Two Worlds - Impressions

I think it rocks, i've played it with 1.5 patch for a few days now and im very impressed. Sure, there are things that are lacking (the dungeons sucks, unfortunately). But the (outside) world itself is perhaps the best i've seen in a 3D RPG, _very_ varied, _very_ big (Oblivion and Gothic doesnt stand a chance! …WoW might )

The graphics are beautiful, i prefer it over Oblivion and Gothic3. G3 looked bad because it didnt look very consistent (the art style, or styles rather), it looked too messy, some parts great, some bad and in a different artistic style.. Very displeasing to the eyes, imo. This game looks very consistent. I like that the ground is totaly covered with plants and grass (it has a little pop-up effect but i hardly notice it). You wont see the terrible pop-ups of houses and other large objects like in Oblivion either.

When you stand on a mountain and look down over the forest and the river it looks fabulous. The forest acctually look like a forest (its thick, not a tree here and there like Oblivion), and the river even has a cool shimmering effect. The water kicks both Oblivion and G3's butt btw..

Performance is top-notch, I have far less distracting "hick-ups" compared to G3 / Oblivion. The load times are blazingly fast.

Story, so far, has been good enough, nothing out of the ordinary perhaps, but better than e.g G3. The side quests havent been anything special, its the usual "deliever the package" stuff..

Combat is nice enough. It's not very strategic (it cant be since you're often attacked by 10 enemies or more, well ok, it could've been turn-based heh). Instead of combos like left-up-click there's only click-combos and something that is similiar to WoW (activating certain "strikes" - i activate them by right-clicking).

Looting is more fun / pleasing than in other games because of the merging system.

Voice acting is so-so, the player character sounds like the Gothic 1-2 dude which is good enough for me. There seems to be quite a few actors at least. The language used is a bit stupid sometimes ("old english"). The comments the player character makes are varied, but mostly just stupid "oh? its raining", "Wet!" (when swimming).

Horse riding was a bit difficult in the begining, but you learn… i guess it's realstic that it auto-moves and you just choose direction (i mean the player isnt supposed to be the horse, you're supposed to sit on it). There are also different kinds of "mounts", seen 3 so far.

The devs of this game seems quite serious, the patches are huge (latest was over 1GB) + they're gonna release the SDK.. i hope it'll get a good modding community, its the only thing that keeps it from totaly pwning Oblivion's ass Wow. This became a long post.. i was just gonna post "it rocks!", that didnt went very well did it

I agree, this game is pretty darned good, IMO. I'm about 15 hours into it, and it takes a while to figure out all the goodies the game has to offer. This is an extremely well thought out and polished game. It's Diablo in first person. It's better than Oblivion. It's similar to Gothic in that it's extremely rewarding in the sense that when you get your first 2 handed sword, and can slice through grey and silver wolves like butter (those same wolves that were kicking your backside 5 levels prior), you just have to sit back and grin. Honestly I'm surprised at the negative comments about this game; it's one of the best action/CRPG games I've played in a LONG time.

This might be something I might like. I think I'll try the demo.
What's the word on the demo? Is it atleast a somewhat nice
representation of the game itself?

I played the demo for a little over 2 hours and decided against buying the game. It's not really a bad game but I hate the writing and voice acting so much that I just can't play it with any enjoyment. Maybe Witcher will be better. Meanwhile I'll stick with Oblivion and Gothic3.

Originally Posted by fragonard
I played the demo for a little over 2 hours and decided against buying the game. It's not really a bad game but I hate the writing and voice acting so much that I just can't play it with any enjoyment. Maybe Witcher will be better. Meanwhile I'll stick with Oblivion and Gothic3.

I totally agree, I won't be buying it either after playing the demo. I think I hated the combat even more then the voice acting though, it's nothing like Gothic at all, which I was hoping it would be.

I finished the demo and had no problem with either voice acting or anything. I loved the combat. I ordered the royal edition which is now sitting on my shelf. I have to force myself to wait till it gets patched and modded to max (not to mention finish lots of other games first). Its not easy though to put two worlds on the side because its quite addictive.

Zakhal: It's up to 1.5, stable and runs great. I haven't had a single lockup/crash. The 1.5 patch is over 1 GB, and made the game run WAY different from the demo I played several months ago. About 15 hours into the game, I'd seriously give this an 9 out of 10. I have both Bioshock and Two Worlds, and to my surprise, Two Worlds is the one that caught my attention because it's just more fun. Oh well just my opinion.

I am having fun, but am not as impressed as some. The writing and dialog are … um .. awful. Here is a hilarious one as noted on an entry at the GameSanity blog:


The combat is pretty fun and the level-scaling seems to really work. The 'trash' as Vogel calls it stays harmless and the special encounters get more difficult but not impossible. There seem to be problems with the reputation system, but it isn't broken. The story seems pretty decent, but the characters don't have a lot of life.

That said, it is fun and keeps me playing.

Yeah, that's some pretty stilted English, but that's endemic in computer games and has been for a while, especially games produced in non-English speaking countries. The Gothics had PLENTY of similar moments, where the dialogue left me scratching my head, so I can't understand why everyone is criticizing Two Worlds for some the same shortcomings that plagued the Gothic games. I agree though, the NPC's don't seem to have any real life. There's no Diego, Gorn, Lee etc. so that is definitely a checkmark against Two Worlds. Overall, though I like the fast load times, fast pace, loot, large world to explore and sense of accomplishment because of the lack of scaling. I think it's better than Oblivion, but not as good as Gothic 1 or 2.

Originally Posted by Sir Markus
I think it's better than Oblivion, but not as good as Gothic 1 or 2.

The fast loads are absolutely wonderful.

I think that the stilted language feels ultra-stiff, like it was doubly-translated from not-so-great dialog …

As for where it falls, I'm still playing … ask me in another 75 hours or so

Originally Posted by Sir Markus
I think it's better than Oblivion, but not as good as Gothic 1 or 2.

That's a huge understatement. This game couldn't carry Gothic's jockstrap.

Personally, I don't think it's even as good as Oblivion. I know Oblivion has it's own issues, but I love the background lore and the stories within that world.

Originally Posted by JDR13
That's a huge understatement. This game couldn't carry Gothic's jockstrap.

Actually, I think Two Worlds is pretty close to 'carrying Gothics' jockstrap'; I'm not saying it's better, but it's pretty close. Oh, and Two Worlds is WAY better than Oblivion unless you're playing on an Xbox; Bethesda optimized their game, stupid interface (complete with tiny, barely recognizable inventory icons) and control system for consoles, while its clear that the Two Worlds folks started with the PC interface (classic drag and drop, large item icons) and made it work for the Xbox as an afterthought.

Originally Posted by Sir Markus
Actually, I think Two Worlds is pretty close to 'carrying Gothic's jockstrap'; I'm not saying it's better, but it's pretty close. Oh, and Two Worlds is WAY better than Oblivion unless you're playing on an Xbox; Bethesda optimized their game for consoles, while its clear that the Two Worlds folks started with the PC interface and made it work for the Xbox.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion but I played the demo a good 3-4 hours and just wasn't impressed at all. Unless the game gets dramatically better later on, I wouldn't even consider paying $50 for that game.


I bet you think OSU is better than UM as well.

LOL actually I'm already looking forward to seeing Ohio State work Michigan YET AGAIN this fall in Ann Arbor. I was at the #1 vs. #2 game last fall, and it was a thing of beauty. Seriously though, with all that returning talent, UM should win the Big Ten this year if they play up to their potential and stay healthy. Nevertheless it would be nice to see UM undefeated when OSU/UM get around to their annual showdown like last year.

I played the Two Worlds demo and hated it and deleted it after about 20 minutes. But on recommendation from a friend, I picked up the US release, version 1.5, and it's like a completely different game. It's REALLY good, IMO, but it takes 5-10 hours to figure out what the game is about. Oh well, the only reason I'm trying to sell this game is because I've put a fair amount of time into it and think it's outstanding.

Originally Posted by Sir Markus
Zakhal: It's up to 1.5, stable and runs great. I haven't had a single lockup/crash. The 1.5 patch is over 1 GB, and made the game run WAY different from the demo I played several months ago. About 15 hours into the game, I'd seriously give this an 9 out of 10. I have both Bioshock and Two Worlds, and to my surprise, Two Worlds is the one that caught my attention because it's just more fun. Oh well just my opinion.

I know it runs fine but there are rumours that new patches are coming and since the mod SDK was released only recently the real modding havent started yet even. I will wait till the game is as good as possible before playing it. I do the waiting thing especially with games that have extensive modding capabilities. Besides I have 10+ other unfinished games (inc. syshock1&2,baldurs gate2,morrowind,gothic2 gold, etc) allready on the line. Gotta keep things in order.

I think that dialogue clip is someone's attempt to write old style mediaeval English!! At least the syntax is fine!!

Originally Posted by Sir Markus
But on recommendation from a friend, I picked up the US release, version 1.5, and it's like a completely different game.

Some thoughts grow insoide of me as what German buyers of this game might think about it …

If this what you've described, becomes a general trend,

then this game might sell very well in the biggest gaming market in the world - the USA - and suck in Europe (regarding the sales).

So, this sheds a very unpleasant light in the business methods of the involved companies: Bring the game into the market fairly early without thinking too much on the sales because it's only a small market compared to the USA (and the rest of the world), for which the game will be totally patched and made *much* better - so, as it was meant to be.

In short, they just neglect European customers in favour of the rest of the world (and the biggest market of all, the USA).

Reputation of Zuxxez : -2,5

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
In short, they just neglect European customers in favour of the rest of the world (and the biggest market of all, the USA).

Unfortunately I think that their plan backfired on two counts - by releasing too early they earned a reputation for the game as being a 'lacking Oblivion wannabe' which turned off much of the press. Then they released under the Cloak of (Bioshock) Invisibility, dooming them to even less attention.

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
Some thoughts grow insoide of me as what German buyers of this game might think about it …

If this what you've described, becomes a general trend,

then this game might sell very well in the biggest gaming market in the world - the USA - and suck in Europe (regarding the sales).

So, this sheds a very unpleasant light in the business methods of the involved companies: Bring the game into the market fairly early without thinking too much on the sales because it's only a small market compared to the USA (and the rest of the world), for which the game will be totally patched and made *much* better - so, as it was meant to be.

In short, they just neglect European customers in favour of the rest of the world (and the biggest market of all, the USA).

Reputation of Zuxxez : -2,5

I've noticed this trend and it sucks. That demo for Two Worlds was lame, and if I recall the full game was released at the same time in Europe. That version of Two Worlds was pathetic. If game designers have a certain standard for a USA release, the same should hold true for gamers in Europe/Australia.

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
Some thoughts grow insoide of me as what German buyers of this game might think about it …

If this what you've described, becomes a general trend,

then this game might sell very well in the biggest gaming market in the world - the USA - and suck in Europe (regarding the sales).

So, this sheds a very unpleasant light in the business methods of the involved companies: Bring the game into the market fairly early without thinking too much on the sales because it's only a small market compared to the USA (and the rest of the world), for which the game will be totally patched and made *much* better - so, as it was meant to be.

In short, they just neglect European customers in favour of the rest of the world (and the biggest market of all, the USA).

Reputation of Zuxxez : -2,5

Wasnt it the same with Gothic? The first buggy version ("open beta") was released only in germany.