Exitium said:
doubt you know me so I?ll spare a few minutes of my time to introduce myself as Ian ?Exitium? Cheong, designer and staff writer at the RPG Codex, a website which your website (Gamer?s Hell) had a little contretemps not too long ago.
It would have probably been more SITELY(yeah, pun!) to say you were with your Lionheart website, which I assume is fairly defunct now, isn't it?
The game begins with lots of intentionally confusing dialogue and hints about what to do next.
How ironic that this review shares much in common with the aforementioned sentence.
I think it would have been better to point out there's no elaboration on what he thinks is hard to understand and what confuses him. Hell, any twit at a keyboard can say, "The beginning is confusing." but that's hardly helpful to anyone.
Lionheart on the PC is a classic RPG from the same oven as Baldur's Gate and Diablo.
I wasn?t aware that Lionheart was released on any other platform other than the PC. The inclusion of ?on the PC? is a classic case of verbal redundancy.
I halfway wonder if that statement means he thinks BIS made Diablo.
The important fact here is ? is it good?
Question is not equal to fact.
Not to mention that "Is it good" will never be a fact since it's fairly subjective, especially if we follow the context of this being a game review. Obviously it's subjective because there's a great deal of people who totally fucking hate the game.
The non-linear gameplay might prove to be a bonus for a lot of people.
Could you please repeat that sentence, preferably if it was paraphrased and given proper clarification?
This is the statement that makes me question whether or not he's even finished the game. If he has, then he doesn't have a clue as to what
non-linear means.
Whenever you die, you literally ?go to hell? and choose how to return ? straight back to earth with all your belonging, or load a saved game.
It should be clarified that this ?feature? only exists in the multiplayer portion of the game. Do not assume that the single player and multiplayer portions share the same features. But alas, you would have known this had you actually played the game.
Which also makes me think he just played multiplayer and wrote the review from that. If he'd played single player, he probably would have died at least once while playing and kinda noticed
that feature isn't in single player.
Within the main plot proper, you get to travel all over the new earth...
This sentence is a crime unto itself.
Actually, it's a downright fallacy, since you only get to parade around Europe, really. South America is mentioned in the backstory, but you never get to go there. So, it's rather hard to claim you get to travel
all over the new Earth, when you only get to play in a small part of it.
I chose to have a ramble about and hopefully get some elite weapons before attempting any quests and thus went for a scout.
This is utter gibberish. Do you even care to read your material, or does it hurt you as much as it hurts everybody else? I?m quite certain that the other two who ?proof-read? your review simply dismissed it as yet another one of your dribbles and simply handed it over to you ?claiming- to have proof-read it. You see, not all of us are masochists.
I don't see a problem with this bit of prose. Care to explain what's wring with it? I mean, it's a run on sentence, but it's not a glaring English screw up. Hell, replace the first "and" with a comma, and it works fine.
This bring out an important feature of the game ? conversation. Thankfully, conversation is good to use within the game.
Well, if it?s important, it?s certainly going to be ?good to use?. This sentence is yet another case of redundancy.
Who gives a flip if it's redundant? The statement isn't true considering the vast majority of playtime is dungeon crawling. Dialogue is only useful in the beginning of the game and only a few times beyond that.
If you're going to criticise, it's probably better to point out inaccuracy rather than articulation.
This is important as how many game have we all played where the plot is revealed and missed by you, because you couldn?t be bothered waiting around for the NPC to get to the point?
Trying to understand this sentence hurts me almost as much as a kick to the face.
Yeah, this begs the question as to whether or not it was proof-read. I'm not even sure what the hell he's trying to say.
The open-ended nature of this is good. I?m all for having main plots and quests, but only having one goal gets tiresome very quickly ? here you get to choose what you do, which I feel is very important in an RPG, especially to give you that ?feel? for the world and your character.
It seems to me that if you did play this game, you did not progress far beyond the first two hours of play.
That's more like it, considering the only choices you get to make are really in Barcelona. After that, you're funnelled from dungeon to dungeon. Yippee!
I don?t really want to go into the main plot here, as it is for you to discover. I was pleasantly surprised by it ? finding myself immersed within the Lionheart world quickly.
This certainly seems like the scapegoat anyone would use if they didn?t play the game for more than 2 hours. I can?t believe people like you get paid to write this sort of poorly researched material.
He was too immersed to get out of Barcelona!
I think the greatest tribute to the immersiveness or the world is that I stayed up till 4am on the day I received my copy from Gamer's Hell.
I do suppose that this can be construed as the truth if you had only started playing the game at 2 AM.
It might have taken him until 2AM to find a person on GameSpy Arcade to play the multiplayer, with. Also, I'd like to point out the review was finished at 4:27AM that day, proof read twice by 4:32AM that day, and then later posted.
It does have an innovative ?aim? feature, where you can tell your character to go for specific body parts, which I found a small distraction.
I would not call borrowing a feature from a much older game (Fallout) to be an example of innovation.
Fallout, Fallout 2, and Arcanum. Arcanum's actually worked in real time, no less.
In the game, even if you skip through the text, you get a thing called the ?Quest log?. It basically tells you what you have to do, and who you are looking for and so on.
?And so on?? Would you care to elaborate, or does writing tire you? You don?t seem to show much empathy for your readers by expecting them to discern what you are referring to when none of this is ever explained. Reviews are meant to explain, not confuse!
And let's face it, just mentioning a RPG has a quest log is like mentioning a 3D RTS has camera control. It's a given. This is where elaboration is key! Why the fuck are you mentioning it has a standard feature? What's impressive enough about it that it's even mentioned?
The game commences with a standard character generation sequence...
Pray tell, what is ?standard?? Please define the meaning of ?standard? in this context.
Type a name, pick some stats, GET READY!
That's what he's saying. Of course, it might be useful to give
a little more information.
"Ahh, multiplayer ? the scourge of many an early riser. I played the game against a friend from the start "
Lionheart does not have a competitive multiplayer feature. It is strictly cooperative in that setting, so I do not understand how you could have played ?against? your friend? unless you used the wrong words to describe it, or simply forgot to play the game before you wrote this ?professional? review of yours which you so openly mock others for criticizing.
You totally missed the admission, Exit.
I played the game against a friend from the start. pretty much spells out this is how he played Lionheart. He fired it up, and went straight to multiplayer.
The plot is gripping ? if you get over the problems, then this really is a worthwhile title.
That?s akin to saying that getting eaten by a shark could be a worthwhile experience, if you liked the taste of fish.
I think it's important to note up until this point, he's said
fuck all about the plot other than to say he won't say anything about it. About the only thing you can walk away from this review about the plot of it is that the review thinks it's gripping.
