Review Hordes steams up RPGDot's glasses

[Saint_Proverbius]

Tags: Neverwinter Nights: Hordes of the Underdark

<A href="http://www.rpgdot.com/">RPGDot</A> has posted a stellar <A href="http://www.rpgdot.com/index.php?hsaction=10053&ID=873">review</a> of the lastest expansion pack to <A href="http://nwn.bioware.com">Neverwinter Nights</a>, which would be the one with the Drow and stuff, <a href="http://nwn.bioware.com/underdark">Hordes of the Underdark</a>. They gave it their <b>Platinum Choice</b> thingy, even:
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote>I had as much fun with this game as I did with Temple of Elemental Evil for exactly the opposite reasons: Fully realized and interesting NPCs as opposed to using my imagination, fast paced combat to turn based, strong story over - er - classic story. After I send this review off I'll probably be back into Hordes for another rampage through the depths of the world. I rarely complete a game more than twice, traditionally, and I completed both Temple and Hordes three times. Either my patience is increasing (not likely) or recent games are increasing in quality of replayability. I hope it's the latter ... though my crash-inducing soundcard hopes its the former, I'm sure.</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
I completed <A href="http://www.greyhawkgame.com">ToEE</a> three times, but I couldn't begin to get enough interest up to even write a review of <A href="http://nwn.bioware.com/underdark">Hordes of the Underdark</a>, let alone play it again. It wasn't awful like <A href="http://nwn.bioware.com">Neverwinter Nights</a>, but it wasn't that interesting either.
<br>
<br>
Thanks, <b>Garrett</b>!

 

[Elwro]

I think that's quite a good review. I only don't understand why are the marks so high, while the reviewer lists quite a number of the game's disadvantages.

 

[Anonymous]

Because BioWare has money.

 

[atoga]

It's the same situation as FOBOS: bad reviews, high marks. Too bad most people only check the numbers; on pretty much every site, including the major stuff like GameSpy, the comments are mostly just filler to tie the numbers together.

 

[Anonymous]

Yeah, and if they read it, see the end numbers, they think 'Hmm, they said some of the faults are the game are large, but it seems over-all it's good.'

 

[Rendelius]

To say that it received a high rating because Bioware has money is nothing less than an insult, and I strongly object to that attitude of yours.
Could you accept that someone rates a game high because he liked it? And could you accept that there are games that are fun DESPITE of some flaws? Look at TToEE for example: In my opinion, the flaws are legion, but still I loved it more than anything else what was released 2003.
And no: I didn't write the review you are critizising. I just got upset by this silly accusation.

 

[Human Shield]

ToEE review - Wish I could give the game higher marks because I liked it but it has too many flaws

KOTOR review - The game has many flaws but I will give it high marks because I liked it.

Weird isn't it.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Exactly. Human Shield summed it up nicely.


[BTW, HS, nice avatar :wink: ]

 

[Jed]

To say that it received a high rating because Bioware has money is nothing less than an insult, and I strongly object to that attitude of yours.

I strongly defend the position. Bioware gets slack because they are a big glossy dev house and reviewers want to stay on their good side. KotOR, while being a different style of CrPG is not as good a game design-wise, yet it consistently scores better. Smells like politics and hype to me.

 

[Otaku_Hanzo]

I have to agree with Jed there. Simply the way it is these days, sad as it may be.

 

[Nightjed]

There was only one class that repeatedly got owned when I tried it: Shifter. Good and fun idea but ultimately... turning into monsters that the other classes splatter en masse isn't a particularly effective way to win the game. The epic forms are pretty neat but they're so hard to qualify for that the only successful way to play a Shifter is to be a high level druid first... and never transform (as you can't cast spells while transformed). Which defeats the purpose of shifter nicely -- especially since anything the shifter can get epic wise the druid can too.

the problem is that he is thinking that the shifter should complement the druid, thats wrong, he forgot bioware likes to wipe the rules on their asses, no form (not even humanoid forms which btw are rare) can cast spells, so the druid levels are useless, however you only need druid lvl 5, if you want a good shifter you need to go either 2 ways, fighter (good with all the forms) or monk (INCREDIBLE with natural weapon monsters) all the monks abilities, including stun, heal, the armor bonuses, the extra attacks, im talking of a big mean iron golem punching machine here, also as a shifter your physical atributes are irrelevant (however remember even if you can turn into monsters with 25 str you still need to right natural str for power attack and stuff)
you can reach epic monk levels + epic shifter levels + druid lvl req in the level limit so its all good, if you want all the forms you need to plan your leveling up a lot tho

edit: you also dont get the form feats (there is one that gives you power attack but thats it) like on the pnp game.

ah, btw, forget using the shifter on modules other that the main game, because it crashes badly with the new forms

im pissed at bioware for this prestige class selection, you can be a damn harper (wth wants to be a harper) but no drunken master!, damn them, i want my fire breathing drunk monk

The Fugly, sadly, is the epic component of the game. The epic progression is fine... they translated it from the pen and paper nearly flawlessly from what I can tell. Everyone gets the same attack and saving throws after 20 levels of class, which is as it should be. Each class gets bonus feats when they should. No, that part is fine... what's fugly about the matter are the insane pre-requisites for feats.
...
Let's not even look at the 30 wisdom a shifter needs to get Dragon Wildshape.

the most useless stat for the shifter for other than the monk armor bonus, damn you bioware

Could you accept that someone rates a game high because he liked it? And could you accept that there are games that are fun DESPITE of some flaws? Look at TToEE for example: In my opinion, the flaws are legion, but still I loved it more than anything else what was released 2003.

Thtats the thing, he liked it but he points out a LOT of problems, so the >95% ratings sound a bit overrated

 

[Nightjed]

ah damn, 4 ppl replied while i was writing that :p

 

[Nightjed]

i agree with XJEDX too :D

 

[DemonKing]

I strongly defend the position. Bioware gets slack because they are a big glossy dev house and reviewers want to stay on their good side. KotOR, while being a different style of CrPG is not as good a game design-wise, yet it consistently scores better. Smells like politics and hype to me.

Sorry - I assume you mean not as good as TOEE (rather than HOTU).

TOEE was a decent PNP D&D combat/roolz simulation with good graphics but missed the boat completely in terms of voice acting, originality, broken quests and atrociously annoying bugs (even post-patch). Personally I would rate KOTOR a little higher for overall quality and originality.

Saying that the scores HOTU is getting are ridiculous - it is a 6/10 game if you are being generous...but then the game sites/magazines hyped NWN so much I guess they would feel stupid if they assessed it and its expansions honestly.

 

[Spazmo]

I don't really think anyone has bought RPGDot just yet, really. I think the real issue here is simply that numerical scores are a bad thing. Reviewers assign vague and non descriptive numbers to reflect how much they liked a game on a more or less arbitrary basis. Either sites should develop a clear and almost scientific method of grading games much like a teacher in school (which would be a pain) or just dump the numerical hoopla and get to the real point of a review: should people get the game and why..

 

[Nightjed]

heh, do you really think thats ever going to happen ?
well, the average rating have been growing and growing each year (even tho game quality has been droping and droping) maybe when they reach the point where theyll have to give games ratings between 99.000% to 99.999% (if you consider 100% impossible that is) theyll understand numbers are meaningless without a scale

 

[Dhruin]

To say that it received a high rating because Bioware has money is nothing less than an insult, and I strongly object to that attitude of yours.

I strongly defend the position. Bioware gets slack because they are a big glossy dev house and reviewers want to stay on their good side. KotOR, while being a different style of CrPG is not as good a game design-wise, yet it consistently scores better. Smells like politics and hype to me.

Well, go on then - defend it! Surely you can do better than to pull made-up assumptions out of thin air? Tell me about the politics you smell - I'll be fascinated to see what you can make up.

 

[Jed]

Well, go on then - defend it! Surely you can do better than to pull made-up assumptions out of thin air? Tell me about the politics you smell - I'll be fascinated to see what you can make up.

I meant in general, not your site in particular. Why so fucking defensive? At any rate, you should learn the difference between "made-up assumptions out of thin air" and an analysis.

Now stop worrying so goddamn much that somebody might criticize your site and get back to criticizing--er, I mean reviewing games.

Whiner.

 

[Dhruin]

Let me get this straight: Rendelius replies to a ludicrous comment from Llamagod, you quote from Rend's response saying you defend the position - but it's only a general comment? No -- wait -- an analysis.

Criticise the content of the article all you like but defend a position that says we've been bought and I'll probably respond.

 

[chrisbeddoes]

Because BioWare has money.

Probably because this year most of the rpg that came out SUCKED.

So even a mediocre one can get high marks.

Plus the idea that rpgdot may have taked money from anybody to rig reviews is totally ridiculus.

I do not think that such a thing was implied was it ?

Mayby something else was meant.

 

[Jed]

Let me get this straight: Rendelius replies to a ludicrous comment from Llamagod, you quote from Rend's response saying you defend the position - but it's only a general comment? No -- wait -- an analysis. Criticise the content of the article all you like but defend a position that says we've been bought and I'll probably respond.

Here's what I responded to:

To say that it received a high rating because Bioware has money is nothing less than an insult, and I strongly object to that attitude of yours.

Note that Llamagod never stated that RPGDot had been bought, and himself was responding to the question posed: Why can KotOR get high marks despite its flaws while ToEE gets the shaft despite being a great game? I interpreted his response not as they gave your site money, but rather that they can afford the glitz and PRODUCTSHUN VALUES to hype themselves to the point that people are somehow unable to give their swill a truly critical examination. The notion that RPGDot is bought & sold is purely an inferrence on your part, at least as far as Llamagod's and my comments on the topic go.

So, I don't think you're site is bought, just easily dazzled.

I actually like your site, despite the fact that you cover MMOrPGs.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

I'm kind of curious how it got that high of marks, myself. Even Volourn tends to agree with my assessment of HotU in that Chapter 1's first level of Undermountain is pretty good and then gets progressively worse the next two. He did like the second chapter more than I did, but there's nothing very inspirational there. Chapter 3 starts off GREAT, then devolves in to some of the worst puzzle stuff in the history of CRPGs. Beyond the frozen hell area, puzzles are pretty much all there are, and some don't even make sense given the EPIC LEVEL stuff.

But really, it is hard to deny that when it comes to reviewing BioWare games, most sites tend to follow the formula: if (BioWare) score++;

 

[Human Shield]

The thing that annoys me about these expansions is that a ton of players buy expecting new MP stuff (very little) and it causes a landslide in which you have to buy the new expansion to join the majority of online games.

Exactly. Human Shield summed it up nicely.


[BTW, HS, nice avatar :wink: ]

Love your Rorschach avatar on NMA (if the two Role-Players are the same)

 

[Volourn]

Is this a ROLE-PLAYING site, or a CONSPIRACY THEORY site? All this talk of bribery yet not one ounce of proof. People talk like BIO has billions (or even millions) of dollars to bribe silly Internet Geek Reviewers when if one was to do research on their income statements; they'd know they don't. What's funny is how quickly people forget how (comparitively) low SOU's marks were. The bottom line here is you are allowing your bias against BIO to cloud your judgement so that any review that gives them higher than 50% is obviously lying, are brainwashed, were bought, are stupid, etc., etc. Then again, these comments tend to come from the same people who try to claim that TOEE has very few bugs in it, and everyone else including Troika are making said bugs up.

Now, do I personally think that HOTU is worth perfect scores? No. Then again, only 4 games I have ever played have warranted 90%+ so there ya go. However I say, if the guy feels the game is worth a near (or absolute) perfect score despite his problems with the game then let him be as he obviously liked the game a lot. Just like all the guys who ignore all of TOEE's HUGE problems (realtively easy combat in a dungeon crawl, a 100% completely unoriginal story, an almost entire cast of completely forgettable characters, bugs up the wazoo, awful writing, etc., etc.) and still rate it as their favorite (or second favorite behind Geneforge 2) role-playing game of the year yet expect to be taken seriously really don't have a foot to stand on when whining about another person rating a game pretty high despite having supposedly major complaints about it.

Atoga, if you think that FOBOS has gotten high marks you should look at it from the slanted Internet Geek Review Scores. Its marks, overall, tend to be very low in comparision to most other games. It is, relatively speaking, getting bad reviews AND bad scores across the boards (with some good ones but nothing compared to most games).

In conclusion, enjoy the drama of tha Internet! :D

P.S. I'm just doing my part here.

 

[Dhruin]

Note that Llamagod never stated that RPGDot had been bought, and himself was responding to the question posed: Why can KotOR get high marks despite its flaws while ToEE gets the shaft despite being a great game? I interpreted his response not as they gave your site money, but rather that they can afford the glitz and PRODUCTSHUN VALUES[More...]

Llamagod didn't repond to that question at all. There's no mention of ToEE (apart from a different context in Saint's newsbit) or KoTOR at the point in the thread when Llamagod makes his comment. His post seems pretty clear to me but if you saw it differently, fair enough.

As to the score itself - I personally can only observe Xen's own comments in the review. He says "I had as much fun with this game as I did with Temple of Elemental Evil" - and his ToEE review scored 91%, so on that basis the HotU score seems consistent - it also disproves any idea that ToEE can't get a similar score to a Bioware game (on our site).