Gamespy's 2006 highs and lows

[Jim Kata]

I read it, and I completely fail to see how that review makes a good game, or makes an rpg at all.

The real depth is in choices and multiple ways to get things done, generously offered by Piranha Bytes. Nothing is forced on you, nothing is mandatory - NOTHING AT ALL - so everything is in your hands and up to you.
(...)
1.Gothic 3 offers you to take sides in several active conflicts.
(...)
2.These conflicts can easily change the entire playing field. You can liberate all towns from the orcs (and one from formerly human, currently undead guardians) and repopulate them with humans, or you can wipe out all the rebels, destroying all hope.
(...)
3.Gothic 3's quests are more dynamic, allowing you to double-cross easily. In Oblivion, I was often asked not to tell something to other people, but I couldn't do it anyway, since a dialogue option wasn't provided. In Gothic 3, such options are plentiful – in fact, every bit of information that could be beneficial to several parties is immediately turned into 2-3 quests, allowing you to decide what to do with it.

The rebels asked me to find a local resistance guy in a nearby town. When I found the hidden rebel, I went to a mercenary leader and to the orc commander in that town, and was able to tell both of them about the rebel.

A hashashin merchant sells artefacts from far-away lands in an orc-controlled town. I found his brother in a cave nearby digging for artefacts. A quest to confront the merchant was added. I talked to the merchant who paid me to keep my mouth shut. A quest NOT to keep my mouth shut was added immediately. I talked to the orc commander and told him that the there are artefacts in that cave.

(...)
6. Gothic 3 offers you a huge truly living and breathing, very atmospheric world that actually looks like a recently conquered world with ruined towns, crumbling fortresses, burning capital, and crucified paladins and rebels. People go about their daily chores, cutting wood, working fields, hammering anvils, cooking in large pots, mining ore, sitting near fire, cooking meat, and even smoking weed, effortlessly creating an atmosphere the overhyped RAI had failed to.

Missed these parts?

Goddamit, I think I start to know what Volourn felt when he was defending NWN1 and yelling "all facts were already given!"

So what? these are very superficial choices. It is nice to have a choice, but again, so what? That is a nice feature, but in and of itself it is nothing. It's also very formulaic in the choices possible, and how is it a real difference if you can basically just hold off and choose at the end what ending you want?

 

[Elwro]

So what? these are very superficial choices.

What? These are natural choices resulting from the way events unfold. The fun is with "small" quest and "local" consequences, I'm not talking about the possibly UberEpic main quest as I haven't finished the game yet. Why the fuck should I care that at the end of the game I can supposedly choose the ending I want, if that's your main argument? For what I know I may be 70 hours from the game's end, and I'm facing smaller dilemmas with real, not epic, not groundbreaking, not mindboggling, but reasonable consequences.

 

[Jim Kata]

So what? these are very superficial choices.

What? These are natural choices resulting from the way events unfold. The fun is with "small" quest and "local" consequences, I'm not talking about the possibly UberEpic main quest as I haven't finished the game yet. Why the fuck should I care that at the end of the game I can supposedly choose the ending I want, if that's your main argument? For what I know I may be 70 hours from the game's end, and I'm facing smaller dilemmas with real, not epic, not groundbreaking, not mindboggling, but reasonable consequences.

I am not proving anything, but I fail to see how what you say proves much of anything. It is good to have a detailed world, but when your interaction is mostly shitty combat and that aspect sucks, why bother? There is no meaningful character building, which I like. The choices are there but make no real difference. In fact that you can constantly play people off makes it less realistic. Having choices have serious consequnces qould be more interesting. Like being the leader of all the guilds at once. Yeah, it is better than oblivion, I am sure, but how much?

 

[Elwro]

The choices are there but make no real difference.

:
I'm definitely not sure what you mean by "real difference". I'll give some examples.

1. a) Resources and supplies are very important during the war and immediately after it. That's where you, the PC, enter. Sometimes both sides of the battle demand similar stuff and want you to provide it. Depending on whom you help, the reputation with one of the groups may rise. And vendors belonging to a given class won't sell you e.g. certain types of armor before you're "worthy" of it. Also, sometimes depending on with whom you side you will have different skill teachers.*
b) Sometimes your choices may lead to NPCs changing their location. This may e.g. result in more orcish mercenaries inside a castle. Then, if you begin the revolution, you'll have to face tougher opposition.
All these are, I'd say, examples of "small" consequences.

2. In the first "orcish" city you usually reach, Cape Dun, there are at least 2 "natural" ways of beginning the revolution (assuming, of course, that you want to incite it, as it's your choice entirely). Depending on what you choose, almost the entire city may get slaughtered or not. Death of certain people means you won't e.g. get quite a useful quest. This, I'd say, is an example of a "medium" consequence.

3. If you "push too hard" with revolting and liberate too many towns, orc leaders become more cautious. If they see you, they will want you dead and alarm all other orcs in the region. Apart from big fights / long chases, this means you will be deprived of certain ways of getting some useful information. This, I'd say, is an example of a "big" consequence.

Of course, all this has nothing to do with "chossing the ending".

* Of course, the really interesting part would be if getting to a teacher of a really rare skill depended on a tough choice. But I'm not far enough in the game yet.

 

[Jim Kata]

I suppose those are good consequences, but I suppose my ultimate question for any game is do you have to actually think to play it?

is the gameplay itself more than just combat and if not is the combat at eleast good? Is the character development interesting and varied? To all those questions I have to answer no based on everythign I have read.

 

[Elwro]

do you have to actually think to play it?

Yes. More than in Diablo or Sacred. Less than in Myst, but that's not saying much.
I guess you could stomp your way through the game generally just kicking ass and missing most of the fun. But moments when thinking and careful planning pays off are frequent. For example, a clever use of Telekinesis at the right moment (to manipulate a certain object) may provide you with a bloodless solution to a quest which at the outset seems to involve angering someone. If you don't rush at the orcish hordez!!1 but explore the capital, you might discover a more peaceful route to the castle, as I described in another thread. Also, using potions of tranformation and changing into different animals may help in some obvious and other less than obvious ways.
So yes, using your brain helps in Gothic3.

is the gameplay itself more than just combat

Well, for me "gameplay" is also exploring, dialogue, stealing from NPCs, forging weapons, brewing potions... but don't let me fool you, combat is very frequent and (...)

is the combat at least good?

(...) since it is a bit ridiculous at times, as I described perhaps in some other thread, I really hope it'll get patched. In short: combat has some good elements, some bad, manages to convey the image of aw3some asskickery, but sometimes (especially when fighting large groups) is clearly ridiculous (the opponents are too passive) so that's the key thing PBs have to patch, and they promised it.

Is the character development interesting and varied?

I didn't play the game long enough to be able to answer this question with certainty. But from my experience the answer would be: so-so. It's not bad, but there are definitely too many skills compared to the actual number of different abilities they provide. Also, I seem to be swimming in character points. I think that it might be possible to make a jack-of-quite-a-few-trades from the Nameless One. Fearing I'd run out of character points I decided to specialize in Stealing, but I'm pretty sure I could also be a proficient smith. (I now have 50 character points I didn't spend.) Such things were harder in previous Gothics.
I have no "special" skills yet, and I think that's when the fun with character development begins.

 

[Apar]

GOTHIC 3 SPOLIER. I WILL SPOIL SOMETHING IN GOTHIC 3 IF YOU DO NOT TURN AWAY. IF YOU ARE PLAYING THE GAME AND DO NOT WANT TO KNOW THINGS THAT YOU MIGHT NOT WANT TO KNOW, TURN AWAY NOW.

NO JOKE, HERE COMES A SPOILER. TURN AWAY NOW IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO KNOW.

COMMENCING DESPOILMENT:

* Of course, the really interesting part would be if getting to a teacher of a really rare skill depended on a tough choice. But I'm not far enough in the game yet.

There is at least 1 skill (murder) that can be learned from a single trainer in a city that requires an insanely high rep (75%) with one of the factions (the Hashishin). Getting that skill would not merely require dabbling in some quests for this faction, but would require a serious, long-term commitment to their cause. Which is to say, not merely a single tough choice, but many, all oriented towards a single faction (and not the most efficient to support in many areas of the game). I should add that the skill is a quite powerful one.

This is the only example that I know of that requires that type of commitment, but I've only played the game thru once. I went for a thief/hunter build, and thus did not pursue any many of the other skill trees (never bothered with the high-end combat or alchemy skills, didn't touch magic or smithing at all, etc). I am fairly sure that it is not the only high-end skill behind a large faction wall armed with many dangerous, pointy choices.

 

[Surgey]

What Gamespy failed to mention was that once Khelgar DID become a monk, he suddenly lost a ton of dialogue options and was just a faceless NPC. In fact, you could still ask him about his quest to become a monk and he'll act like he's still a fighter.

 

[Admiral Rimjob POOBUM]

GOTHIC 3 SPOLIER. I WILL SPOIL SOMETHING IN GOTHIC 3 IF YOU DO NOT TURN AWAY. IF YOU ARE PLAYING THE GAME AND DO NOT WANT TO KNOW THINGS THAT YOU MIGHT NOT WANT TO KNOW, TURN AWAY NOW.

NO JOKE, HERE COMES A SPOILER. TURN AWAY NOW IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO KNOW.

COMMENCING DESPOILMENT:

* Of course, the really interesting part would be if getting to a teacher of a really rare skill depended on a tough choice. But I'm not far enough in the game yet.

There is at least 1 skill (murder) that can be learned from a single trainer in a city that requires an insanely high rep (75%) with one of the factions (the Hashishin). Getting that skill would not merely require dabbling in some quests for this faction, but would require a serious, long-term commitment to their cause. Which is to say, not merely a single tough choice, but many, all oriented towards a single faction (and not the most efficient to support in many areas of the game). I should add that the skill is a quite powerful one.

This is the only example that I know of that requires that type of commitment, but I've only played the game thru once. I went for a thief/hunter build, and thus did not pursue any many of the other skill trees (never bothered with the high-end combat or alchemy skills, didn't touch magic or smithing at all, etc). I am fairly sure that it is not the only high-end skill behind a large faction wall armed with many dangerous, pointy choices.

Master Dual Weilding is the same.

 

[WittyName]

Khelgar just struck me as your basic Gimle-clone (or is it Gimli?). "Arrr... aye... I must fight for me'h honor! I'm gunna bust some heads!"

I only used him as a companion when I absolutely had to have him in the party. Neeshka was annoying but I had to keep her because I wasn't a thief and wanted one handy to open and disarm things. I liked Sand both for combat purposes and thought his character was better done than must of the others (although the 'bow down to me' shit when you selected him was way over-the-top).

Grobnar was sort of annoying and Bard's are sort of crappy but I found his dialog fairly amusing most of the time.

Although Elanee and Zhahjshjf or whoever grated on me, I had to drag along at least on healer... usually the cleric.

 

[Jim Kata]

Well, Gimli was what he was. Er, Khelgar. A pretty straight up dwarven fighter, but he was done well for what he was. Also, he was always very eager to fight, which was sort of amusing.

Neeshka could really only be termed chaotic annoying, and her class should ahve been methhead....

 

[Volourn]

Khelgar had very little in common with Gimli. for starters, Gimli as protrayed in the movie was retarded. Gimli in the book wans't much better though it's been like 2 decades since I read it last.

In essence:

Khelgar is 1 million times > Gimli the Shithead.

 

[cutterjohn]

Well, I decided to poke through the drivel regardless of the warnings posted here, until I stumbled across this gem:
"...Allies have to rely on speed and mobility to get the job done."

WTF?! Those guys ever hear of blitzkrieg? or even bother to look at any actual battles other than some of the eastern european city battles?!

Although they do get this "...fewer, tougher units and insanely powerful tanks..." right for the "Axis" "race".

I'll have to see if there's a demo for this one and see if it's as fucked as they make it out to be in their little award, or if their writers are just imbeciles.

...but first I MUST(!!) finish NWN2...

 

[OccupatedVoid]

...but first I MUST(!!) finish NWN2...

I can't bring myself to do it, and I'm not sure why.

 

[Jim Kata]

Well, I decided to poke through the drivel regardless of the warnings posted here, until I stumbled across this gem:
"...Allies have to rely on speed and mobility to get the job done."

WTF?! Those guys ever hear of blitzkrieg? or even bother to look at any actual battles other than some of the eastern european city battles?!

Although they do get this "...fewer, tougher units and insanely powerful tanks..." right for the "Axis" "race".

I'll have to see if there's a demo for this one and see if it's as fucked as they make it out to be in their little award, or if their writers are just imbeciles.

...but first I MUST(!!) finish NWN2...

The russian tanks were quite tough as well, the germans were just much betetr soldiers, overall.

 

[HardCode]

The T-34 owned pretty much every German tank except the Tiger, which I believe was developed to counter the T-34 (if I remember correctly; it may have been the Panther).

 

[Jim Kata]

Actualy russian soldiers were very good, too, but they had sort of a stilted style of leadership. They also did not have very versatile units and designs or equipment. The germans could move extremely fast and do anythign very well, wheareas the russians were much strategic and rigid int heir lines of comamnd.

 

[Rosh]

Rare is a game that embarks on such an ambitious path and succeeds so remarkably at delivering everything it's promised.

I don't get it, I just don't get it. What possesses people to write something like this?

The ZeniMax board shared some of its pile of blow with the GameSpy editors?

That's the only conclusion I could come up with for GameSpy to forget each and every overhyped lie made by Bethesda...

 

[Dopey]

The T-34 owned pretty much every German tank except the Tiger, which I believe was developed to counter the T-34 (if I remember correctly; it may have been the Panther).

You actually have to be the idiot kid debating at Duck and Cover if yanks could conquer the world.

You should not believe anything. When you grow up; you should go to army. That, of course, will not help you in your desperate quest digging your head out of your lardish and useless ass. Military history will help your child's ass just for that much.

You know who is Walter C. Christie, or anything at all ?

 

[Vault Dweller]

What a wonderfully witty response. It has everything except for the actual proof that HC was incorrect.

To throw my 2 cents in and give you more targets to attack:

"The T-34 was a technologically innovative design which ... <snip> the German general von Runstedt called the T-34 the "best tank in the world" and von Kleist said it was the "finest in the world." The T-34 had a more powerful cannon than German tanks, a higher top speed (32 MPH versus 25 MPH), and superior sloped armor and superior welded construction. "

"T-34 although available in small numbers in the early stage of fighting on the Eastern Front gave German Army a nasty shock when first encountered and remained that way until introduction of more powerful anti-tank armament. T-34 was described by the Germans in the following statements: "Very worrying", Colonel-General Heinz Guderian, Commander of Second Panzer Army, "We had nothing comparable", Major-General F.W. Mellenthin, Chief of Staff of XLVIII Panzer Corps and "The finest tank in the world", Field-Marshal Ewald von Kleist, First Panzer Army."

"When the Germans first encountered the T-34 they were in complete shock at it’s combination of speed, armor, and firepower. The T-34 introduced many innovative features that had previously never appeared on tanks. It had nicely sloped armor that would cause projectiles to ricochet off instead of penetrate. It also mounted a long 75mm gun which gave it impressive firepower. The T-34 used wide treads and had a powerful engine which gave it incredible off-road performance in comparison to the German panzers. The T-34 totally outclassed all of the German Panzer III and IV’s and would encourage the Germans to create a new medium tank to combat this threat. It was several years in the making but all the effort would culminate into creating the best tank of the war. The Panzer V “Panther”."

The ball is yours, Dopey.

Edit: As for the Christie reference, the Russkies borrowed the suspension system from the Christie's tank. Hardly enough to imply that T-34 is a rip-off.

 

[Dopey]

What a wonderfully witty response. It has everything except for the actual proof that HC was inco

To throw my 2 cents in and give you more targets to attack:

Rank ? Which armies rule ? And, yes, softdick in an idiot, disagree ?

It's not that I don't like angry young men; but stick to the business you know. That's a prequisite. If you don't, you'll look like an severely challenged person.

"The T-34 was a technologically innovative design which ... <snip> the German general v
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34

Nuff' said.

The ball is yours, Dopey.

Thanks, I like the ball.

Edit: As for the Christie reference, the Russkies borrowed the suspension system from the Christie's tank. Hardly enough to imply that T-34 is a rip-off.

[/quote]

I'll give 1,5 you points for that. Other than Wikipedia, explain to me suspension system of Tiger; and why it was so good.

And lastly, since you answered: When do you ???????

 

[Annonchinil]

Calling German tanks more versatile is plain wrong. There is something stupid about building tanks that require tons of fuel and mechanical maintenance when your army and country could hardly support either.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Rank ?

My rank? Lieutenant.

And, yes, softdick in an idiot, disagree ?

Disagree.

It's not that I don't like angry young men; but stick to the business you know. That's a prequisite. If you don't, you'll look like an severely challenged person.

I assume that implies that you are an expert on tanks and most likely invented one or two. So, which model do you take credits for?

"The T-34 was a technologically innovative design which ... <snip> the German general v
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34

Nuff' said.

I can't believe it!!! My powerful argument is defeated! Oh noes!!!
Ok, so I used wiki as ONE of the sources. A despicable act, I agree. I assume you will quote a more credible source any minute now, proving both me and the wiki wrong. Any minute now.

I'll give 1,5 you points for that.

You are most kind.

Other than Wikipedia, explain to me suspension system of Tiger; and why it was so good.

Have I ever claimed to be an expert on suspension systems? If you know the subject so well, explain it to us. It's quite possible that tanks and suspension systems are your field and you know the subjects much better than we do. Unfortunately, all you do is imply that other people are stupid and clueless, without bothering to provide any arguments proving your point of view.

And lastly, since you answered: When do you ???????

http://masseffect.bioware.com/_commonex ... 80x760.jpg

 

[Ladonna]

What is incorrect at the wiki source? The quotes are all correct, ripped as they are from history books and direct quotes from German officers. :

I am guessing the Tiger Tanks suspension has some shit about Torsion bars included.

Finally an idiot savant at the Codex, after all these years....And here I was thinking that these types were only available at Tamiya Hobby competitions and Matrix games forums.

 

[Claw]

Rank ? Which armies rule ? And, yes, softdick in an idiot, disagree ?

Darmok at Tanagra? Dopey beneath Momouteh?