Review RPG Codex Review: Undertale

[Irenaeus II]

You need to understand that furries also have a near-infinite purse as well, as in there are furries who are engineers, doctors, and surgeons who spend their money only on their fetish fueled hobby. They will hold a game's development hostage if their fetishes are not catered to. The only way through funding games you're going to stop these fucks is either out bid the degenerates so thus spineless devs consider you more important or know that the developer has a fucking backbone, which is in rare supplies these days.

There are some developers with anti-degenerate reinforced backbones around the codex and at large, for those with the eagle eye.

Anyway, sorry to open the curtains on the little show: I don't really want to (or could possibly) out bid furfags or fund a cultural revolution based around shitlord games (tm). While I appreciate more challenging games, maybe with competitive multiplayer for fun, basically video game stuff that resonates with my cultural background, I don't give much of a shit about this particular game or review. Ask Bradylama. I'm mostly writing whatever silly shit I can think of on the spot and at the same time throwing feces monkey style at my high level "enemies" on codex admin to entertain my codex bros. It was a fun day, that's all. "This game is satanic" and Scrooge new sobriquet are much above whatever realistic desired outcome I expected when I started sextuple posting in this thread out of fancy. The way this thread developed spells another day of incline for the glory of Codexia and for Irenaeus' fame.

 

[Edward The Mediocre]

You could spare certain monsters like moldsmal in the first turn but they wouldn't give any money and for the most part you could just run away against the majority of monsters; Being friendly to the monsters for cash was pointless as you could just buy shit from the turtle and sell it to the temmies if you wanted to grind for cash.

Anyways it was fun bantering with you Irenaeus II, you fucking faggot.http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?members/irenaeus-ii.20214/

 

[Seethe]

From all the gameplay I've seen and things I've read, why is this game exactly labeled as an RPG? This acronym is being thrown around like a second hand condom as of late. Might as well call Telltale's games RPGs because it haz le decision making.

 

[Shin]

From all the gameplay I've seen and things I've read, why is this game exactly labeled as an RPG? This acronym is being thrown around like a second hand condom as of late. Might as well call Telltale's games RPGs because it haz le decision making.

Maybe it's time for one of them 'what is a RPG' threads? It's been a few weeks since I saw one of those.

 

[CRD]

I can see that, although both are a little less linear. Undertale would work so well if it was an action adventure and focused on puzzles like Zelda instead of doing what it did, in my opinion. This is why I'm a little against it. It's such a missed opportunity in some areas, which is a shame, because the jokes are great and the music is awesome.

It is a bit ridiculous to judge something based on what could have been. You have a product and that's it, you enjoy it or not, but you can't decide about it based on a "what if", this is not Futurama. I want Madden to be Blood bowl but it isn't so it's a shit game because I hate realistic sports simulators. Sorry, it doesn't work like that.

Being against something because it isn't what you wanted to be instead of playing fair and judging it based on what it is, imho is stupid. Where you see a missed opportunity, others just see a wise choice.

 

[Markman]

All I know is you guys fucked me out of 8 bucks for hyping this piece of shit.

Hope you all get wizzed to Tumblr.

 

[Tao]

From all the gameplay I've seen and things I've read, why is this game exactly labeled as an RPG? This acronym is being thrown around like a second hand condom as of late. Might as well call Telltale's games RPGs because it haz le decision making.

I was very surprise to see a review of Undertale here in Codex. Imagine my reaction when i read people comparing it with Underrail or AoD XD

Shall we expect reviews of Zeldas like games now? Dunno if my body is ready

 

[Vikter]

I can see that, although both are a little less linear. Undertale would work so well if it was an action adventure and focused on puzzles like Zelda instead of doing what it did, in my opinion. This is why I'm a little against it. It's such a missed opportunity in some areas, which is a shame, because the jokes are great and the music is awesome.

It is a bit ridiculous to judge something based on what could have been. You have a product and that's it, you enjoy it or not, but you can't decide about it based on a "what if", this is not Futurama. I want Madden to be Blood bowl but it isn't so it's a shit game because I hate realistic sports simulators. Sorry, it doesn't work like that.

Being against something because it isn't what you wanted to be instead of playing fair and judging it based on what it is, imho is stupid. Where you see a missed opportunity, others just see a wise choice.

Of course it can. Everytime you judge something you do because you have something else as parameter. Saying the combat would be better if it was different is obviously valid, since it was a design choice that affects the player and someone can make a critique. Like you said, some people see as a wise choice, but others don't. If what you say were true we should never be able to question any design choice, and this is really stupid.

 

[mondblut]

Haven't played Undertale yet but I'm happy that it was made cause apparently the fact of its existence alone is some sort of self-sustainting butthurt and drama generator of massive proportions.

You must totally adore bethesda and bioware then. They sure shown them pesky elitist dead RPGamers! The butthurt they have caused must be measured in trillions of quirkyquirks.

 

[mondblut]

Basically Crooked Bee, Scrooge, me, felipe, etc., we've kinda... leveled up. We don't just like Fallout or PS:T anymore. We like them plenty, and games like that, but we're not gonna pigeonhole ourselves or dedicate ourselves to just one style of RPG. If it's good, we'll play it; doesn't matter if it's tacticool KOTC combat crawling, classic Underrailing or a hip new jRPG that's really well made. If it's good, we'll play it and we won't feel ashamed about it.

I'd say we have more fun than you guys because we get to enjoy more games. Maybe we're even more hardcore than you - we beat Labyrinth of Touhou, after all, greatest dungeon crawl ever made that's new. :3

:incloosive:

Also,

Basically Crooked Bee, Scrooge, me, felipe

Two women, a furfag, and a protege of Lie Alexander. What a telling fanbase

 

[Fowyr]

On the one hand, this game is an excellent tumblr bait.

What are these gifs? Take on F:NV, I presume?
Rough Fox, really?

 

[CRD]

Of course it can. Everytime you judge something you do because you have something else as parameter. Saying the combat would be better if it was different is obviously valid, since it was a design choice that affects the player and someone can make a critique. Like you said, some people see as a wise choice, but others don't. If what you say were true we should never be able to question any design choice, and this is really stupid.

You can but is ridiculous.

If you have a car, you should judge the car as a car, not saying "I am against this car because I like planes and if it doesn't fly then is crap, I was expecting a flying plane-car", so even if the car is a Ferrari and awesome in the car segment, I give it 0/10 because it is not a plane.

You can say you don't like the game and then giving reasons of what doesn't do well, not "The game is crap because is not the genre I was waiting for", or well, you can tell it but is retarded as the game could be amazing doing what the creator wanted to do, and not being the game you wanted to be is not a valid argument to do it.

The game it is what it is and the creator wanted. Judging it should be around how the game do what it is intended to do and against the competition, not what could have been.

 

[Stainless Veteran]

On the one hand, this game is an excellent tumblr bait.

What are these gifs? Take on F:NV, I presume?
Rough Fox, really?

There's a link in "e.g." part of my post. Basically, it was a semi-serious project by some tumblr girl to make Fallout: New Vegas dating sim.

 

[Lurker King]

You can say you don't like the game reasoning it with what doesn't do well, not "The game is crap because is not the genre I was waiting for".

Of course, you can. Some genres suck, whether in gaming, movies or literature.

 

[Lurker King]

All I know is you guys fucked me out of 8 bucks for hyping this piece of shit.

Hope you all get wizzed to Tumblr.

It serves you right, for having zero critical sense and no personality. Whatever way you look at it, the game is awful. If felipepe told you that eating shit is the new way of roleplaying, would you eat shit too?

 

[Damned Registrations]

All I know is you guys fucked me out of 8 bucks for hyping this piece of shit.

Hope you all get wizzed to Tumblr.

It serves you right, for having zero critical sense and no personality. Whatever way you look at it, the game is awful. If felipepe told you that eating shit is the new way of roleplaying, would you eat shit too?

I mean, if he had two braincells to rub together he could just get a refund.

 

[Markman]

Its not about the money.

 

[Cassidy]

Hearing Undertale fanboys itt feels like hearing Appletards claiming the Mac is better than PC.

 

[Damned Registrations]

It's amusing seeing the people who tried the game and didn't like it discuss only the least memorable moments in the game, as they clearly didn't go out of their way to explore things while playing. I'm not going to say these people should try it again and play differently, if that's how you played then you clearly don't give a crap about exploring and wouldn't enjoy finding the neat stuff anyways. But there is clearly a type of person that doesn't like this game, and I'd feel sorry for them if they weren't also being misleading cunts, like someone who played through Fallout without ever reading dialogue and just murder-hoboing through the whole game complaining about the bad combat.

 

[Archibald]

Tell us more about these feelings that you have.

 

[Viata]

I'm not going to say these people should try it again and play differently, if that's how you played then you clearly don't give a crap about exploring and wouldn't enjoy finding the neat stuff anyways.

"You guys are playing the game wrong" - Tim Schafer to rpgcodex after hearing his game was easy.

 

[Damned Registrations]

I mean, if someone played fallout in the way I described, what would you tell them? "Oh man, you're right, Fallout really is a shit game, I never tried playing it that way before!"

 

[CryptRat]

I am currently playing the game and if nothing else the dialog battles are pleasant and make the game particular. I mean, I am not particularly interested in pacifist playthrough through stealth and fleeing, but dialog battles are generally a good thing. Some dialog battles in Arcanum for example are better thant those of Undertale, so far, but you can't resolve every encounter in Arcanum via dialog.

 

[Vikter]

Of course it can. Everytime you judge something you do because you have something else as parameter. Saying the combat would be better if it was different is obviously valid, since it was a design choice that affects the player and someone can make a critique. Like you said, some people see as a wise choice, but others don't. If what you say were true we should never be able to question any design choice, and this is really stupid.

You can but is ridiculous.

If you have a car, you should judge the car as a car, not saying "I am against this car because I like planes and if it doesn't fly then is crap, I was expecting a flying plane-car", so even if the car is a Ferrari and awesome in the car segment, I give it 0/10 because it is not a plane.

You can say you don't like the game and then giving reasons of what doesn't do well, not "The game is crap because is not the genre I was waiting for", or well, you can tell it but is retarded as the game could be amazing doing what the creator wanted to do, and not being the game you wanted to be is not a valid argument to do it.

The game it is what it is and the creator wanted. Judging it should be around how the game do what it is intended to do and against the competition, not what could have been.

That makes no sense and seem arbitrary, to me. I played the game and have the opinion that it doesn't work well as it is and exposed an idea of what it could have to be better. Of course it is what the creator wanted, but by that logic you can't criticize anything.
If I buy a car, I'm not gonna complain about it not being a plane, but I can say that it doesn't handle very well and that it should have better aerodynamics compared to some other car. It's my right to do so, and that is a feedback to the almighty artist. I don't know why you are being so annoying about the fact that I should be able to criticize a game's battle system and saying it could be something else when that is pretty much the point of critique. If I can't say that it could have been something different and open a discussion about how it could have handled non-combat aspectos, like some people were discussing, I don't see the point of having reviews. We should just put horse masks and masturbate Toby Fox and lynch those who don't play the game, because those who play can't have a negative opinion about anything in it.

 

[Irenaeus II]

How does Undertale compares to a Rolls Royce Phantom III?