Review ToEE smack down at Gaming Illustrated

[Saint_Proverbius]

Tags: Temple of Elemental Evil

<a href="http://www.gamingillustrated.com/">Gaming Illustrated</A> has done up <A href="http://www.gamingillustrated.com/toee.php">their review</A> of <a href="http://www.greyhawkgame.com">Temple of Elemental Evil</a>, giving it a <b>62%</b> and a <b>Dead Fish</b> rating, mainly for bugs. Here's the conclusion:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote>This open-ended morality and skill system gives TOEE a real story based on the stats, something which would have makes it a highly replayable game. The designers even went so far encourage *re*playing the game with a dimwit party spokesman for an amusing change. It?s almost assured that when the promised patch comes around, I?ll be popping TOEE back into the CD drive and continuing the adventure. In the meantime, the bugs make TOEE a real disappointment with a silver lining of a good translation of D&D rules and adventure.</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Kind of makes you wonder how well this game would have been recieved if they'd had more time to work out the bugs instead of having to work out the evil stuff like hookers.
<br>
<br>
Spotted this at <a href="http://www.bluesnews.com">Blue's News</a>
<br>

 

[Otaku_Hanzo]

Kind of makes you wonder how well this game would have been recieved if they'd had more time to work out the bugs instead of having to work out the evil stuff like hookers.

Those wacky moronic saints at Atari. :evil:

 

[GreenNight]

Kind of makes you wonder how well this game would have been recieved if they'd had more time to work out the bugs instead of having to work out the evil stuff like hookers.

Those wacky moronic saints at Atari. :evil:

Don't forget the ones at WoTC/Hasbro.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

Damn, this game would be friggin so much better, not that it's not awesome now, if there weren't so many bugs. What is it with these publishers anyway?

 

[Volourn]

I agree. Them expecting the developers to do the job theyw ere hired properly. WHAT were they thinking.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Changing the job a month before you expect to ship it and expecting everything to turn out okay isn't kosher. This isn't a first person shooter where you can remove a weapon or a map and everything still works great, after all.

 

[Peacedog]

agree. Them expecting the developers to do the job theyw ere hired properly. WHAT were they thinking.

You might have missed it, but Troika did in fact do the job they were hired to do, and do it properly. Had this not been the case, Atari would have ditched the project at some point along the way. What Atari did do was say "ok, we'd like to be done spending money on this project. Can we release it now and worry about patching it later without having the game tank sales wise? Would spending more money boost us in that department?" While it is certainly possible Atari just said "F*ck, let's just cut our losses, release the product, and forget it ever existed", it doesn't look that likely (though this is certainly not unheard of).

The answer to those questions, from Atari's perspective, were apparently "Yes" and "It isn't worth the resources". Now, both questions are open to debate - but the game doesn't appear to have tanked outright. In fact, it just might be making Atari some cash. That Atari made this decision (a business one) in no way is indicative of Troika not doing their job.

The game certainly has issues, many of which could have been ironed out with another month to month and a half of testing (unless the people doing the QA are idiots, not a possibility that can be discounted, though I'm an optimist). Neither is this an idication of Troika failing to do their job. Thinking this is the case on either count simply displays a lack of understanding of how both software and game design work. Especially when other factors (the potential profit, Atari's decision to both release and patch the game) would indicate Troika in fact suceeded in their job.

 

[Volourn]

SP: So, other than the whore house, what exactly was removed from the game by the new standards? All I hear is "general evil options", and that tells me nothing.

Peacedog: All we know was that TOEE was in the top ten sales for the first month. That really proves nothing other than the fact that the D&D name sales to the same people no matter what for the most part.
Youa re right through; Troika did their job;but did it poorly. What I find funny every single thing wrong with the game is Atari's fault accoridng to most people.

Lack of interesting characters? Atari's fault.

Lack of a good story? Atari's fault.

Poor writing? Atari's fault.

Boring quests? Atari's fault.

Bugs up the wazoo? Atari's fault.

Identify that isn't identify? Atari's fault.

Need I go on?


Now, let's look at the thinsg the game DID do right.

The most accurate game to D&D rules? Troika's fault.

Great combat? Troika's fault.

Killer frogs thats wallow? Troika's fault.


You see the pattern. That's the main problem. The ludricrinous of the one sidedness should irk anyone with an iota of common sense.


I still say even though Troika made the game, and the game is a good little job; I don't think they succeeded at their job as was intended. The reviews, the lacklustre sales (for a D&D game that was hyped) , and this fingeirng of the evil Atari proves this. People always blame the other people. The bottom line is if time was such an issue why did Troika agree to the deadline? I guess they aren't as brilliant as some would have us beleive. I mean, pre release, Troika said the time alotted to the game was plenty of time to get the job done, and get it done right. Weird. The tune shure changes now.

 

[Jed]

C'mon Volourn, you forgot a few:

Lack of valuables stored in barrels and crates outside of homes?

Lack of +6 vorpal lewt everywhere you turn?

Lack of meaningless options?

Lack of diety-spawned PC?

Lack of jiggly b00bies (wait for Bloodlines)?

Lack of mobs of low-level encounters?

Lack of crappy bastardized combat?

Lack of BioWare logo?

 

[Elwro]

Lack of interesting characters? Atari's fault.

Lack of a good story? Atari's fault.

Poor writing? Atari's fault.

Boring quests? Atari's fault.

Anyone actually said that?

 

[Jora]

Steve Moret admitted that many of the bugs were Troika's fault and could have been easily prevented. I'm trying to find a link.

Edit: I didn't find that particular post from Moret (maybe it was some other Troika guy?) but I did find this (by Sean Craig):

while I accept the charge of being flip, and I am can stand being called an a$$, what i can't let rest is the accusation that I don't care about my customers or am unconcerned about the quality of our product. TOEE is our baby and a labor of love, and every bug of mine found burns like a cancer in my stomach. Believe me when I say that while we knew some of the interfaces were klunky and we were not 100% satisfied with the performance of the game, neither Troika nor Atari were aware of any save game bugs, CTD issues, or any major rules violation when we shipped. The rules issues in particular pain me because they are so easy to fix. How did this happen? Well, when you're working 100 hours a week for months on end, things slip past you. You're too close to the game to see it objectively. On top of that, sometimes a bug fix at one point in the code will introduce more bugs elsewhere. Next project, i'm definately going to lobby for adopting practices, such as more thorough code reviews and automated unit tests, which minimize these kinds of errors.

(http://www.ataricommunity.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=4336110#post4336110)

 

[Major_Blackhart]

I thought it was because Atari decided to use an earlier version of the game or some such nonsense and edit out things, like the whorehouse.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Anyone actually said that?

Volourn?

 

[Volourn]

What?

 

[Otaku_Hanzo]

LOL

 

[Chadeo]

Volourn I agree it is not fair to blame the publisher for some of that.

I blame the original d&d module for being boring and I blame Troika for deciding to make a game based off of a well known module that would get some free sales based on name recognition.

Still, looking at what the game is based on, I would say that Troika did a lot to vastly improve the module. Even so I have never been impressed with classic d&d story and plot lines and thus while I enjoy ToEE it falls short of the example set by previous Troika games.

Though I also agree with XJEDX one can also fault Troika for leaving out a lot of things. =)

The problem with making the most faithful d&d game to date though really is the shallowness of the d&d license and the crap one currently needs to put up with from Mr. Potato Head.

Not that my one voice matters, but please…for the love of god, if you must do another d&d game, please make it a 100% Troika created setting. No more of these module conversions. To make them interesting you have to do as much work as just creating a brand new setting.

Keep the engine, bring back the arcanum story telling.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

That would be awesome if they did that man!!! ALRIGHT 200 POSTS

 

[Elwro]

You should edit that second one, Major, to say "201 POSTS" .

 

[Spazmo]

Double post murderized.

 

[Volourn]

Actually, Chateo, I would say that TOEE is the weakest I've seen the actual TOEE module handled by any DM. One example is that the Temple has baiscally no reinforcements. You can go in and clear one floor, leave and come back, and it'll be basically the same. In the pnp module; it specifically states that reinforcements would be brought in to refortify the temple if the PC left it for more than a day, or too. There are other examples of this as well. Of course, TOEE isn't the only crpg guilty of this kind of thing. Almost all of them don't beleive in villains refortifying their hideaways... Weird stuff.

The D&D license is ONLY shallow if the one using it makes it so. I agree 100% though; they should have used their own created story, and characters. At least, at worst it would be original; not a retreat to a popular dungeonc rawl for eons ago. (YES, sleight exaggertaion for moi!).

 

[Chadeo]

The fact that the temple does not bring in reinforcements is a non-issue when it comes to the role-playing aspects of the game. Might as well get annoyed that you can’t lift up a table and put it in front of a door. I.E. it has nothing to do with the setting or writing. In fact depending on how this was handled it could cause many players to totally freak out (wtf man! I killed this room already!). You would have to make it clear that the temple could get reinforcements and that either they would stop or you could slow them down somehow (which I admit would be very cool, but again very hard to pull off).

I am talking about the entire town of Homlet(sp?). I am talking about the settings involved in the module. I am talking about the basic plot.

Props to Troika for at least keeping an evil path in the game, but even so the personalities and locations in the game are just so…blah. It is a typical d&d fantasy world.

An example of the kind of criticism that I would level would be the fact that even if you start as the most evil church burning party possible, you still have to say either (paraphrasing here but you get the point) “Why yes I would love to help you find a bigger barn cuz gosh I am an adventurer and that’s what I do!” or “I must be going now”.

While I don’t think it is completely fair to expect all side quests and minor npc’s to have a variety of responses, I think that a large part of this blandness comes from the basic d&d setting of a medieval town and a group of “adventurers”. Fallout (yes yes not fully troika but it at least partially counts) and Arcanum have a rich detailed world, which allows for things to be far more interesting.

My point is just that in order to lift the old ToEE module above its bland d&d roots you need to basically do a total rewrite. So why not just start with your own setting in the first place?

Then again I guess some people really think the medieval fantasy town setting is the height of interesting.

Also a note for fairness’s sake, due to my utter suckage at fighting, I have not played through ToEE completely. I guess it is possible things get better, but from what I saw, Nulb(sp?) and the Temple were not any more interesting for me. Pretty, but not interesting.

 

[Voss]

It isn't that the medieval fantasy town setting is the height of interesting, its more a matter of being conservative. Companies and publishers don't like pushing too hard at the edges of what may or may not be acceptable to the majority of potential customers.

And a large number of gamers, when you get right down to it, are conservative as well. Witness all the panicked complaining when a new edition of anything is announced. Part of its money, sure, but a lot of it is that the rules set that their comfortable with and know how to exploit is changing and they get spooked.

As far as medieval fantasy goes (or rather medieval European fantasy), well its the standard at this point. And companies look at abysmal failures like Maztica or Al-Qadim, and the sucessful in some circles, but not really overall settings like Planescape and Dark Sun. Some people really like them, but they don't have the mass appeal (and thus, reliable cash from a larger audience) that the more vanilla Greyhawk or FR have.

Oh, and your point- about creating their own setting. Valid, but its less costly, easier and quicker to adapt an existing text than to create something. Which would require a full fledged design team, as well as a larger window than the 18 (or whatever) months, that this deal with Atari was for.

 

[Volourn]

Actually, accoridng most sources who worked with both selfc reated settings , and licensed based ones; it is much easier, and in the long run cheaper to use one's owns etting or various reasons they have expalined. I know that JE Sawyer is the most outspoekn for that issue. And, apparantly, BIO agrees. I'm also sure that Troika has learned that the hard way after the experience with TOEE.

Think of this. With Arcanum, no one can say that x wans't implemted properly; but in a D&D game you got people whining about how y, z, and f spell wa simplemeted. (yes, I'm know I'm as guilty as everyone else for this). Plus, getting access to a license isn't exactly cheap either; and in Troika's case; I seriously doubt they were paid a bundle of money.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

The fact that the temple does not bring in reinforcements is a non-issue when it comes to the role-playing aspects of the game. Might as well get annoyed that you can?t lift up a table and put it in front of a door. I.E. it has nothing to do with the setting or writing. In fact depending on how this was handled it could cause many players to totally freak out (wtf man! I killed this room already!). You would have to make it clear that the temple could get reinforcements and that either they would stop or you could slow them down somehow (which I admit would be very cool, but again very hard to pull off).

Another good reason is because re-enforcing the temple wouldn't be FUN for the player. It'd be like CRPGs with pissant critters late in the game, where there's no threat potential for them. When your party is 7th+ level, some restocked bugbears would just be an annoyance.

 

[Volourn]

That's interesting. Troika must have thought bugbears were fun since I was still fighting them up when I was tenth level on the deepest level of the temple. Weird stuff.