Review GameTap praises MotB - 7/10

[Vault Dweller]

Tags: Neverwinter Nights 2; Obsidian Entertainment

<a href=http://www.gametap.com>GameTap</a> has posted a <a href=http://www.gametap.com/home/read/article/8a25090115b7d1850115ba85a5ee2adf>review</a> of Mask of the Betrayer, stating that it's "<b>quite possibly the most original, and best, Dungeons & Dragons game since the days of Baldur's Gate II and PlaneScape: Torment</b>, and that "<b>the quests and story are world class</b>", and rewarding such excellence with 7/10. Well, maybe they have high standards. Let's see... Halo 3 - 10/10! BioShock - 10/10! The Orange Box - 10/10! *sigh*
<br>
<br>
<blockquote>Mentioning those last two titles is quite appropriate, as Mask feels like a fusion of those two. It takes the epic, high-level combat of Baldur's Gate II (notable the Throne of Bhaal expansion for that game), and fuses it with some of the storytelling and role-playing concepts of Planescape: Torment.
<br>
...
<br>
Everything sounds hunky-dory, but there is one element that left me ping-ponging between outright hatred and resigned annoyance: the spirit-meter. Without getting into story details, it essentially turns you into a drug addict. You get an extra meter to watch over that continually declines no matter what you are doing. As the meter runs low, you experience various side effects, and if it runs out, you die. To fill the meter, you either have to give in to cravings (which lock you in a cycle of needing an, er, spirit fix even more frequently) or use other abilities to satisfy your cravings.
<br>
<br>
This sounds interesting in theory, but I got annoyed that when I would rest to recover life and magic, the spirit meter still drains. My evil character was forced to "eat" to raise the meter, as the other way of combating the hunger results in your character becoming good, which can screw with certain classes that have alignment restrictions. And because you're forced to wait five minutes between "eatings," I found myself not "eating" fast enough due to the cooldown period, and was even forced to give up experience points to stave off my hunger. Sometimes, it's a mild nuisance, but for me, it was a major headache. </blockquote>He even had to sacrifice experience points to keep his character alive? That's outrageous. How dare they!
<br>

 

[fastpunk]

The 8s,9s and 10s are reserved for those who pay...

 

[bezimek]

The 8s,9s and 10s are reserved for those who pay...

(...) pay a lot of.

 

[Kingston]

Isn't it odd that reviewers are capable of some proper though when they review MotB, but when anything else comes in their way they turn back into slobbering morons.

 

[pkt-zer0]

That's odd, to say the least. I'm supposed to believe that they knocked off three points for technical issues like the camera, whereas Oblivion got 9/10 with its absolutely retarded AI? Whee.

 

[Vault Dweller]

And then Atari will look at the review scores and tell Obsidian to stop fucking around and start making quality RPGs like NWN2 OC and HALO.

MOAR COMBAT LESS FAGOTRY LIEK SPIRIT METARS AND NON-FUNNY CHARACTARS!

The REALLY sad thing is that all those morons who gave it 7-8/10 acknowledged that it was a pretty good game, better than most shit they saw in years. Yet their scores ensure that it will be awhile until we see games like that again.

 

[Starwars]

It's also probably the goold ole "expansions are lesser beings" mindframe at work.

EDIT: Except Shivering Isles of course, lulz.

 

[Chefe]

The 8s,9s and 10s are reserved for those who pay...

That said, I probably won't get this, because NWN2 is shit.

 

[Volourn]

"The REALLY sad thing is that all those morons who gave it 7-8/10 acknowledged that it was a pretty good game, better than most shit they saw in years. Yet their scores ensure that it will be awhile until we see games like that again."

And, those whine about it should get 9s or 10s or how much 'better' than it is than x gaem (usually Oblivion is the target) tend to ignore MOTB's faults.

Don't get me wrong. It's a good game; but overrated.

 

[Kingston]

Somehow it seems that reviewers have to give the same score for games as their peers, as not to appear grumpy and unappreciative, and ofcourse to keep the ads coming in. Once the first big game site / game magazine (IGN, Gamespot, PC Gamer etc.) review is out everyone has to keep that score as their base so that they don't look unprofeshunal.

Its not really journalism because they are more dependent on ads than their readers. Its only when they are devoted to their readers that you get proper journalism, because in the end the readers will smell the bullshit and they will notice when they are being decieved. And that's when the sales go down. Currently though there doesn't seem to be an alternative to the bullshit so the readers feel that its the best they've got and so they don't complain. If we ever got a proper gaming magazine we would probably see quite a shift of readers to that magazine, which in turn would make the old bigger magazines restructure themselves and the whole system would start improving itself. That wouldn't happen for a while though, since gaming journalism is very young. Either there is a reformation or the whole thing collapses on itself, given time. Games aren't cheap after all.

 

[Vault Dweller]

The 8s,9s and 10s are reserved for those who pay...

That said, I probably won't get this, because NWN2 is shit.

Indeed. Yet MotB is a very different game, completely unrelated to the OC.

And, those whine about it should get 9s or 10s or how much 'better' than it is than x gaem (usually Oblivion is the target) tend to ignore MOTB's faults.

It's not about that, Volly.

I'd rate the game at 8-8.5, BUT I'd not give Oblivion, Halo 3, or BioShock (which I enjoyed) 10/10. So, it's not about whether or not 8 is a poor score - it's not. It's about the discrepancy and the perceived value of scores. These days, 10 means great game, 9 - good game, 8 - flawed but worth giving it a shot, 7 - crap. Most publishers seek 9.2+ scores - as ridiculous as that sounds, and anything that's rated at 7-8 is a failure.

 

[pkt-zer0]

I'd rate the game at 8-8.5, BUT I'd not give Oblivion, Halo 3, or BioShock (which I enjoyed) 10/10. So, it's not about whether or not 8 is a poor score - it's not. It's about the discrepancy and the perceived value of scores. These days, 10 means great game, 9 - good game, 8 - flawed but worth giving it a shot, 7 - crap. Most publishers seek 9.2+ scores - as ridiculous as that sounds, and anything that's rated at 7-8 is a failure.

Hah, yeah, I remember the older days - a four page review of System Shock 1 plus an additional page for a brief walkthrough, the game rated around 85%, i.e. pretty darn awesome. Compare that to a single page 9.75 Mass Effect review.

 

[Chefe]

The 8s,9s and 10s are reserved for those who pay...

That said, I probably won't get this, because NWN2 is shit.

Indeed. Yet MotB is a very different game, completely unrelated to the OC.

Well that may be, but

 

[Volourn]

"I'd rate the game at 8-8.5, BUT I'd not give Oblivion, Halo 3, or BioShock (which I enjoyed) 10/10. So, it's not about whether or not 8 is a poor score - it's not. It's about the discrepancy and the perceived value of scores. These days, 10 means great game, 9 - good game, 8 - flawed but worth giving it a shot, 7 - crap. Most publishers seek 9.2+ scores - as ridiculous as that sounds, and anything that's rated at 7-8 is a failure."

This, for the most part, iks true. i didn't even bother with oblivion, Halo 3 is completely out of my gaming vision, and BioShock was fun for what it was. And, I don't think even my favorite games of all time (NWN, BG2, and FO2) are worthy of 10s.

I just think for the most part, people see their favorite game get a 'low' number of 7 and see games they hate (Oblivion) get near perfect score, see red. Nothing wrong with it teally since it;s true everywhere.

The problem is that with few exceptions is that many of those same people have pretty much glossed over ANY imperfection in MOTB (yes, some have made criticisms - most notebaly ph@t lewt); but it seems ignored for the most part to be the first in line to proclaim love for it.

It's basiclaly being guilty of the same thing Codexers usuaully blast Oblvion fanboys for. Anyone who has read my first 'review' of NWN could ahve seen how much I did criticize it despite my liking it.

I just ask fot people not to ignore imperfections,a nd don't worry about some reveiwer not rating the game the same score as you for whatever reason.

 

[Avu]

Its not really journalism because they are more dependent on ads than their readers. Its only when they are devoted to their readers that you get proper journalism, because in the end the readers will smell the bullshit and they will notice when they are being decieved. And that's when the sales go down. Currently though there doesn't seem to be an alternative to the bullshit so the readers feel that its the best they've got and so they don't complain. If we ever got a proper gaming magazine we would probably see quite a shift of readers to that magazine, which in turn would make the old bigger magazines restructure themselves and the whole system would start improving itself. That wouldn't happen for a while though, since gaming journalism is very young. Either there is a reformation or the whole thing collapses on itself, given time. Games aren't cheap after all.

You're giving people too much credit. People are stupid and they will believe anything and everything. People are sheep. Things will not change not for the better anyway. The minority that sees through the crap is too small to count.

 

[Lurkar]

In their defense, Orange Box was fucking fantastic and worth high scores.

Rest of the shit is incomprehensible, mind you.

 

[Futile Rhetoric]

When a game is a rare stroke of genius in a world consumed by wanton stupidity (hyperbole, yes, but only just), it is okay to ignore some "imperfections". The difference between MotB and Oblivion is that underneath its "imperfections", MotB is a hell of an RPG, while Oblivion is a turd sandwich. No one ignores Torment's flaws either, for instance; it doesn't change the fact that the game is universally loved.

The object of this thread however is a lot more simple than all that; when someone says that a game is "quite possibly the most original, and best, Dungeons & Dragons game since the days of Baldur's Gate II and PlaneScape: Torment", and then goes on to give it what amounts to an average score, I have to think of dementia, and how, apparently, its occurrence among gaming "journalists" is on the rise.

 

[Futile Rhetoric]

In their defense, Orange Box was fucking fantastic and worth high scores.

Rest of the shit is incomprehensible, mind you.

Portal is absolutely marvelous; everything else is pretty much a drag. I'm not entirely sure what Episode 2 is supposed to add to the series, other than the continuation of the story, which, while decent, certainly doesn't lift it to the state of utter perfection. Team Fortress 2 is meh.

 

[elander_]

Team Fortress 2 is better played online. I also agree that orangebox is very appealing. Portals is what i would call a great example of innovative gameplay: new rules and new problems to challenge our brains.

 

[MetalCraze]

Spirit-hunger is teh hard

Oh crap! I thought that media-whores are just that... whores.
But now I see that they are simply fucking dumb casual imbeciles.
teh gaem is teh hard!

Don't get me wrong. It's a good game; but overrated.

if MotB is an overrated game what's a Halo with it's 10/10 (which means perfect game) then?

 

[Solaris]

Seems like GameTap are hypocritical cunts...just like most other gaming sites

This thing annoys me too. The scoring system is skewed so much at these places. It's so obvious who is on the take and who isn't.

 

[Lurkar]

I'm not sure if the journalists are being payed as opposed to them just buying into the same shitty hype as everyone else.

Games that get high scores are games that whore their names out. The more people know about your game, the higher the score, it seems. This is especially depressing when you consider that this is the opposite of what it's supposed to be. The game magazines and such are supposed to get word out on the little known games that are good, so that more people will play them. Instead, it's become one big MySpace friends page. "I'm the better journalist, look at how I rated these popular games!" "No I'm better, I rated the popular games higher!"

 

[HanoverF]

Well I will say that in regards the the spirit eating I think it's interesting, but like the influence in NWN2 OC It's handled like utter shit. Lawful Good basically getting a free pass (or the alignment change to it if you aren't), creatures that seemingly should be edible but for some reason are immune to the devour ability, (Still) utter shit companion AI vaporizing your meals. I'm all for the curse being a burden, I don't like that shit game mechanics magnify that burden exponentially.

 

[The_Pope]

My lingering faith in humanity tells me that the numbers are actually done differently to the text - the text is about how good the game is, and the number is how much bloom it has.

 

[Volourn]

"), it is okay to ignore some "imperfections"."

No.



"if MotB is an overrated game what's a Halo with it's 10/10 (which means perfect game) then?"

Don't expect me to defend a Halo game. I've never played any aprt of the series nor do i plan to. And, I don't rate games a 10. evar.