Review Titan Quest impresses IGN

Tags: Titan Quest

There's <A href="http://pc.ign.com/articles/714/714552p1.html">a review</a> of <a href="http://www.titanquestgame.com">Titan Quest</a> over at <a href="http://www.ign.com">IGN</a>. The mythology action CRPG scores up an <b>8.1</b> and has the word <b>Impressive</b> written below it. Not sure what that means in the vast scheme of things, so I'm guessing they liked it. Anyway, here's a clip:
<br>
<blockquote>Like most other RPGs, your character starts out simply. In fact, he doesn't have a class until you've achieved level 2, at which point a slew of class type options open up, although their advantages and disadvantages are not explained in the manual and only briefly explained in-game. This invites replayability and individual exploration of the game's style, which is rarely a bad thing, but there's no randomization of creatures or terrain to reward multiple adventures, unlike the Diablo games. While custom-crafted maps can allow for more eye-pleasing environments, the gameplay too often boils down to engaging with one clump of enemies after another who are skulking around a treasure chest or just skulking in general.</blockquote>
<br>
I tend to agree with the skulking assessment there. I don't think it's due to a lack of randomly generated terrain, but there's just something about the demo that left me not remotely interested in anything more to do with the game.
<br>
<br>
Spotted at: <A HREF="http://www.shacknews.com">Shack News</A>

 

A box of rocks is enough to impress IGN.

A couple of variations of mage/warrior archetypes are truly the most original thing ever.

 

you've got to paint the rocks first though, they won't consider your rocks unless they're shiny or have particle effects.

 

Try playing the game before you knock it, okay?

How is Diablo 2 any different, honestly? You just fight one batch of monsters after the other in both games.

 

Because there were typically a mix of monsters in those batches which complimented each other in some way, especially in the dungeons.

 

If you've played Titan Quest, you'll know that it is the same case with the game. In every fight you'll come across, the groups will feature a mix of monsters. Those three swordsmen you face are going to get back-up from a bunch of archers and maybe even a shaman to heal them. The IGN guy makes it sound like all you'll be facing are 10 swordsmen and nothing else. Besides that, you'll come across multiple groups of different monsters in the same areas so it's not like wading through an army of clones, either. There's even hero monsters who come equipped with special equipment (e.g. unique items) that they'll even drop after you kill them. Those guys are really tough.

From playing both the game and reading the IGN review I can say that the guy didn't play more than an hour of the game.

 

Shut up 5.3

 

Ahh Codex intelligence.

 

still more than you have D:

 

What the fuck? He basically spends the entire review critisising the game, and still it manages to get 8.1? It doesn't improve on Diablos formula, "but the graphics are nice". Pfah!

 

First, IGN gives some bad reviews. Its like they took that guy from high school who wanted to be a journalist real bad and spent all his spare time working for the school paper yet he had abosutely no talent and just annoyed the heck out of people... yeah they take that guy and give him a job writing reviews about games. Unfortunately, he's also the guy who any conversation with ends up being about Halo. Not all reviews are that bad, but enough are.

Second, Sol Invictus would be wise to remember he was once an administrator at the Codex, and his depature was not about him feeling the site was... unitelligent. There are plenty of stupid posts to go around.

 

In case anyone is too lazy.

Good old Rex (AKA Sol Invictus) edited some of Roleplayer posts and then banned him based on those edited posts, of course he got caught and stripped from adminstrator funtions and Roleplayer account was unbanned.

 

To be honest I really didn't care at that point. This site had already gone to the dogs (e.g. people like Drakron).

You make it sound as if losing my administrative permissions on the Codex was like some great personal loss to me.

No one in their right mind would want to be affiliated to the Codex these days, given it's horrible reputation, thanks to the dogs that populate its forums. There's nothing more charming than being called an ugly gook by someone who can't formulate the facts to back up a poor argument.

It wasn't always like this.

 

Of course not ... I mean its not like you made a whole deal with the site graphics or anything by starting a tread saying <a href="http://www.rpgcodex.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=7620&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=&sid=93d1a9d0e3a66dd6e4cd2015682d406c">You have some nerve thinking you can use my graphics</a> or anything

 

But I did. When did I ever deny that?

 

Drakon -- You know you've got nothing when you're resorting to tactics that Sandelfron was using.

You're kinda overstating the stupidity quotient of the site a bit though, Rex. Yes, there's a buncha morons but there's also a good number of truly intelligent people here. And yeah, the Oblivion shit brought in a number of those morons but Section8, EVoG, Saint, Role-Player, et cetera all still post here and make great contributions. I wish Role-Player or Section8 would do more of those roundtable discussion things. The last one we had was a while ago, but it was pretty damn interesting.

Chit, I must've edited this post a million times...

 

Its kinda hard, the only RPG in the future seens to be Gothic 3 and considering we are looking as improving and enlarge RPG elements the previous ones lacked its not really that of good news.

Yes I know about NwN2 but looking at Atari quarter reports losses ... well, its not looking pretty.

You know what is sad? adventure games that are supposed to be dead (but fortunatly are not) have more comming out the so called "popular RPG", only thing we have is Action RPGs, MMORPGs and game that for some odd reason get a RPG tag (I seen DarkStar One being called a RPG ...)

 

...what? Gothic 3 is looking great and they seem to be honestly focused on making the RPG elements the forefront of the game. The other two were very good RPGs, and I see no reason to doubt that Pirhana Bytes will fail to deliver.

 

Well the other 2 were rather linear and lacked many RPG elements ... in fact the team never called then RPGs to start with.

Sure it looks go so far but I think its more of a improvement and expansion of RPG elements that anything else, I still afraid of combat because it was simply too "fighting gender" style and I was never able to "get it" (not to say about system requirements).