Review GameBanshee twaps ToEE

[Saint_Proverbius]

BTW, apparently the reviewer of ToEE didn't play the game through very much, at least not as far as the moathouse. There's a totally different dialogue branch for my UBER GOOD, LAWFUL GANG than there was for my Neutral Evil Bunch and my True Nuetral Bunch. Instead of all the bargaining with power and riches stuff, I got the option to tell him to leave the moathouse and never return.

So, yeah, alignment does have an impact on dialogue - more than just the openning quest stuff.

 

[Fable]

You review has some good points, but the rating is fucked up. Whoever did that is either extremely biased or extremely stupid. I'm not trying to offend, so do stick around for an explanation.

1. Graphics 8/10. Can you elaborate? Can you give us an example of 10/10? Did you miss the animations?

Meaning no offense, but did you miss my very positive comments about the animations, especially the magical effects? I felt the backgrounds were average; neither particularly good, nor bad. 8/10 is a pretty high score. 9/10 is spuerlative. 10/10 is spectacular, stuff that causes you to swoon, in my critical lexicon.

2. Sounds 6/10. Is it really that bad?

The music was okay, but many of the voiceovers were truly awful, IMO. I have to wonder whether the devs decided to do some casting from in-house.

3. Gameplay 6/10. 6? You must be kidding. This is a combat game, gameplay is focused around combat, which is nearly perfect. Can you give us an example of a better combat?

Did you read my first paragraph? To repeat: "I’ll say this outright. I’ve played many computerized and PnP RPGs over the years, but it’s seldom I’ve encountered one whose good and bad qualities were as distinctive as TOEE. Depending upon what aspects of RPG gaming are individually rated the most significant, it’s likely that this title will attract extreme reactions from players, Please bear this in mind while I attempt to explain what I find positive and negative about the game. You may come away with completely different conclusions than I have about any aspect of TOEE..."

My opinion is that TOEE isn't simply a combat game, but one that involves a lot of out-of-combat quest solving, exploring, dialog and character development. If you've read the review, you'll realize that I gave the game high marks for its detailed combat system and graphics, and low marks for RPG aspects and bugs.

I don't think TOEE can be written off as "It's only a combat game, so we should only look at its combat aspects, and everything else can be discarded," anymore than the combat can be written off as unnecessary. That's my opinion; feel free to disagree.

4.Replayability 7/10. Why? In a game where gameplay is all about combat, playing with different characters and followers does make a huge difference. Care to explain?

See above. I don't feell the game is simply about combat.

In all honesty, the game deserves at least 9 for gameplay and 9 for replayability.

In all honesty, I disagree; so I suspect we shall simply have to agree to that fact. I shall maintain my views, and you will maintain yours. Some people agree with mine, and some people don't. But I'm honest, I played TOEE a lot, and I came by my final tally after considerable thought. As I wrote above, TOEE is clearly going to be a controversial game, because if seen from different aspects, it's either very good, or very bad. I tried to find a median and attempted to articulate both the truly great and piss-poor things I saw in the title.

 

[Fable]

You review has some good points, but the rating is fucked up. Whoever did that is either extremely biased or extremely stupid. I'm not trying to offend, so do stick around for an explanation.

1. Graphics 8/10. Can you elaborate? Can you give us an example of 10/10? Did you miss the animations?

Meaning no offense, but did you miss my very positive comments about the animations, especially the magical effects? I felt the backgrounds were average; neither particularly good, nor bad. 8/10 is a pretty high score.

2. Sounds 6/10. Is it really that bad?

The music was okay, but many of the voiceovers were truly awful, IMO. I have to wonder whether the devs decided to do some casting from in-house.

3. Gameplay 6/10. 6? You must be kidding. This is a combat game, gameplay is focused around combat, which is nearly perfect. Can you give us an example of a better combat?

Did you read my first paragraph? To repeat: "I’ll say this outright. I’ve played many computerized and PnP RPGs over the years, but it’s seldom I’ve encountered one whose good and bad qualities were as distinctive as TOEE. Depending upon what aspects of RPG gaming are individually rated the most significant, it’s likely that this title will attract extreme reactions from players, Please bear this in mind while I attempt to explain what I find positive and negative about the game. You may come away with completely different conclusions than I have about any aspect of TOEE..."

My opinion is that TOEE isn't simply a combat game, but one that involves a lot of out-of-combat quest solving, exploring, dialog and character development. If you've read the review, you'll realize that I gave the game high marks for its detailed combat system and graphics, and low marks for RPG aspects and bugs.

I don't think TOEE can be written off as "It's only a combat game, so we should only look at its combat aspects, and everything else can be discarded," anymore than the combat can be written off as unnecessary. That's my opinion; feel free to disagree.

4.Replayability 7/10. Why? In a game where gameplay is all about combat, playing with different characters and followers does make a huge difference. Care to explain?

See above. I don't feell the game is simply about combat.

In all honesty, the game deserves at least 9 for gameplay and 9 for replayability.

In all honesty, I disagree; so I suspect we shall simply have to agree to that fact. I shall maintain my views, and you will maintain yours. Some people agree with mine, and some people don't. But I'm honest, I played TOEE a lot, and I came by my final tally after considerable thought. As I wrote above, TOEE is clearly going to be a controversial game, because if seen from different aspects, it's either very good, or very bad. I tried to find a median and attempted to articulate both the truly great and piss-poor things I saw in the title.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

You might be honest, but your review is wrong. I just found more dialogue that's based on alignment/class. I just talked to Zert with my paladin, and basically told him that since he's evil, he can't come along with me.

 

[Fable]

First, the paragraph the Codex quotes could have been more clearly stated, but it remains true:"Once in the TOEE module, alignment has no effect." All the moral niceties are gotten out of the way during character creation. Within the module, your party doesn't exist in a morally dynamic universe where alignment can shift, nor are you offered moral choices permitting a range of decisions that have major affects on the universe.

Welcome to strict D&D, where shifting alignment is typically the result of something incredibly major. It's rather silly to criticise a D&D game for following the rules of the license, don't you think?

I don't know. I rather think it's sillier to knock a review that points out the lack of variability in the alignment within the game, when many people who read an RPG review are obviously interested in this fact.

And honestly, static alignment works a hell of a lot better than the half assed alignment shifting in Neverwinter Nights, where you can accept a quest to assassinate someone and that has no affect on the alignment, but asking for the money up front makes you more evil.

Personally, I didn't like NWN for a number of reasons, and the ridiculous alignment shifts were one. I didn't write a review of it, but I joked to friends upon its release that it must have been written by a closet anti-capitalist, since NWN associates asking for rightful pay with evil. :D However, I did like how alignment was handled in Planescape: Torment. And in any case, I don't like how it's handled in TOEE.

However, you said alignment has no affect on dialogue or actions in the module, and that's obviously not true since much of the dialogue is based on alignment flags and even the presentation of your major task in Hommlet is based on the alignment you chose in the beginning.

I previously explained that my remarks at that one point in the review could have been clearer. What was meant was that once your alignment is chosen, pre-game, you're set on a ethical path that won't allow for any actions that could possibly shift it within TOEE.

I'd be kind of curious what bugs Buck noticed or was he just reading the Atari forum? Many of the bugs mentioned on the Atari forum aren't bugs at all, but changes from 3E to 3.5E rules, design decisions that people don't like such as follower looting, and so on.

I can't say what bugs Buck noticed, but I personally noticed quite a few, and had friends who--as I mentioned in the review, which you read--compiled a list that was several pages long. Would it help if I posted it?

How about in Baldur's Gate 2 where you can make one NPC kill another one, then the one that killed the other one starts to bitch about the direction the party is going? You gave it a 10 out of 10 for gameplay, yet it allows quite similar things!

Huh? I never reviewed BG2.

It seems to me that you want to CLAIM your scores aren't weighted, but they look pretty weighted to me given you'll fault one game for something and not fault another for doing either the same thing or something similar.

Again, huh? Your critical apparatus would appear to be incapable of looking at bylines. I've only reviewed one game at Buck's site, TOEE. I can't be held responsible for whatever any other reviewer thought about 'em. ...Well, I can, but to use your own charming comment from above, it's rather silly.

 

[Fable]

But, Volourn, the IE games the guy fawns over (BG/IWD) dont typically represent the reader with alot of hard moral choices either.

Hm--

"certainly more clunky than BG2’s efficiently grouped rows of spell and activity icons."
"Others titles, like BG2, cleverly hit you with a large variety of carefully gradated quests as soon as you leave the relatively linear trainer dungeon, all of them beautifully justified in context."

These don't strike me as "fawning," but favorable comments aimed at another game to provide legittimate comparison in a review. But then, each to his own. I suppose any such comparison of TOEE negatively set against any other game would have been regarded as fawning, too, by people who strongly like TOEE. That's called Personal Bias. I'd introduce you to her, but I can see you are already well-acquainted.

I can think of precious few instances in any of these games that present the gamer with a particularly hard moral dilemma (ESPECIALLY IWD which that site scored well - I dont recall that game presenting the player with ANY moral choices other than perhaps turn in the guy who took over the inn or allow him to make good or get free rooms; thats not exactly a hard moral choice either).

Planescape: Torment is covered with 'em. (And I never liked the way IWD or NWN handled alignment issues, though they did so in different fashions.) I also like the way the Fallout series and Arcanum handled alignment: you did stuff we all pretty much agree is good, you become more good, and evil works the same way--not very Paulian, but hey, I'm not Christian, so that's cool. My point in any case was that I don't like the fact that pre-chosen alignments force you to follow a predetermined course through TOEE. You are welcome to like it. It's called difference of opinion, which is still, thank the gods, not unheard of in civilized society.

Your same criticisms could easily be launched against any of these titles (and often have on these boards). The thing is that Gamebanshee is not showing any degree of fairness when it calls this title on these issues then ignores the same issues in other titles. That is biased journalism and deserving of our criticism.

There are a handful of reviews on the GameBanshee website, written by five different reviewers, as all their bylines attest. It seems a bit bizarre to treat them as though they were written by a single individual. I strongly differ in my opinions about several of the games with some of the other reviewers.

I get the distinct impression up here that if I'd written a review in words of one syllable with numerous misspellings, faulty logic and violent biases that swooned over TOEE, it would have been greeted with approbation by some of the most violent--I won't say critical--opponents of my actual review. The bias I am alleged to have shown, because of somebody else's comments about a different game review over at GameBanshee, only points out the extravagant bias on display, here.

I'll repeat what I said in the review: there are strongly positive and negative elements in TOEE which will provoke in turn strong reactions among players. Depending upon how you weight different areas of the game--combat, roleplaying, questing, graphics, bugs, etc--you'll probably love it, or dislike it intensely. I'd like to think it's possible to simple note the differences of opinion based on the way we individually weight these matters, but evidently that's not possible for those who view TOEE as a Cause and themselves as Crusaders. Each to his own, I guess.

 

[Fable]

You might be honest, but your review is wrong. I just found more dialogue that's based on alignment/class. I just talked to Zert with my paladin, and basically told him that since he's evil, he can't come along with me.

Actually, you're wrong. I suggest you read over my comments, again.

 

[Sol Invictus]

1. Graphics 8/10. Can you elaborate? Can you give us an example of 10/10? Did you miss the animations?

Meaning no offense, but did you miss my very positive comments about the animations, especially the magical effects? I felt the backgrounds were average; neither particularly good, nor bad. 8/10 is a pretty high score.

I believe Vault Dweller was making a juxtaposition of your TOEE review with the IWD2 review on GameBanshee, which offered graphics a 9/10. He (as well as myself) would like an elaboration as to why you think IWD2, which the graphic quality cannot be in any way compared to TOEE, deserves a higher score. If you choose to argue that the graphics were 'good' during its time, compared to the standard, I will say that you are simply wrong - as IWD2 was only released not too long ago, when Morrowind was already in the market.

As for the rest of what you said, look above - and reread Vault Dweller's posts. What makes TOEE a lesser game in comparison to Icewind Dale, Baldur's Gate, NWN or any other RPG - especially when you fault TOEE fo the same aspects which you (or rather, GameBanshee) glorify those games for.

The problem is this - you fail to maintain the same standard of review procedures as the rest of the reviews on the website. A magazine, online or print, should seek to maintain some sense of consistency between reviews or simply leave out scoring altogether - as it's a highly subjective process unless handled properly by an editor, which apparently your website does not have.

 

[Fable]

I believe Vault Dweller was making a juxtaposition of your TOEE review with the IWD2 review on GameBanshee, which offered graphics a 9/10. He (as well as myself) would like an elaboration as to why you think IWD2, which the graphic quality cannot be in any way compared to TOEE, deserves a higher score.

That's easy: I don't think IWD2 deserves a higher score for its graphics. I would have given it a 6. They're competent, but uninspiring, and it's all been done many, many times before.

As for the rest of what you said, look above - and reread Vault Dweller's posts. What makes TOEE a lesser game in comparison to Icewind Dale, Baldur's Gate, NWN or any other RPG - especially when you fault TOEE fo the same aspects which you (or rather, GameBanshee) glorify those games for.

With respect, the operative part of these remarks is "rather, GameBanshee." I am not responsible for the remarks made by reviewers in other reviews on that website, or any other website, but only for the remarks made within my own review. That's why I admitted at once, here, that my remarks concerning alignment in TOEE were poorly worded: I was responsible for that content, and the lack of clarity was mine. If you wish to critique the content of reviews in general at GB, that's another matter altogether, and one for which I admit complete incapability. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with Buck's selection of reviewers, only that I had no input into the process.

The problem is this - you fail to maintain the same standard of review procedures as the rest of the reviews on the website. A magazine, online or print, should seek to maintain some sense of consistency between reviews or simply leave out scoring altogether - as it's a highly subjective process unless handled properly by an editor, which apparently your website does not have.

I think I see what you are saying: that I am "coming from another place" in my review from a few others posted on GB. I don't honestly see this, myself; to me, the differences I observe between reviews on GB are the same sort of differences that occur within reviews written by various hands on any number of websites. If I read a review on a website that dissed Morrowind, for instance--a game I really enjoy--I wouldn't assume that was the opinion of any other reviewer for that website. (I have often said, in any case, that it might be more critically advantageous to the readers if review websites were to publish both well-considered positive and negative reviews of any major productl but I've yet to find an editor who agrrees with me on this. Note, I haven't mentioned this idea to Buck, the site owner.)

But in any case, your observation is a matter for you to logically take up with Buck, who determines what gets reviewed, who does it, and whether a review is fit to print.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Thanks for the clarification, Exitium, this is exactly what I meant. I have no problem with Fable's review overall, but the rating is wrong in comparison to other games listed

Fable, you can't make up your own high standard rating system while the rest of GB reviewers are using something else. When you wrote your review, your goal was to give people some idea about ToEE, well, the message that you sent was "it's way worse in any aspect then BG2, NWN, IWD, etc". It's unfair, plain and simple, and morally wrong.

Imagine what if you had to take a driving test and you got the lowest score and didn't pass just because the instructor decided to rate you differently then everybody else? Did I make my point? So, if you have any journalistic integrity, rerate ToEE according and versus other games reviewed. If you have an issue with the rating system, discuss it with your collegues and apply to all games, not one.

 

[Shevek]

These don't strike me as "fawning," but favorable comments aimed at another game to provide legittimate comparison in a review. But then, each to his own. I suppose any such comparison of TOEE negatively set against any other game would have been regarded as fawning, too, by people who strongly like TOEE. That's called Personal Bias. I'd introduce you to her, but I can see you are already well-acquainted.

The linearity commentary is primarily flawed in your mention of IWD. IWD was a much more linear game yet you excuse its linearity here because of an unrelated (and extraordinarily subjective) issue. Lets take a second look at this part of the review:

"Linearity is another issue, at least, for some of us. Of course, all RPGs, whether pen-and-paper or computerized, are ultimately linear, but some games (and some DMs) do a great job at disguising that fact. Wizardry 8, Morrowind, and Troika’s own Arcanum offer enormous lands to explore, revealing key, plot-advancing quests only when you employ specific triggers. Others titles, like BG2, cleverly hit you with a large variety of carefully gradated quests as soon as you leave the relatively linear trainer dungeon, all of them beautifully justified in context. However, TOEE is based on an extremely linear module, and Troika did next to nothing to hide that fact. In this respect, it’s like the Icewind Dale series, though some of the Icewind Dale characters leap out at you from the game, as potent in their flavor as the endless, well-structured battles."

First thing, you claim that ToEE is as linear as IWD. This is not true. There are several avenues one can take to reach several parts of the temple (guard tower, front door, various ways down, etc). One can move through the game either by working with temple priests or by plowing ones way through combatively. There are various elemental nodes one can do in any order they wish. IWD had nowhere near this degree of nonlinearity. You went from dungeon to dungeon and from dungeon level to dungeon level in a fairly uniform manner. There is no player choice in IWD and I see your lack of mention of this here to be considered fawning. Perhaps there is legitimacy to our criticism of your bias which you refuse to see.

Second thing, you excuse IWD's linearity because of a somewhat unrelated aspect: the NPCs. Now, the notion of excusing linearity because of NPC personality seems especially odd to me. However, even if this is accepted, one has to question its validiity. IWD contained very few NPCs that had any character whatsoever much less that leapt out of the screen at you. ToEE, by comparison, contains a wealth of interesting NPCs (I listed some for you in a previous post). So, if you can say linearity is ok in IWD because the characters are cool, dont you think its odd the same isnt said about ToEE? Again, i wonder over your bias here.

Finally, the last comment in that quote pertains to "well structured battles." One is left with the impression that you felt the battles in ToEE were, by comparison, not well-structured. This is not so, IMO. I found ToEE battles to be very well structured and many to challenge my party in a variety of ways.

Planescape: Torment is covered with 'em. (And I never liked the way IWD or NWN handled alignment issues, though they did so in different fashions.) I also like the way the Fallout series and Arcanum handled alignment: you did stuff we all pretty much agree is good, you become more good, and evil works the same way--not very Paulian, but hey, I'm not Christian, so that's cool. My point in any case was that I don't like the fact that pre-chosen alignments force you to follow a predetermined course through TOEE. You are welcome to like it. It's called difference of opinion, which is still, thank the gods, not unheard of in civilized society.

Thats the thing: only PS:T really focused on giving players an abundance of difficult moral choices. IWD, NWN, the BG series, etc and all the other games you have mentioned do not do this. It is not particularly good journalism to say a title is lacking in some respect when, amongst the bulk of its peers, it is not. You go on at length about the flaws you percieve in the system but fail to acknowledge that the implementation better supports non-good alignment choices than most other DnD CRPGs. I find this to be yet another example of the bias present in your review.

There are a handful of reviews on the GameBanshee website, written by five different reviewers, as all their bylines attest. It seems a bit bizarre to treat them as though they were written by a single individual. I strongly differ in my opinions about several of the games with some of the other reviewers.

Well, your editor should make sure that the site's reviews are more or less on the same page. As a reader, I find it quite natural to look at a site's other reviews to see how they feel title's compare. However, as I stated before, your somewhat flawed commentary on other titles within the review opens you up to criticism in this respect.

Blah blah blah rant. Blah blah blah. Each to his own, I guess.

Yup.. to each his own.

 

[Fable]

Thanks, Exitium, for clarifications. This is exactly what I meant. I have no problem with Fable's review overall, but the rating is wrong in comparison to other games listed

Fable, you can't make up your own high standard rating system while the rest of GB reviewers are using something else. When you wrote your review, your goal was to give people some idea about ToEE, well, the message that you sent was "it's way worse in any aspects then BG2, NWN, IWD, etc". It's unfair, plain and simple, and morally wrong.[/b]

Leaving aside the moral comment (which is mindboggling), what standard rating system at GameBanshee are you referring to?

I think that, intentionally or otherwise, you are putting some kind of moral weight behind your statement, above: Bad Fable! He disregarded Buck's, er, unstated ratings system, and Buck, in the misplaced mercy of his heart, allowed it to happen! This isn't accurate, however. Buck approved my review, and said he agreed with it and the ratings. (in fact, he hinted he may have liked TOEE less than I did.) If you want to compare my ratings on TOEE with somebody else's ratrings on another game, that's your business, not mine. I don't go around to websites like Gamespot or IGN, looking at how an individual game's ratings stand up against a series of ratings for other games. I just look at the ratings and review of a single game I'm interested in.

On a side issue, do you realize that the other reviewers at GameBanshee also formulated their ratings on the basis of internal criteria concerning the games they reviewed? That the second reviewer didn't look at how the first had rated a game, and that the first didn't whimper at the awful responsibility on his/her shoulders? On any website, individual reviewers are going to differ strongly about the ratings given any single game? There is no such thing as rating a game objectively. Every reviewer has to make their best call about each rating category, which explains why ratings can differ so dramatically on some games, and why one reviewer finds much to praise in a title, while another hates it. I've known reviewers I can respect who differed dramatically on their feelings about games--not unlike Siskel and Ebert, if that doesn't date me--and their ratings were at strong variance. It didn't invalidate whatever they both said. Given tneir respective views, they were both accurate. I'm not a unilaterist.

 

[Fable]

The linearity commentary is primarily flawed in your mention of IWD. IWD was a much more linear game yet you excuse its linearity here because of an unrelated (and extraordinarily subjective) issue.

This is where I say, No, it isn't, and point that everything you've stated is a matter of POV; and that to me, the two games are both extremely linear products, which I refuse to debate because your tone indicates you're obviously correct about everything. Then you say that I don't know what I'm talking about, and that you're being completely objective and factual, because you always are. To avoid getting into a silly mess on this last subject with someone who clearly enjoys slinging insults, I then point out that the comment about the intensity of some IWD2 characters was clearly a change-of-subject tie-in to the next paragraph, since I start with, "And speaking of characters and story..."

Then you respond by telling me you don't believe it, I'm open to attack on so many fronts you don't know where to start, and I don't know what I'm talking about. Since you're right.

Whew. Well, that was fun. What shall we do, next?

EDIT: On second thought, this will be my final post. Ooooo, I'm having a vision; and in it, I can see that everything I write will either be twisted around, or used as fodders for mud. What a suprise! So I'm going to leave posting--to those who want to discuss the issues themselves, and those who just want to glory in the knowledge that it's a terrible review with 'orrible ratings, that dared besmurch the integrity of TOEE.

In any case, have fun, guys. I mean that. :D

 

[Shevek]

Its somewhat disappointing to see an individual dodge the issues so blatantly when criticisms are so straightforward.

 

[Vault Dweller]

what standard rating system at GameBanshee are you referring to?

Imo, the other ratings are somewhat consistent. I may disagree with them, but they appear to follow the same guideline intentionally or not. That's what I referred to.

I think that, intentionally or otherwise, you are putting some kind of moral weight behind your statement, above: Bad Fable!

I'm sure your intentions were good. Your rating system sounds reasonable. However, as a side effect your rating looks much more critical then you intended at least comparing the rating to the review itself. That's why I suggested to correct that mistake.

If you want to compare my ratings on TOEE with somebody else's ratrings on another game, that's your business, not mine. I don't go around to websites like Gamespot or IGN, looking at how an individual game's ratings stand up against a series of ratings for other games.

Fable, don't be an idiot! You know what we are talking about. We don't compare your rating to some other site's rating. We compare GB's ToEE rating to GB's ratings of other similar games and some consistency is only to be expected.

I just look at the ratings and review of a single game I'm interested in.

Once again, the ratings of a single game have meaning only when the frame of reference or commonly accepted guidelines are present. You can give a game 3/10 thinking it's pretty good, but to everybody else it would mean that the game sucks. It sounds a bit counter-productive to me.

 

[chrisbeddoes]

I have a theory .

Reviewers that say that the game is crap tested with securom protection.


Reviewers that say that the game is crap tested without securom protection.


Mayby securom is causing to this game a lot more problems than usual ?

Mayby instead of just a small slowdown it also causes a lot of crashes ?

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

I don't know. I rather think it's sillier to knock a review that points out the lack of variability in the alignment within the game, when many people who read an RPG review are obviously interested in this fact.

Alignment shifting and waiting isn't really a strict D&D rule. Fixed alignments, for the most part, are. Sure, you can still do bad things if you're Lawful Good in PnP, but you can also do bad things if you're Lawful Good in ToEE. It's mainly a guideline for the player.

But still, the point remains that alignment does have an impact on the game, and it has a hell of a lot more impact in the game than a lot of the other D&D games. Heck, most D&D games just make you play a generic hero who saves the world from something. In ToEE, if you're a bad guy, you can be a bad guy.

Personally, I didn't like NWN for a number of reasons, and the ridiculous alignment shifts were one. I didn't write a review of it, but I joked to friends upon its release that it must have been written by a closet anti-capitalist, since NWN associates asking for rightful pay with evil. :D However, I did like how alignment was handled in Planescape: Torment. And in any case, I don't like how it's handled in TOEE.

I liked it in Planescape: Torment as well. However, Planescape: Torment wasn't about following all the rules as much as possible, and ToEE is. There's really only two good ways to do alignment in D&D CRPGs, the way PS:T did it and the way ToEE did it. Either you follow the alignment paths or you make shifting alignments that are consistant.

I can't say what bugs Buck noticed, but I personally noticed quite a few, and had friends who--as I mentioned in the review, which you read--compiled a list that was several pages long. Would it help if I posted it?

I've seen it.

Huh? I never reviewed BG2.

Doesn't matter. You reviewed a game for the same site that did the 10 out of 10 thing for Baldur's Gate 2 which has the exact same issues as ToEE. There should be at least some degree of consistancy between the reviews.

 

[krankee]

hmmm where can i get a CD Crack for the full retail version of ToEE? I bought my copy but my CD is borked now so I need something to disable the CD search.

thanks

 

[Nicolai]

60%? OK, so it's a bit above average? I'd rate it higher but that's fair.

 

[Astromarine]

Nicolai, what the flying fuck? Shit is two years old!

 

[Sarkile]

Fucking necrophile.

 

[Chefe]

hmmm where can i get a CD Crack for the full retail version of ToEE? I bought my copy but my CD is borked now so I need something to disable the CD search.

thanks

... he never got his CD Crack...

 

[Naked_Lunch]

This thread is totally :che:

 

[bryce777]

As usual, VD has a lot of good points.

I can't think of a top down game with better graphics quality. Fallout and fallout II have great artwork, too, but are dated in comparison. IWD is fucking awful, and BG series not much better.

The sound fx are great. The voiceovers are uneven, but hardly critical to the game. Some were also quite good such as the evil monk who exclaims "Nerull's Scythe! Err, uh, I mean, look at all this treasure." or whatever it was.

The big failing is the story or lack of it, and the bugs.

I compiled a big bug list on the atari board. I am very familiar with what's on it - the only remaining bugs are minor annoyances but unfortunately there are a lot of them, more unfortunately, bugs when it first came out made it virtually unplayable.

I think the whole rating system used is pretty stupid. It's obvious they decide what rating they wanted, and then fudged the other scores to reflect this. Any system where graphics and sound and gameplay all count to the same degree is ridiculous.

Since all the numbers are meaningless anyhow, why not just have a headline the sums up how good the game is? They could well have said "A potentially great game that failed to deliver in some areas and had major bug issues." as a command summary. WTF does 60% or 85% mean? Absolutely nothing. On the absolute scale very few games would make it into the 80% area, ever...you can't tell me any game is close to being truly the ultimate game possible.

Alignments do matter to a degree, but that doesn't make the quests more interesting. Invariably you will end up just slaughtering all the temple minions anyhow, so a lot of the quests there are fairly silly. If you have a paladin, just killing everyone is basically your only option, which is how it SHOULD be in that circumstance. I recall morons complaining that if they talked to some dark dwarf clerics with a paladin they would go into combat. Why that surprised them is beyond me, except that they are utter idiots.

They should have had questing done in other areas and not from the big evil dungeon.

 

[bryce777]

As far as the crashes go, it is simply that some people move the mouse around wildly and have a crappier system. That exaccerbates the bug of slowdowns for them. The only place I noticed it was in the fire and earth nodes, and it was really not a big deal.