is referring to?

Good, comprehensive review.

Inane criticism (from posters).

RPGFool said:

For the sake of clarity, and fairness to Larian. what I thought I said, and meant to say was that reviewers should be fair; that this review numerical score is a statistical outlier. The low score could unfairly hurt Larian.

You want to make fun of me or argue with me; have at it.

But Larian should not suffer for anything I have said, or any mistakes I have made. I have only asked that Larian be treated fairly.

It was my belief that the review wasn't fair to Larian. Mistakes are mine. My problem. Please let's keep it that way.

__

Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying and I don't think any harm will come to Larian one way or the other because of this review.

I admit to still being a bit confused. So are you saying that when someone writes a review they should adjust that review if the score doesn't fit into the average and is an outlier? That reviewers should change their scores so they meet some external idea of fair?

I don't think that is a good way to do scores but granted that is just my opinion. If a reviewer for a website, blog, forum, etc. is about to post a review and looks around and goes … hey my score is an outlier from what I am seeing others posting. I better change that score to bring it more in line with what everyone else is rating it … I just can't see that as a good thing.

I think each reviewer should always post a score that is what they truly feel is the most accurate score based on their experience with the game and not adjust it to fit into a bell curve or because they are worried about how others might react to it. If they post a score that they feel is fair and accurate based on their own experience … that seems to be the most honest type of score to post.

Just my two cents. I am not trying to pick on you or argue with you. I guess I just see scores as something that should not be affected by peer pressure, what other people are giving as scores, or because they are concerned about the impact of the score on the company. At the same time a reviewer should also not give a bad score if they liked the game but hate the company or have some sort of ulterior motive. Meaning simply a reviewer should do their best to give an honest score based on their experience. Which I think Maylander did.