Review Dungeon Lords trashed at GameSpy

Tags: Dungeon Lords; Heuristic Park Inc.

<a href=http://www.gamespy.com>GameSpy</a> has posted a very negative <a href=http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/dungeon-lords/619945p1.html>review</a> of <b>Dungeon Lords</b>, calling it "buggy, incomplete and all together boring". The score is <b>1.5 out of 5</b>.
<br>
<br>
<blockquote>Repetitive, action-oriented role-playing games are nothing new to the genre; games like Diablo made their bones delivering this style of gameplay. The difference is that Diablo was creative, highly polished, fun, and exciting despite the fact that you were only clicking the left mouse button over and over again. Dungeon Lords has none of that except the fact that you smash crates to finds items, which is as much fun as it sounds.
<br>
<br>
To call Dungeon Lords unpolished would be an insult to unpolished games. There's no musical score (which is definitely noticeable), basic features such as an auto-map are mysteriously absent, and you can't even customize the look of your character. (Even though the manual says you can.) The collision detection is terrible, as monsters phase through walls and hover in mid air during combat. Rooms are almost completely void of character or décor (except for the crates). It all screams "rush job," and the lack of detail and polish makes you feel as if you're playing an early build of a game that is not finished yet.
<br>
<br>
Then there are the bugs. The game has a tendency to lock up from time to time. In fact, it took several attempts to get out of the first sewer dungeon because the game continued to give a "Monster in Space XTile0" error. This same error occurred several times in the first dungeon and required a reboot of the system. Not good.</blockquote>
<br>
Not good indeed. I hope that all parties involved have learned a valuable lesson: not all RT games sell, selling out isn't always profitable, and paying $40 to beta test is stupid.
<br>
<br>
<br>
Spotted at: <A HREF="http://www.rpgdot.com">RPG Dot</A>

 

this was supposed to be Bradleys retirement fund.. so obviously he could have cared less about actual RPG fans.. i guess its nice to see such swift karmic retribution

 

I'm sure a TB based game of the same quality would have sold ... to those 5 people out there that would prostitute themselves to get a TB title when the rest of the world has moved on.

 

That wasn't the point. There are publishers and developers who believe that akshun RT games = guaranteed sales. It would be nice to leave that concept in the past.

As for that "the rest of the world has moved on" comment, care to elaborate?

 

they've moved on to the next thing that everyone else told them was cool

 

Wrong, there are a few TB apologists who desperately search for reasons why no AAA TB games are made anymore, and in their desparation they make up stupid statements like "there are publishers that believe that RT games = guaranteed sales". That's a stupid assumption and betrays how much you really understand about this industry. Dream on.

 

I sense disturbance in the Force. That and a flame war.

WHAT?!! No AAA TB games are made anymore? That sucks! Did someone tell Sid Meier to stop working on civ FUCKING FOUR? Or the HoMM series? What other news did you bring us?

I'm ashamed of my ignorance, but I feel that I'm in the presence of a learned one. Please share your wisdom with less fortunate.

 

I should have said TB RPGs, my apologies.

But still, the publishers that think RT = guaranteed sales exist only in your head. TB RPGs are dead, the last AAA title was years ago (ToEE was a cheap B movie that wanted to appear as AAA title). Silent storm was ok, but more a TBS than RPG.

 

But couldn't TB RPGs have died precisely because publishers seem to think RT games = sales?

 

Ok, you're halfway there. Now you only need to answer "why".

 

Or maybe because it's because TB RPGS have proven not to sell in sufficient quantities? Of course, that would leave only RT games on the market, so it would be true to say that RT Games sell because TB games don't exist anymore.

But the notion that publishers equalize RT with automatic sales is stupid, you could say something like "The Sims" (RT, not TB) is automatic sales and I would agree with you, but no publisher thinks RT = guaranteed sales, it's more that there IS only RT this time because in a time where half of your potential audience suffers from ADD or related disorders, it's just natural that TB RPG don't sell. Add to it that nobody has made a really successful TB RPG in years (because evil Bioware backstabbed the TB genre with their fun and overwhelming successful alternative) and you can see why publishers don't bother with TB RPGS - it's dead territory and unless someone comes and proves to them that it's otherwise, they won't bother wasting money on it.

So no, it's not

publishers think that RT is guaranteed sales

it's

publishers think that TB RPGs have a much smaller audience by default and you don't waste time and money making games for niche groups.

What publishers likely think, and given the evidence it's hard to deny, is that if you have two games of the same quality and production value, one RT and one TB, the RT game is likely to sell several times as many copies.

It's convenient to claim publishers are stupid because they think RT sells guaranteed but it's wishful thinking by a few who have dwelled a bit too long in their vaults and have lost the connection with the real world inside their incestous community.

Do you really believe that the developer or publisher of Dungeon Lords sat at a table and went "Lets make a RT RPG because that will be successful regardless how much shit we put into it?". IPLY might have been that stupid with their Slam Dunks, but that's IPLY, hardly a role model for the publishers out there.

So stop pretending TB games are not made because people think RT is guaranteed sales, you know the real reason is it's because people think TB games suck (in terms of market performance). It's hard admit to yourself that the reason the kind of games you love and want are no longer made is not someone being stupid, not some unfair conspiracy but just the truth that they are no longer the kind of game that the real market wants.

 

Quite an assumption you've got there. Using your own words: "That's a stupid assumption and betrays how much you really understand about this industry. Dream on." Nicely said.

There's a number of games including DL whose only feature was RT action. I'm trying to imagine what Dreamcatcher saw in this pile of crap when they decided to publish it and the only logical answer is RT HAWT AKSHUN! Other memorable games are Harbinger and FOBOS.

You make it sound like combat wasn't always the weakest part in Bio games.

Hmm, let's see. So, publishers don't want to waste money on TB because they believe it's dead - in other words, they can't make money on it, which implies that they believe that they can make money on RT, which means RT is teh salez.

You do realize that you've just agreed with the point you argued so much against?

Pretty much. Otherwise, where is all the missing shit?

Of course. Interplay isn't a role model, because it's dead. Let's ignore the time when it used to be big and was one of the top publishers out there.

Once again. While the Civ and HOMM games aren't RPG, they exist and do very well competing with RT giants like WC, SC, WH40k, C&C, AoE, etc. That fact alone proves that TB isn't dead, that the audience isn't that retarded, and that only publishers' resistance is keeping us in the RT loop.

 

So, saying that publishers are thinking "RT = sales" is ridiculous, stupid and naive, but publishers thinking "TB = not sales" makes perfect sense? It's the same fucking thing, muffinhead. And it's also wrong. ToEE sold pretty well, way better than Dungeon Lords is likely to.

 

I think that demonstrates your self delusions perfectly. Running out of good arguments to make, you try to put up smoke and mirrors and pull the discussion into the realm of 'but their combat system was weak'. It doesn't fucking MATTER.

It doesn't matter how weak one thinks their combat systems were, it matters only that their games sold significantly better than any of the TB games you have listed. Not to forget that the majority of time spent in bio games is combat, since their games sell like hot cake, people apparently love it or at least they don't mind. Publishers give a fuck about combat system, they want to sell copies, not impress the incestous remainder of rabid TB fans.

 

There is a difference between (a) RT = guaranteed sales as VD says and (b) TB = inheritly less sales than RT given a leveled playingfield, which is what I was saying. Try again donuthead.

ToEE sold about as much as a bio expansion pack, that's of course 'pretty well', but it highlights the difference just as well. It was relativly successful for a niche product, but 'pretty well' doesn't cut it anymore, even less in the coming years.

You didn't ask that question when Troika released the bugfests called ToEE or Bloodlines. And I'm sure Feargus & Co sat on a table when they cut large parts of KotOR2 and said "doesn't matter, it's RT". No, there are no other reasons to cut content out of games than RT. If you repeat it often enough, it will become true.

You said "they think RT is guaranteed sales"
I said "they think RT is more sales than TB given two equal games",

There is a difference between more and guaranteed spindoctor.

 

First off, I'm happy to say I'm related to absolutely no one here. Secondly, I don't have intercourse with anyone here. I may share an opinion or two with some of the posters, but thats it!

On another note, I can probably count on one hand the number of PC RPGs releaed over the past year, regardless of combat style. The fact none of them are turnbased is a sympton of the shrinking market then of a real inferiority for it. If you look towards consoles, FFX used a purely turnbased combat system, and I assure you it sold great and few people complained about the combat.

Turn based is not some old fashion way of handeling combat to give way to real time, its a perfectly viable. As for companies wanting to make money, well, duh. But just because something is a money maker doesn't make it a good game, and no gamer I have ever met suggested quality is best represented by sales. Heck, that would make Sponge Bob Squarepants the future of gaming.

 

Once again, that perfectly describes your tactics. First, the above comment was in response to your "Bioware backstabbed the TB genre with their fun and overwhelming successful alternative", so you were the one who started pushing the discussion into the realm of "RT is better than TB". Second, you ignored all the other points, and picked one to put up smoke and mirrors. Nice!

You know what else people like? Doom, Quake, and Half-Life. Let's stop making isometric games because FPS is teh win! Clearly, nobody would want to play an isometric game other then some "rapid fans".

 

Full agreement here, but the discussion was about sales, which is the driving force for publishers, not about what is "better" or not. "Better" is a religious argument just as "god is with us, we can't lose". Publishers don't care for "better", they care for the + or - on their quarterly statement. No disagreement that this is a bad thing for the gaming community, but that's not the point.

If VD implies that publishers are making their decisions for RT because they think it's guaranteed sales, it's a lie. Everyone knows there are few guaranteed sales (EA yearly sports games, sims, etc), and that other parameters (quality, execution, etc) always play a role, trying to imply otherwise is stupid. Now he tries to put up some smoke to make it appear he said something else, pulling Civ or Homm to the rescue of his dead genre.

Fallout 3 will be the final nail in the coffin, it will sell extremely well and piss of the few remaining hardcore fans Fallout, mark my words.

 

I didn't. Missing shit aint the same as bugs. Nice try though. It looks like you ran out of arguments and just throw anything you can think of.

Did I say that every RT game sucks? That every RT game is made with the RT is the win principle in mind?

In other words, RT guarantees more sales than TB. Are you done digging yourself deeper?

 

Nintendo seems to be backing the TB genre and was pushing Fire Emblem bigtime at E3 this year, it was located at the entrance to their exhibit area and a had a banner that was larger than Bethesdas whole exhibit. I hate using the term AAA title its too much of a buzzword (way too many defintions) manufactured by marketing people to hype their products but it seems Fire Emblem is getting treated like a AAA title by Nintendo.

 

Marfish officially deserves the dumbfuck title, who's with me?

 

No, I can see where he is coming from even if it isn't clear. "RT = guaranteed sales" might have the same net effect as "TB = no sales" (both = make RT games) but it isn't the same cause.

Dungeon Lords' problems also have nothing to do with the realtime combat or "selling out" -- why would the execution improve if it had TB combat? The combat is actually one of the better things about the game (believe it or not).

This doesn't mean I agree that TB games shouldn't be made or that they can't sell but I agree with Marfish that when publishers look at historical sales data, they don't see the numbers they want for TB RPGs. Strategy and other genres are irrelevant to them.

 

I actually proposed the same in another thread.

 

Yeah, it's got more to do with lack of completion. Skills or spells that dont work. Empty areas. Bugs the size of Australia. That sort of thing.
Even if it was A TB party-based thing* it would not save it from these problems. It would still be a buggy hollow experience.

*(yes, I'm pining for some reliable company to make Wizardry 9 dammit!)

 

If the playingfield is equal (same budget, etc), a TB RPG is likely to sell significantly less than an RT RPG. Reasons given above multiple times. If it wasn't so, why hasn't anyone made a million selling TB RPG in 5 years while there are numerous RT RPGs that sold more than a million copies?

You are dumber than I thought if you think that there was even the discussion of making Dungeon Lords a TB title. That question isn't even asked anymore. Nobody is going to ... ah, it's going to be a bad game, let's make it RT so it sells at least a bit more, because the question of TB isn't even asked anymore these days. The lack of TB western "fallout" style RPGs is proof enough for the last 5 years.


To take your original bullshit

You are implying with that that someone might actually believe that, and everyone with a bit of brain knows that no publisher would make such a simple equation. Even Interplay added consoles to their mix of dumbness.