Review G4 reviews Gothic 3 - 3/5

[Vault Dweller]

Tags: Gothic III; Piranha Bytes

<a href=http://www.g4tv.com>G4</a> has posted a <a href=http://www.g4tv.com/xplay/reviews/1389/Gothic_3.html>review</a> of <a href=http://www.gothic3.com>Gothic 3</a>, complaining about the bugs and combat, but praising everything else. The verdict is 3/5.
<br>
<br>
<blockquote>You’ll eventually make lasting changes to the continent itself. Say you side with the humans, for instance, in which case you’ll have to liberate cities from orc rule, after which NPC rebels scattered throughout the region will actually move in and set up shop. And when fixed story events do occur, they’re cumulatively justified, as opposed to handholding “directives” with only nominal relationship to your character’s actions. It’s hardly the stuff of a George R. R. Martin novel, but we’re at least talking good and evil on a more abstruse Ultima scale, with none of the cosmic black and white nonsense you’re forced to swallow in other RPGs.
<br>
...
<br>
We’ve read for months just how mind-blowing Oblivion is, so here’s something--Gothic 3 may be even better. After you’ve played Oblivion for a dozen hours, I dare you not to notice how Bethesda’s magnum opus starts frittering away depth for breadth. Oblivion may be visually jaw-dropping and gi-normous, but once you’ve scoped a few of its dungeons, churches, taverns, guilds, forests, and hellish alternate dimensions, you’ve pretty much done them all.
<br>
<br>
Gothic 3 on the other hand maintains a handcrafted distinctness that’s stitched into every last inch of its capacious go-anywhere game spaces, from the overhanging pine-draped cliff tops sheltering decrepit strongholds, to the vast honeycombed grottoes concealing an ostensible ecology of subterranean critters. Imagine a more deliberate, less random version of Oblivion without the beautiful but often empty-headed characters and look-alike locations and you’re glimpsing Gothic 3.</blockquote>The truth slowly starts to come out. Well, better late than never, I suppose.
<br>
<br>
<br>
Thanks, Kharn.

 

[Volourn]

3/5 seems about right.

 

[suibhne]

Unfortunately, G3 sometimes has the same "procedural" feel as Oblivion - not nearly as much of the time, but it's there. Most NPCs are only slightly more distinctive than those in Oblivion; loot is (mostly) randomly-generated just as in Oblivion; dungeons are template-generated just as in Oblivion (and similarly lack distinctive enemies and l3wtz).

G3 still feels far more interesting to me - the sense of art and culture in the game is far better than in Oblivion. But it doesn't get a pass on the procedurally-generated junk, which is very similar to some of Oblivion's problems.

 

[HardCode]

So, the review writer proposes that it may be better than Oblivion, praises Choice and Consequence, but gives it a 3/5? What a moron. Anyway, I play the game and encounter no more bugs than any other game. Morrowind would CTD more than G3 crashes.

 

[Limorkil]

It's somewhat pointless to make a high level comparison of two games with similar graphics and gameplay, since at that high level they are bound to seem the same.

The differences are in the details. Oblivion really is the true definition of RPG shallowness. Nothing you do influences anything. None of the in game events change anything. Your stats and abilities do not make that much difference to anything. There are almost zero alternative choices: I believe one quest gives you the option to talk or fight and that is about it for the entire game. You never have to think, since the game leads you by the hand. You never have to care. You never have to make a choice or take a side.

Gothic 3 may have similar graphics and action gameplay, and similar generic seeming dungeons, but those are just high-level similarities. The basic concept that you are a fixed character - the 'hero' - in a grim medieval world and the outcome of the story depends on what you do makes G3 totally different from Oblivion. It is not something you can capture in a screenshot or a video, it is something you feel as you play. Gothic 3 feels like the other Gothic games; it feels like a RPG, even though it has action gameplay. Oblivion does not feel like that; it feels more like Half-Life 2 with swords or Diablo 2. I still like Oblivion, but it is in no way similar to G3 despite the superficial similarities in terms of graphics and gameplay.

 

[Volourn]

Comapring thes egames is stupid because I didn't play Oblivion. G3 has good points that make it fun; but in the end it drags on so long that any role-playing that is done means shit. It's repetive, bland, and just goes on, and on. The role-playing chocies are, themselves, rather shallow either/or scenarios. Gothic 3's greatest trength is the real sense of exploration.

Take that, you fuckin' SUCKAS!

 

[Section8]

G3 still feels far more interesting to me - the sense of art and culture in the game is far better than in Oblivion. But it doesn't get a pass on the procedurally-generated junk, which is very similar to some of Oblivion's problems.

The biggest difference that strikes me, is that Gothic 3 has a "spread thin" feel to it, where you find yourself wishing there were a few more man hours to go around and flesh out a few more NPCs, since it seems to be strictly business, where the only characters who can be engaged in conversation are tied to a quest.

On the other hand, Oblivion spent more time on disposable NPCs, they were just utterly inane.

As for the other procedural content, I'd deem it adequate, but no more, but that's a huge step above Oblivion's utterly transparent and poorly designed systems.

To compare the two, Oblivion had a design where the entire game world adapted to the player, which meant Bethesda could have designed a game that was enjoyable without character progression, and then used their own predictable scaling systems to ensure that enjoyment is maintained at all levels. Likewise, if their procedural generations of encounters could generate a single enjoyable dungeon, then it should work across the board. But in the end, everything was pretty bland and generic, the scaling was derived from a nonsense variable, and so every flaw was proliferated across the entire game.

On the other hand, Gothic 3 has highs and lows. I find my first visit to each town to be fairly fruitful, but it doesn't take long to experience everything that settlement has to offer, and understandably, the dynamic ownership of towns winds up spawning a bunch of drones who are no more interesting than any other drone. It's still better than generic blandness across the board.

The reviewer is right about the combat though. It's almost like an attempt at Prince of Persia style swordplay, but winds up being like Bart and Lisa and their "Well I'm gonna walk like this and if you get in the way, it's not my fault."

 

[Vault Dweller]

Take that, you fuckin' SUCKAS!

Don't forget to take your medicine today.

 

[lefthandblack]

I really wanted to like this game, perhaps I will after a few more patches. My biggest complaint with it is the performance issues.

My system isn't top of the line, but it meets all of the recommended requirements with
the exception of the processor (I have an amd64 3500 as opposed to the recommended
4000) I even bought a matched set of OCZ performance ram to up my system to 2gb.

Even with all details off/low the performance is unacceptable, the extra ram helped, but
didn't make it playable. I've tweaked the hell out of the ini, so it's not like I haven't tried.

When you die in a cavern and the bad clipping allows you to see the rest of the cave system as well as the underside of the surrounding landscape, including any actors that may be present, it's easy to see why it runs like shit.

I think we were much better off with old-fashioned bsp geometry. At the very least, they need to find a way to occlude stuff that the engine shouldn't be drawing at the time, like
the special brushes the unreal engine uses to block visibility, I can't remember what they call them now.

 

[The_Pope]

If I remember right they gave Oblivion a lowish score. At least, not 11/10 so it was low enough to induce fanboy rage.

 

[Pseudofool]

It's hard for me to find many faults with Gothic 3's performance after I realized I was playing on a Demo-saved game file; after that, I haven't had any issues.

I really find two faults:
The combat is waaay too easy esp. at certain point in the game. And the whole wolf being much harder than a Orc any other critter is stupid.
The NPCs like someone said are flat. Many depend on your knowledge from the prior prequels, which is fine, but there is no realationship, I have no motive to help any of hte NPCs out. Heck most of the Orcs have more charm than the human joinable NPCs. (Getting Xardas was one of the most anti-climatic game moments I can remember.)

But Beyond that I'm having a blast and playing obsessively and flustered over whom I should finally side with, and evetually I'm going ot have to decide.

For those who've finished any recommendatinos on where I should finally draw my allegiance?

 

[Claw]

One issue with Gothic 3 is that most patch fixes only take effect on a new game. So if you continue playing with a pre-patch savegame, many erros simply aren't fixed.

I find it amusing that Gothic 3 suffers at the same time from the developers taking on more than they could handle, as they admitted themselves, and the developers aiming too low in the first place.
I was rather disappointed by how simply and formulatic the reputation system turned out, but accoding to the devs they never meant for it to be more sophisticated. In fact, one interview left me with the impression that it exceeded their initial goals, although I couldn't imagine how.
It irritates me a bit because I feel that just adding the faction reputation to the local reputation would be a big improvement, liberating the gameplay and allowing players to skip some local quests after gaining enough fame. But that's just my opinion.

 

[Jaesun]

Hmmm so G4 gives NWN2 the same rating... 3 ot of 5. But gives Oblivion a 5 out of 5?? Apparently that set's the Standard of cRPG's at G4.

PROS

* Incredible graphics and gameplay
* Great sound
* Absurd amounts of personal freedom
* Insanely huge game

CONS

* Often lacking more concrete incentive for side adventures
* Some AI glitches and bugs
* Possibly detrimental to real world relationships


INTEGRETY MISTARY! It would be interesting if they had based the above Pro's and Con's with Gothic 3 as well as NWN2, since Oblivion sets the standard for ALL cRPG's at G4.

 

[geminito]

Gothic 3:
- frustrating controls and combat. Someone help JoWood understand useability issues, please!
- no role-playing: stuck with one generic, bland male character
- yet another "Oh no! Orcs!" plotline
- rigid choose-your-own-adventure choices: 1. I will help you. 2. I will help the orcs. 3. Good day.

Oblivion:
- fun, varied gameplay
- infinite role-playing possiblities: many races, both genders, custom classes, spellcrafting, enchanting, dress-me-up-and-take-me-out.
- several storylines to choose, create your own quest mods, or play other people's quest mods.
- make choices by acting, not by clicking on dialog options.

Ultimately, the first point is most important. If the act of playing a game is frustrating, then few people will care about the content of the game.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Gothic 3:
- no role-playing: stuck with one generic, bland male character

Oblivion:
- infinite role-playing possiblities: many races, both genders, custom classes, spellcrafting, enchanting, dress-me-up-and-take-me-out.

Role-playing?

- make choices by acting, not by clicking on dialog options.

What kind of choices? Do I kill this guy or run past him? Do I take everything he had or only the best stuff? Do I sell the loot in town A or town B?

 

[Admiral Rimjob POOBUM]

Gothic 3:
- frustrating controls and combat. Someone help JoWood understand useability issues, please!
- no role-playing: stuck with one generic, bland male character
- yet another "Oh no! Orcs!" plotline
- rigid choose-your-own-adventure choices: 1. I will help you. 2. I will help the orcs. 3. Good day.

Oblivion:
- fun, varied gameplay
- infinite role-playing possiblities: many races, both genders, custom classes, spellcrafting, enchanting, dress-me-up-and-take-me-out.
- several storylines to choose, create your own quest mods, or play other people's quest mods.
- make choices by acting, not by clicking on dialog options.

Ultimately, the first point is most important. If the act of playing a game is frustrating, then few people will care about the content of the game.

 

[geminito]

Gothic 3:
- no role-playing: stuck with one generic, bland male character

Oblivion:
- infinite role-playing possiblities: many races, both genders, custom classes, spellcrafting, enchanting, dress-me-up-and-take-me-out.

Role-playing?

- make choices by acting, not by clicking on dialog options.

What kind of choices? Do I kill this guy or run past him? Do I take everything he had or only the best stuff? Do I sell the loot in town A or town B?

Well thanks for inquiring, VD. I expected flippant STFU responses.

In the first case, I guess I was flippantly referring to investment into the character you play. I find it hard to identify with the Gothic main character, and feel no incentive to get inside his head and play him a certain way. Choosing my identity is a huge part of an RPG for me.

On a micro scale, you're right that Oblivion doesn't offer hundreds of options to solve each encounter, but it's better than most RPG's. Gothic suffers the same problems, as I'm often forced to suffer through another combat situation, although combat gets easier later on. On a macro scale, Oblivion gives you a huge range of choices for which quests are suitable for your character, whether you want to earn money by being a burglar, by looting dungeons, by joining a guild, and so on. I enjoy that kind of choice better than choosing dialog option 1 or dialog option 2. Is anyone still reading this?

 

[HardCode]

You have no fucking clue what you are talking about. Stick to Mario Brothers or play the ultimate RPG - Notepad.

 

[Volourn]

FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!

 

[suibhne]

In the first case, I guess I was flippantly referring to investment into the character you play. I find it hard to identify with the Gothic main character, and feel no incentive to get inside his head and play him a certain way. Choosing my identity is a huge part of an RPG for me.

I see where you're coming from on this. I already felt some investment in G3's hero because I played both of the previous titles - and the original Gothic, for better or worse, does feel slightly more tabula rasa at the opening (tho without any physical character customization) - but I can imagine preferring to create my own character in G3 if I didn't have that background of 100+ hours with the character provided.

That said, approximately 100% of my potential identification with my self-created character in Oblivion ended within a few hours of my "escape" from the sewers. In G3, the opportunities for choosing your character's place within the gameworld don't become narrowly constrained (unless you've chosen to constrain them :D) until 90% of your way through the game. To me, that says that Oblivion, despite promising significant role-playing opportunities, ended up delivering almost nothing - while G3, despite working with a much more limited set of opening conditions, is able to offer much more character flexibility and meaningful consequences for your choices.

On a micro scale, you're right that Oblivion doesn't offer hundreds of options to solve each encounter, but it's better than most RPG's. Gothic suffers the same problems, as I'm often forced to suffer through another combat situation, although combat gets easier later on. On a macro scale, Oblivion gives you a huge range of choices for which quests are suitable for your character, whether you want to earn money by being a burglar, by looting dungeons, by joining a guild, and so on. I enjoy that kind of choice better than choosing dialog option 1 or dialog option 2. Is anyone still reading this?

Oblivion gives you all possible choices, at least wrt guilds, Daedra, etc. If you like that, I guess you're good to go; I hate it because it removes all logic and meaning from the gameworld as well as from my own character choices. (If I can always do any quest for any guild or Daedra, regardless of the character choices I've made, then how can my choices be said to have mattered at all? How is that "role-playing"? As for the gameworld losing logic: becoming Master of the Mage's Guild without being able to cast spells is just about as stupid as you can get.) In its mainline narrative, otoh, Oblivion gives you no choices at all (aside from entirely superficial decisions like "Which of the Daedric artifacts do I sacrifice?"). And 95% of Oblivion's individual quests have only one solution, even when they purport to offer more than one (e.g. the "Finger of the Mountain" quest for the Mage's Guild).

G3's quests are generally straightforward and narratively unsophisticated, but they frequently involve competing interests - so you'll often get two different mutually exclusive quests with mutually exclusive solutions and results. When does this happen in Oblivion? I won't claim "never", but I put 100+ hours into the game ( ) and didn't see it happen once.

 

[Vault Dweller]

In the first case, I guess I was flippantly referring to investment into the character you play. I find it hard to identify with the Gothic main character, and feel no incentive to get inside his head and play him a certain way. Choosing my identity is a huge part of an RPG for me.

I understand. However, this complaint has got nothing to do with role-playing qualities of the game. Similarly, PST forces you to play a very specific dead-looking character, yet it doesn't mean that it's a poor role-playing game.

On a micro scale, you're right that Oblivion doesn't offer hundreds of options to solve each encounter, but it's better than most RPG's.

Explain please. Give me some examples. I mean, it's easy to say that a game X is better than most RPGs, but can you actually explain your point of view and back it up with some arguments?

On a macro scale, Oblivion gives you a huge range of choices for which quests are suitable for your character...

What if you play a mage, for example? What quests are suitable for mages and how are they different from quests that suitable for fighters? Other than killing people with spells instead of melee weapons?

 

[suibhne]

Bottom line for me: when all choices are possible for all types of characters, and there are no consequences for any of them, where's the "role-playing"?

 

[geminito]

Bottom line for me: when all choices are possible for all types of characters, and there are no consequences for any of them, where's the "role-playing"?

In non-computer role-playing (D&D, Gurps, etc.), this ("all choices are possible for all types of characters") is also possible because you have a Game Master (GM) with whom you are working out a story. If you and the GM can agree that something is possible, and you are clever enough to pull it off, then it can happen. A fighter infiltrating the mage's guild? Sounds like a challenging role-playing situation. "I deftly use a scroll to make the mages think I can cast a fireball."

Computer RPGs have no GM, so they can either put restrictions on you (which can inhibit your ability to role-play your character as you envision him), or they give you no restrictions at all (which means you need to put restrictions on yourself when you play, leading to disappointment when you solve a quest and get an outcome that doesn't suit your character). I guess I prefer the latter, but there are games that found a happy medium (Arcanum, imho).

If I do not use magic, then it doesn't make sense for me to join the mage's guild, so I "role-play" and do not join that guild. If you do so, then you are not role-playing. You are exploiting the freedom that the game is giving you. Role playing isn't something that the game engine is supposed to do for you in Elder Scrolls. "Sandbox" Love it or hate it, I guess.

FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!

I hope not, for a change! Just debate? Yes?

 

[bat_boro]

- no role-playing: stuck with one generic, bland male character
- yet another "Oh no! Orcs!" plotline

And Oblivion's "award winning story" is ... what?
Yet another "you're teh chosen one, save teh fuckin' world", no?
I'm sick of seeing this kind of stories, really.

 

[Admiral Rimjob POOBUM]

- no role-playing: stuck with one generic, bland male character
- yet another "Oh no! Orcs!" plotline

And Oblivion's "award winning story" is ... what?
Yet another "you're teh chosen one, save teh fuckin' world", no?
I'm sick of seeing this kind of stories, really.

It doesn't even have the depth to allow for such a complex idea as "you're teh chosen one". It's just "you're a good dood, kill bad doods".