Review Of Monsters, Men and BROche

[mikaelis]

I stand my ground (and never denied so) that the article as a review is shit (Because the game is quite good regardless of the genre which is absolutely not reflected in the 99% of the review content).

So what did we forget to cover?

Probably nothing. It's not the point. It's alright article if the thesis behind was: "We are reviewing it as: Why TW2 failed as true cRPG of Arcanum and Fallout likes ". The whole construction of the article is like - presenting some game design/mechanics etc. and collating it with why it doesn't work as proper cRPG in lulzy manner.

 

[Mangoose]

Yeah all the criticism about how the difficulty decreases as the game plays, that you can machine gun daggers that do 3x sword damage, that the sword adrenaline skill kills everyone in a cutscene... All that has nothing to do with the game as an action game.

 

[UserNamer]

nice review. The developers quotes are always interesting, funny, and depressing at the same time.

Mikaelis, the site is called rpgcodex, so it makes sense that the reviews would focus on the shortcomings of the witcher 2 as an rpg.

 

[Needles]

Not really relevant to the review....anyway:

Not relevant to the review.

Way to go!

 

[Mrowak]

VentilatorOfDoom, are you really this cynical in real life? I mean, goddamit, here I was hoping for a quality, unbiased review, like we got on numerous occassions.

What makes this review biased?

[/quote]

Goddamit. I hate playing the role of a butthurt fanboy, especially considering that most won't remember that I did not criticise any of the observations you've made (though I disagree with some of them)... but I guess Codex needs its Circus once in a while so here I go!

The main thing that renders this "review" biased is the tone you guys employed. You can write a fun review. You can write a lulzy review. But you cannot write a sarcastic review and expect anyone to treat it seriously (as in "serious source of unbiased assessment") because this mode is not and should not be used for evaluating things. Captain obvious to the rescue - it is used to mocking them. As it is it carries the sense of superiority, the high airs it immediately identifies you as unobjective towards the subject matter. You are basically stating - our way is the only right way of doing shit so STFU. Of course that may appear attractive and very Codexian to our less broad-minded members, but all the same, from the perspective of an outsider, it puts as all in the role of old sacks who whine about gaming and think they are clever.

The irony wouldn't be a great deal if it showed up occassionally, with the criticism of 1-3 features. The problem is, however, once you started using this tone you cannot stop. Throughout most of
the article you are being sarcastic time and time again. That way the reader gets impression that 70% of your writing is ridicule of apparently negative aspects of the game. Be honest - even the sheer volume of ironic parts outweights the positive ones. That would be quite OK if the game was complete rubbish in your opinion, but in the end you stated that you liked it, no matter it is not RPG. So where are the positive bits? What device did you use to create the contrast in the text? So much for consistency. Btw, this is also the answer to the question you posed to mikaelis.

Also, did I mentioned how I loathe the tabloid style, "let's take some random shit someone, somewhere said/published to somebody else and use it as evidence for our agenda". The youtube vid I discussed before is a good example. That's why you won't see that bits in professional reviews (of books, films - not games!) in 1st class publications.

Now bearing this in mind, is RPGCodex some gutter press or a "prestigious magazine"? If the former, then carry on... If the latter, then what's exactly the point of trolling us with this? Just to have some laugh, so we can pat ourselves on the back how witty we are. Come on guys, that wasn't even subtle irony - the best kind you have. That was rather ham-fisted - any idiot could see through. Even as I am writing this I know I am stating the obvious and made mockery to some of you by even criticizing it. But I did that to make a point it. It being...?

 

[mikaelis]

Yeah all the criticism about how the difficulty decreases as the game plays, that you can machine gun daggers that do 3x sword damage, that the sword adrenaline skill kills everyone in a cutscene... All that has nothing to do with the game as an action game.

These are all valid arguments. As I said before, in my eyes the game as a "game" is not so good. Story and presentation are very good. And to be fair they were mentioned as strong points. It is just that the review dillutes the good points of TW2 in the sea of pun and irony.

the site is called rpgcodex, so it makes sense that the reviews would focus on the shortcomings of the witcher 2 as an rpg.

Agreed. More so, the fact that it is rpgcodex should make me immune to sarcasm long, long time ago

 

[Licaon_Kter]

heh, nice review, lulzy and such
too bad it just reiterates what i already gathered from around the web: TW1 consolized slipstreamed and shorter
which is rather disappointing, I just finished TW1 again ( with the ruthless Flash combat mod; BTW did you guys know that Flash is now a CPD employee? ) and I'm kinda weary to play part 2 knowing that many nice things like inventory, sword styles etc. got lost on the way, well it's not bad like the Oblivion thing ( not being Morrowind 2 that is ) but...


/LE: talking about AP, haw lulzy to keep it in the codex database as "Current status: in development"
also, why wasn't it reviewed in this prestigious magazine?

 

[Vault Dweller]

Goddamit. I hate playing the role of a butthurt fanboy...

You are not. You're a very cool bro.

The main thing that renders this "review" biased is the tone you guys employed. You can write a fun review. You can write a lulzy review. But you cannot write a sarcastic review and expect anyone to treat it seriously (as in "serious source of unbiased assessment") because this mode is not and should not be used for evaluating things.

Why not? Yes, the tone is mocking, but the review covers pretty much every aspect of the game, does it not? If you disagree with the tone, but not with the assessment, well...

You are basically stating - our way is the only right way of doing shit so STFU.

I don't see it this way. Care to elaborate?

That would be quite OK if the game was complete rubbish in your opinion, but in the end you stated that you liked it, no matter it is not RPG. So where are the positive bits? What device did you use to create the contrast in the text? So much for consistency.

First, the positive bits are the graphics, setting, and characters. In this order. The rest is poorly designed. Second, you've assumed that the praise at the end was somehow different from the praise throughout the review, despite everything pointing at the obvious. I blame VoD. He made me tone that paragraph down, making it more subtle. Is that guy cynical or what?

Also, did I mentioned how I loathe the tabloid style, "let's take some random shit someone, somewhere said/published to somebody else and use it as evidence for our agenda". The youtube vid I discussed before is a good example.

Fair enough. We should have tried to recreate the build before linking to it. However, the point was that the character system makes your character godlike and whether or not you kill bosses in 2-3 hits or 5-6 doesn't make much difference. Now, I can't help but notice that you said that's most likely a hoax. "Most likely" doesn't sound very confident, does it?

Can anyone comment on the video? If it's bullshit, we'll remove it.

Now bearing this in mind, is RPGCodex some gutter press or a "prestigious magazine"? If the former, then carry on...

How is it different from the Mass Effect interview?

If the latter, then what's exactly the point of trolling us with this?

Honestly? The review would have been much harsher if it was written in a serious tone.

 

[Black_Willow]

VD, why do you keep claiming that this is a review?

 

[Mangoose]

Yeah and why does he insist the ME Interview was an interview?

 

[Vault Dweller]

Why do you keep claiming it's not a review? Because you didn't like it? Must be tough. May I refer you to my signature?

 

[Black_Willow]

Why do you keep claiming it's not a review?

Because it isn't, just like Monty Python and the Holy Grail isn't an Arthurian Tale.

 

[Vault Dweller]

"Because it isn't." That's deep, bro.

 

[Black_Willow]

I might have used a comparison which is too hard for you to understand. So, "Monty Python and the Holy Grail isn't an Arthurian Tale" means that a surreal parody and the target of this parody are two different things.

 

[MetalCraze]

It isn't a review. It hurts my feelings. VD you stupid, don't you know that reviews must PRAISE the game?
Don't you know that if a game isn't getting at least 9.5/10 - it isn't a review?

Learn how to write reviews, stupid. They must be readme.txts concentrating only on good sides. And if there are none you have to invent them. Just check TW2 threads in GRPGD to learn how.

So once again, CD Projekt manages to satisfy both camps. The hardcore audience is pleased with a choice, and the casual audience is pleased because the choice is meaningless. Bra-vo!

C&C!!!
GREAT WRITING!!!
NON-LINEARITY!!!
BEST RPG EVAR!!!





Bottomline: this is the most beautiful thing I've read on the Codex in years. Because instead of some retard inventing secret depth in a game this one actually speaks truth.

VD and VoD are still true patriots even with all their faults

 

[Vault Dweller]

I might have used a comparison which is too hard for you to understand. So, "Monty Python and the Holy Grail isn't an Arthurian Tale" means that a surreal parody and the target of this parody are two different things.

Just because the tone isn't dead serious doesn't mean it's a parody. Too hard for you to understand?

 

[MetalCraze]

Yeah all the criticism about how the difficulty decreases as the game plays, that you can machine gun daggers that do 3x sword damage, that the sword adrenaline skill kills everyone in a cutscene... All that has nothing to do with the game as an action game.

But man don't you know - if TW2 actually at least tried to add variety to combat through combos - you'd have to memorize them. And as TW2 fans here told me - memorizing stuff is for retards.

It's much better to just press LMB when told slow and steady until the finger bleeds.

 

[Black_Willow]

Just because the tone isn't dead serious doesn't mean it's a parody.

[dead serious]-------------------------[somewhat humoristic]----------------------X--[full derp]

X-the thing you wrote

 

[anus_pounder]

I see Bioware and Bethesda are not the only ones capable of creating DISUSS! games.

 

[Twinkle]

The Codex delivers.

And, despite the mocking tone, it's very informative as it covers combat system, character development, alchemy, inventory, questing, writing quality and C&C. It is nothing like Yahtzee's brainfart "trolololol im getting killed in the first chapter dis gaem sux1111111"

 

[Excidium]

Great review!

"The retrospectives show that CD Projekt has become a master of the video game craft. The ratio of gameplay to cutscenes is flawless, raising our hopes that the inevitable sequel will push the definition of multi-platform even further, and will be released on PC, consoles, and movie theaters near you."

 

[CrunchyHemorrhoids]

I'm all for sarcastic reviews, it's not like a serious review has anything new for forumites who've followed a game's development news, its previews, its release day reviews, completed it(often more than once) and formed an opinion of it or decided they wouldn't like it and are aware of others' thoughts on the game (usually including the reviewer's) by the time the review comes out(unless it's a hilariously bad review).

The jokes were a bit long-winded though, might be easier to pull off in a separate, shorter, satire piece that assumes its readers played or are very familiar with the game, while keeping an informative review for the visitors/uninformed poseurs/prestige.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

The Codex delivers.

And, despite the mocking tone, it's very informative as it covers combat system, character development, alchemy, inventory, questing, writing quality and C&C. It is nothing like Yahtzee's brainfart "trolololol im getting killed in the first chapter dis gaem sux1111111"

 

[PorkaMorka]

Best Codex front page feature in quite some time. Bravo.

 

[Mangoose]

Yeah all the criticism about how the difficulty decreases as the game plays, that you can machine gun daggers that do 3x sword damage, that the sword adrenaline skill kills everyone in a cutscene... All that has nothing to do with the game as an action game.

But man don't you know - if TW2 actually at least tried to add variety to combat through combos - you'd have to memorize them. And as TW2 fans here told me - memorizing stuff is for retards.

It's much better to just press LMB when told slow and steady until the finger bleeds.

Actually I was the one who disagreed because I really don't like combos. I like less variety with more depth, than a lot of variety with less depth. I do agree in adding challenge, but in other ways like smarter AI, manual control over blocking/attacking direction a la M&B, timed parrying windows, enemies with weird patterns that you have to learn, etc.