Review IGN rips Gothic 3 a new one

[Texas Red]

"This is what happens when a publisher pushs for a christmas release, if this game had shipped in late jan. the reviews would probably be 8's and 9's. Instead jowood decided to opt to make a quick buck which is 100% wrong thing to do with a deep RPG."

Another fuckin' 'blame the publisher' post. Stupid moron. I love the 'let's blame the publsiher for the bad stuff; but give all the credit to the developer (unless it's Big Bad Bio) for the good stuff." mantra!

R00flers!

Whoever it was Im glad their greed fucked them over. The constant holiday release hunting is annoying as hell. They deserve it.

 

[Erekose]

Maybe if an expansion is ever released it will fix more of the show stopping bugs.

Stop bullshitting us with this shitty bullshit about show stopping bugs bullthis. Bullshit. I had a showstopping - bullshit - bug in Morrowind yet not in Gothic 3, clearly Morrowind (Bullshit) deserved 4.9 not Gothic 3. q.e.b.

What's up with this exzessive stupid swearing here? If you can't talk like a normal Person to me, then i won't answer you.

Like it or not its what i think, if you don't agree fine i don't care.

 

[Emerald Melios]

This is IGN.....

I'm disappointed in you guys. You should know better to take anything IGN says seriously. :D

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Ah come on i can’t understand why people here are disagreeing with bad or under-average reviews. I mean, why should Gothic 3 be given anything over a 4/10?

People are disagreeing with the reviewer's lack of consistency in his views. Crucifying Gothic 3 when Oblivion made the same - if not worse - mistakes is simply not acceptable.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Yeah, as Role-Player said, there's a difference between "OH MY GAWD THIS GAEM SI FULL OF BUGS FOUR POINT NINE" and "What? No instant teleport? Kill everything at level 1 (and then go on about how he keeps dying)? Bland lifeless NPCs but nice graphics? Everything's just like Oblivion? FOUR POINT NINE". Yet for the Oblivion review, he goes on about how AWSUM it is and how unique your character is (which it isn't) and how you can talk to all these "interesting" NPCs (who have all of 2 things to say. That is, the Fighter's Guild is recruiting and they saw a Mudcrab yesterday).

 

[WittyName]

Actually, the review's pretty interesting. He has a handful of critiscisms:

....

For comparison, here's IGN's Oblivion review. Written by the same guy, Charles Onyett. The score? 9.3

Precisely. Having played Oblivion and the Gothic 3 demo for about 10 hours, the only things that struck me as being worse in Gothic were the choppy gameplay and, to a slight degree, the combat (and I say slight because combat in Oblivion didn't impress me at all).

I can understand dropping Gothic to 7ish or so -- I'm not going to buy the game myself until the gameplay bugs are worked out -- but 4.9 to Oblivion's 9.3? I'm sorry, but no one who objectively plays those games can honestly argue they are that far apart.

 

[Erekose]

Ah come on i can’t understand why people here are disagreeing with bad or under-average reviews. I mean, why should Gothic 3 be given anything over a 4/10?

People are disagreeing with the reviewer's lack of consistency in his views. Crucifying Gothic 3 when Oblivion made the same - if not worse - mistakes is simply not acceptable.

It seems more and more to me as if you guys are trying to instrumentalize gothic 3 as some kind of weapon in your holy crusade against the reviewers who gave oblivion a good score,bethesda or whoever, as i said bevore i dont care mutch about oblivion its just not my style of games, im just a gothic fan who thinks gothic 3 is worse then its predessors thats all.

 

[Gnidrologist]

It's not about criticism of reviewers, who gave Oblivion or any other mediocre game an excellent score. It's about the severe lack of consistancy and professionalism when looking at how exactly the same reviewer is gushing over numerous aspects in one game, whereas he sees those as flaws in another game.
Did you read DarkUnderlord's post?

 

[Erekose]

It's not about criticism of reviewers, who gave Oblivion or any other mediocre game an excellent score. It's about the severe lack of consistancy and professionalism when looking at how exactly the same reviewer is gushing over numerous aspects in one game, whereas he sees those as flaws in another game.
Did you read DarkUnderlord's post?

Did you read mine? I dont care about Oblivion and its scores or if it deserves it or not, ok? is that clear enough? all i care about is that in my book gothic 3 deserves the scores it gets because it lacks the story and personality of its predessors, is buggy as hell and way too unfinishedy,anyway thats all i have to say,im outta here.
bye

 

[FrancoTAU]

Extremely buggy games with poor performance deserve shitty ratings, but yeah... can you try to be a bit more uniform with that mindset? Just about every game released in November is buggy as hell and deserves to be ridiculed.

Anywho, isn't there some kind of study where there's pretty much no correlation between game sales and review scores? Scarface just announced a million sales and that game got panned at most places. Gears of War just announced a million copies sold too and it got 9.5s across the board.

 

[z3r'0']

I agree that the game was not ready for prime-time, but putting it on the level of dungeon lords is laughable.

I think Jowood needs to work on their pimping skillz. And Piranha Bytes on their bugs.

Still, the fragile integrity of IGN, etc. ... has never amounted to shit anyway.

 

[elander_]

Strangely enough its reviewers who constantly compare Oblivion to Gothic 3. The two games are very similar from the outside, with their shiny graphics and 3rd person view and action-gameplay.

What is odd is how the reviewer sounds obcessed in insisting that Gothic 3 should play like Oblivion when G3 is an action game with rpg elements but has more roleplaying choices than Oblivion. The bitching about the compass and the journal tutorials is patetic.

These reviews show how people can get so low and stupid to instrumentalize G3 into selling game features that only interest casual gamers. No doubt that IGN has received a lot of new xbox 360 and PCs with windows xp installed from M$ lately.

Its very tiresome that after a huge delay they weren't able to get at least the combat with a similar quality that of the previous games, but that score is simply ridiculous.

 

[Lumpy]

It's not about criticism of reviewers, who gave Oblivion or any other mediocre game an excellent score. It's about the severe lack of consistancy and professionalism when looking at how exactly the same reviewer is gushing over numerous aspects in one game, whereas he sees those as flaws in another game.
Did you read DarkUnderlord's post?

Did you read mine? I dont care about Oblivion and its scores or if it deserves it or not, ok? is that clear enough? all i care about is that in my book gothic 3 deserves the scores it gets because it lacks the story and personality of its predessors, is buggy as hell and way too unfinishedy,anyway thats all i have to say,im outta here.
bye

How does it "deserve" that rating? Ratings are tools for comparing various games. Comparing ratings from different places is preety much meaningless, because a 7.5 on one website could be the equivalent of a 5 on another.
The problem is that there's no way that Gothic 3 could possibly get a 4.9 on a scale where Oblivion is rated at 9.3. Yet it is. This may not mean anything to you, since you don't care about Oblivion, but to the hundreds of so-called RPG fans who read IGN, it's a clear "Oblivion pwns and Gothic 3 is a piece of crap. Buy as many official mods for the first as you can, and don't buy the latter." Which translates to Bethesda getting filthy rich, and Piranha Bytes not getting to do Gothic 4.
Should I mention that your spelling is representative of the "OMG Gothic" userbase of the Gothic forums?

 

[The Vanished One]

this game was shipped early, and is now paying the price for its lack of vision!

G3 should have been shipped later, but is paying the price for the presence on the market of Oblivion:

...Oblivion is also an unfinished game. Iif you find an old picture showing the world map from the E3 demo or something theres an extra town northwest of Cyrodill but Oblivion can fake being a finished game because it had a very good production (kathode has its merits) and it didn't required a significant patching, was not very hard or very easy and no quests had bugs that prevented the player to complete them. In fact Oblivion has a compass and quest tutorials on the player journal which the mainstream reviewers just love.

 

[cutterjohn]

Ah come on i can’t understand why people here are disagreeing with bad or under-average reviews. I mean, why should Gothic 3 be given anything over a 4/10?

People are disagreeing with the reviewer's lack of consistency in his views. Crucifying Gothic 3 when Oblivion made the same - if not worse - mistakes is simply not acceptable.

Shouldn't be a 4.9, but G3 is still in pretty rough shape. LOTS of bug left to squish.

...and my ^E&*#&*(%^*#%!!!! mouse cursor is now ALWAYS having the stupid windows default cursor overlaid the stylized G3 cursor! grrr!

 

[Claw]

What's up with this exzessive stupid swearing here? If you can't talk like a normal Person to me, then i won't answer you.

I would like to express my deepest, most sincere* thanks for not answering me, kind sir.


PS: Bullshit.


*may not actually be sincere

 

[Volourn]

"You have no clue what you are talking about, the devs itself explained in a question and answer thread on a german fanboard that they got not enough time to finish some aspects of the Game, and who other then the publisher sets this deadlines hmm?"

Developers hould spend more time better planning the focus of their game instead of whining about publsiher deadlines. Dumbass. Developer is responsible for the quality of their work. Period.


"Oblivion is also an unfinished game. Iif you find an old picture showing the world map from the E3 demo or something theres an extra town northwest of Cyrodill"

Irrelevant. All games have cut content. This is a fact. I mean while all the Obsidian fanboys were whining about the lost planet in KOTOR2; little did most know that KOTOR1 also had a lost planet. The only difference between the two is that BIO took the care to make sure that it didn't disrupt the game as much. Thankfully, Obsidian has seemed to learned their lesson.

P.S. I finally bought the game. I hope it's better than the demo was.

 

[SlamDunk]

I stopped reading at the teleportation stones part...

I have stayed away from these "big" American sites like IGN, GameSpy and GameSpot and these GS and IGN reviews are yet another reason to not visit them. Also... if there are still people who actually visit those sites, read their reviews and then decide whether to buy a game or not then I'd say they are not worthy of the Gothic series.

 

[Krafter]

Ha ha, Ign.

Considering the source, I'd almost take the score as a compliment. I'm not sure that I would want to play the game that these jokers rate at 9.9 or whatever. Idiots.

I'm sure it's just a coincedence, but the more-hyped of the two games recieved the better score. Crazy.

 

[Solaris]

Gothic 3, or any game for that matter deserves to be slammed for bad bugs/being incomplete but IGN's review/score is pretty ridiculous though. Hypocricy and double standards galore....and a healthy dose of dumbfuck journalism.

Typical IGN really

 

[Rosh]

For comparison, here's IGN's Oblivion review. Written by the same guy, Charles Onyett. The score? 9.3

Once again, proving that you can't spell "IGNorant" without IGN. :D

 

[Elwro]

:D

 

[Chip]

Lumpy, PB's not doing Gothic 4 anyway.

 

[Ladonna]

Link please chip?

They did say they wouldn't do another Gothic with the same Nameless guy as the player character, but haven't said they won't do another Gothic.

 

[Elwro]

Frankly, I'm pretty sure I read they'd be doing Gothic 4 and 5 and (shudder) considering a MMO.