First Arcanum playthrough... disappointed :shrug:

[Severian Silk]

I completed my first Arcanum playthrough, and have to say it didn't live up to expectations set by others here.

Yes the game has CHOICESANDCONSEQUENCES. But the game world is pretty small, and there's really not a whole lot going on or a lot of people to talk to. So all the dialog options and whatnot seem somewhat wasted. I mean, the game's scope never felt like it grew beyond that of a theme park with a handful of set locations. Definitely not a fleshed-out, living and breathing world. Maybe a few more continents and a couple more chapters and/or plot twists would have helped.

Other than the combat and the lack of a certain obnoxious thief girl, I can't really say I liked it better than BGII or KOTOR. And it's nowhere near as good as the two Fallouts. I even liked ToEE better, and greatly prefer the first two Gothics where the smalishl gameworld actually works. Bugs aside, I even felt Prelude to Darkness was as or more enjoyable if somewhat short.

I guess what I'm saying is that the game didn't feel "epic" enough for me, and there just wasn't enough of a narrative to satisfy me.

(It's possible though that the easy combat as a melee fighter marred the game for me a bit. Maybe if there had been more challenging combat encounters it would have taken my mind off the lack of content.)

My 2 cents. Meh.

 

[Reject_666_6]

You have to play it 7 times to like it.

 

[Silentrider]

Saying that Gothic is better than Arcanum seems very wrong to me.
I'd even say that Arcanum is better than Fallout 2 just because of the setting, if nothing else.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

so what do you think about the witcher 2

 

[someone else]

You prefer the combat in Arcanum over BG2 and KOTOR?

 

[sea]

Game world? Small? What? It's not the biggest ever but there's a pretty large number of locations and most of them are pretty interesting - albeit also under-utilised to a degree, like cities which only have one or two quests. Also, it's not quite as linear as it might appear at first - you can find locations on the map even if you haven't been told where they are, for instance, so you can use your meta-knowledge to move about the game world at leisure.

The real strength of Arcanum is its character system. Next to Fallout it's one of the few RPGs that gets a classless system right, and there is a huge amount of replay value in the game depending on how you build your character. Going through as a technology-focused gunslinger is pretty different from a mage, or fighter, or alchemist, or explosives nut, or socialite, or shrewd businessman, etc. While not everything is balanced perfectly (guns suck early game), there's a huge amount of variety and just about every approach to the game is viable, even if some are more difficult than others. Using the same points for all aspects of character development (attributes and skills) is also a subtle stroke of genius, I think - never have I had to think so carefully about which ways I want to steer my character, considering that those points aren't too easy to come by.

 

[Brotherman Bill]

Now this is surprising. Drog alts now come with a 2003 join date? That guy always was too obsessed for his own good.






OP is right though

 

[Jaesun]

2/10

 

[SCO]

You didn't realize it, but there are several "secret" locations only given as coordinates somewhere in the world.


Some even aren't given, but are logical from the maps (ie: there is a pass on the mountains, but you'd have to be OCD to cross that way).

Also try the mastery quests. Even cheat to get all the points to do them all. They are fun.

 

[visions]

You didn't realize it, but there are several "secret" locations only given as coordinates somewhere in the world.


Some even aren't given, but are logical from the maps (ie: there is a pass on the mountains, but you'd have to be OCD to cross that way).

You mean the pass near Caladon, in the south? Guess I'm OCD then .

Come to think of it, I discovered many areas before I was meant to go there or given the locations (Stillwater, Vooriden, Stone Cutter Clan, Kree, Tulla, that quarry etc).

 

[Johannes]

Arcanum would've benefited nicely not from having extra continents, but some more friendly locations, small (human) villages would've fleshed the out world nicely even if they'd only contain very few quests each. Cause the gameworld did feel big to me, but containing mostly only the major cities made it feel kinda empty too.

And wtf were you doing to stumble upon all those randomly visions?

 

[visions]

Exploring the world map, looking for locations.

 

[1eyedking]

Ah, Arcanum.

Tarant's sewers...

The Black Mountain mines...

The Wheel Clan passages...

The Vendigroth dungeon...

And they say The Witcher is bad

 

[hoverdog]

the key to understanding 1eyedking.

 

[Serious_Business]

Arcanum is actually pretty shit

 

[ChristofferC]

I have given it two tries. The story didn't grab me and I couldn't stand the gameplay.

I don't really like any of the Troika games. Bloodlines is the least bad of them.

 

[el Supremo]

I have tried it once. Terrible graphics.

 

[Excidium]

Arcanum has a pretty cool setting.

I'll stop at that.

 

[Severian Silk]

Game world? Small? What? It's not the biggest ever but there's a pretty large number of locations and most of them are pretty interesting - albeit also under-utilised to a degree, like cities which only have one or two quests.

I think "under-utilized" is the word I was really looking for. Thanks!

Also, it's not quite as linear as it might appear at first - you can find locations on the map even if you haven't been told where they are, for instance, so you can use your meta-knowledge to move about the game world at leisure.

I realized it's not linear. I found a lot of locations myself just by wandering, as well. But if there's little content, then it doesn't really matter how non-linear the game is, IMO.

The real strength of Arcanum is its character system. Next to Fallout it's one of the few RPGs that gets a classless system right, and there is a huge amount of replay value in the game depending on how you build your character. Going through as a technology-focused gunslinger is pretty different from a mage, or fighter, or alchemist, or explosives nut, or socialite, or shrewd businessman, etc. While not everything is balanced perfectly (guns suck early game), there's a huge amount of variety and just about every approach to the game is viable, even if some are more difficult than others. Using the same points for all aspects of character development (attributes and skills) is also a subtle stroke of genius, I think - never have I had to think so carefully about which ways I want to steer my character, considering that those points aren't too easy to come by.

Maybe I'll try a technologist character at a future time. I just thought it was sadly imbalanced: I was able to max out dexterity, strength, dodge and melee, turning myself into a fighting powerhouse; and still had points left over to max out charisma and persuade. Toward the end I had a full party of followers, but could still complete nearly every combat encounter myself in one round with my katana, rendering the rest of my party mostly useless. Maybe if a melee oriented character required extra points for combat techniques it would have been better balanced. I know that the latter Spiderweb games began to add combat techniques to make fighters more interesting to develop.

Also, while I don't cherish FedEx quests all that much, too many of the quests could be solved in one or two simple steps. A little more involvement on the player's part would have been nice.

 

[larpingdude18]

i tried to play arcanum a few months ago and i gave up after trying for about an hour.

 

[Orgasm]

Arcanum is irredeemable dung. But Gothic 1 is worse. So I dunno if I should call you names...

 

[Esquilax]

I didn't like Arcanum either. I played an intelligent technologist character and I couldn't stomach finishing it. I think I was at the part where I was finding out clues out the Dark Elves and I left Qintarra. The game was a complete mess and not very enjoyable. It had a cool setting and some interesting lore, but aside from that, I didn't have that much fun playing it. I stuck out as long as I did because I figured it would get better.

There is simply way too much dungeon-crawling for a game like that. The Black Mountain Clan mines nearly made me ragequit because of all the stupid fucking traps everywhere and the fact that the place was loaded up with monsters all over the place without much rhyme or reason.

The exploration was weak as well, I'm afraid. I did find some really cool locations, like the ancient Derian-Ka temple where I met Torian-Kel. However, while talking to him uncovered a lot of cool lore and info about the world that I otherwise wouldn't have discovered, it required me to undergo a tedious slog through a dungeon full of the undead. Most other locations I stumbled into were just caves filled with monsters - nothing that interesting.

Virgil really annoyed the shit out of me. Some bad writing there too: "Oooh, I have a shady, dark past that I've conspicuously mentioned BUT I CAN'T TALK ABOUT IT!" Really cheesy. Am I the only one who found him annoying? Didn't help that the VO made him sound like kind of a pussy too.

 

[Serious_Business]

i tried to play arcanum a few months ago and i gave up after trying for about an hour.

Steadfast autoritative testimony if I ever heard any. No challenger will stand up to such brilliance, this thread is at the end of its lungs. Arcanum is now shit, welcome to the new Codex my nigs

 

[Melcar]

I find Arcanum hard to play through as well. The setting and game world is what gives me strength, but it can only do so much. Maybe if it was more nextgen.

 

[Mastermind]

Arcanum has always been shit. Troika in general has always been shit actually. Their games are essentially giant steaming piles of turd with the odd gem embedded in it. They are pretty much bioware with shittier writing.