Review Sword and Sorcery -- Underworld Review

[Alex]

Personally, I think that graphics can be an important part of CRPGs. As I see it, it is integral part of any RPG to create a imaginary space in the heads of its players. For example, those character sheets with a name, a few stats and a few skills, should, in the head of the players, be mapped to an imaginary character. In other words, immersion is an important part of any RPG. And, of course, graphics are one way to create immersion. Thus, having mismatched graphics like this game seems to have may legitimately hurt the experience of some users.

That said, I am not much of a visual thinker myself, so I don't really care about the graphics. Thanks for the review, Elwro. Charles-cgr, congratulations on releasing your game!

 

[Topher]

Wrong. The fact that Zork and other text adventure games are on computer doesn't stop them for being anything more then books that got transcribed. So that makes 99.999999999% of computer games reliant on visuals hence making them a visual medium... fucking moron.

Er, right. "It is it is because I say so and your counterexamples are wrong and don't count nerrrr! Plus ur a moran!" Ah codex, how I do love thee.

Fucking lol at "books that got transcribed" though, what is this I don't even. So the existence of 'gameplay' is apparently completely irrelevant to whether something counts as a 'video game', while graphics are a necessity? Really dude, you could not have proven my point better.

Did I really have to explain that I wasn't talking about fucking Moby Dick but the adventure style books that games like Zork grew from? Are text adventures on PC more advance? In many cases... yes they are, though I've seen books that have stats, inventories and many of the other typical trappings. Fact is that an insanely overwhelming majority of games rely on graphics and it's just fucking stupid to attack a generality based on that fact. A medium that relies heavily on it's visual component is considered to be a visual medium, shocking, but of course some little mouth breathing fuck-wit wants to piss and moan about semantics because he doesn't have shit else to say.

The only reason I even bothered to post in this topic is, as I've already said, was to offer the developer some insight into the mindset of a potential, but ultimately lost, customer. Seeing as that's been done...

You have successfully added SkepticsClaw to your ignore list.

 

[Mortmal]

Each time we speak of this game , its the same argument again, it has been said over and over in the previous threads , the art direction is terrible, unacceptable. Now you could link hardcore wargames i still find them better than that mix of 3D images in a 2D font.I wont play it for free indeed.
I dont think because there was only three blobbers released in the last decade that you should enjoy anything released.Some codexer standards are incredibly low when it comes to indies .
That said i am not judging the gameplay itself, not wishing any ill to his author , the more advertisement we do to charles, the more likely he will do a sequel with a more classic feeling.
I dont know the price of art, but frankly stylish black and white pictures from an eastern country artist shouldnt cost that much.Copy the interface from bard's tale , add good coherent pictures from the same artist and you wont see any complaints here.

 

[zeitgeist]

This game costs more than 200$ and many gamers would also believe it's hideous.

And they would be wrong, it doesn't look especially hideous at all, the person who designed that at least understands visual congruence on some level, if nothing else.

 

[DragoFireheart]

Really. Did you really think that I was talking about anything else but video games on this VIDEO GAME forum?!? Video games are a visual medium.

Zork, you fucking uneducated barbarian.

 

[Charles-cgr]

I definitely got the message that mixing ready-made stock with what I can put together with my unskilled hands doesn't cut it for many (most?). Those of you who saw the very first thread a year ago will probably acknowledge that I've tried.

Thanks to those that argue in favor. Unfortunately the numbers say that there will have to be a compromise on my part if I'm ever going to have a shot on the long run.

East european artist. Will do then. Or try at least, hoping the guy will stick around long enough to finish - lest I end up earning more flame because the style changes mid-game

 

[felipepepe]

I definitely got the message that mixing ready-made stock with what I can put together with my unskilled hands doesn't cut it for many (most?). Those of you who saw the very first thread a year ago will probably acknowledge that I've tried.

Thanks to those that argue in favor. Unfortunately the numbers say that there will have to be a compromise on my part if I'm ever going to have a shot on the long run.

East european artist. Will do then. Or try at least, hoping the guy will stick around long enough to finish - lest I end up earning more flame because the style changes mid-game

So nice to see the a Codex discussion that achieved more than just a bunch of crybabies jerking off to how "hardcore/old-school" they are. Constructive critics, not blind "graphics whores" rage.

Good Luck Charles!

 

[Jaesun]

East european artist. Will do then. Or try at least, hoping the guy will stick around long enough to finish - lest I end up earning more flame because the style changes mid-game

Or you and Basilisk Ranger could work together and INCLINE the cRPG genre..........

 

[Charles-cgr]

Basilisk Ranger?

Who's dat?

 

[Jaesun]

The Eschalon Developer. :D

Let's just say, I think you 2 together could possibly come up with something wonderful...........

 

[Charles-cgr]

Of course, Basilisk, duh

I'm guessing he's probably a bit too established & hasn't been waiting on me to come along though...

 

[SkepticsClaw]

Really. Did you really think that I was talking about anything else but video games on this VIDEO GAME forum?!? Video games are a visual medium.

Zork, you fucking uneducated barbarian.

I wouldn't bother bro, he'll just start crying and then add you to his ignore list like the little bitch that he is.

In any case, to make up for my off-topic spamming I will be posting some thoughts about this game once I've gotten far enough. I only had time to generate a party so far, but I'm looking forward to seeing how this pans out. One thing I noticed is that the character restrictions are fairly strong - requires a bit of re-rolling to get the party you want, though of course this doesn't in the end effect anything except the time you spend on character creation. Which brings me to wondering if there are any games which enforce the old-school rule of 'let the dice fall where they may'. Though I imagine a lot of people would be upset about having the control taken away from them, it would give a certain roguelike feel of making do with what you have.

 

[Claw]

$20 isn't low-budget? Fucking Steam has warped everyone's expectations.

Bullshit. I just don't pay full price for most games, only a few I am really excited about.

I bought Galactic Civilizations for 5€, great buy. Got Mount&Blade very early, very cheap. I had lots of fun with that. I bought Minecraft right before beta, for 14$ or so.
I forgot what I paid for Eschalon Book I. Didn't buy Book II yet, started the demo and got distracted.

I believe I paid 20€ for Bloodlines, and 30 for The Orange Box. Some of my more expensive buys. I refrained from buying SC2 so far because of the price - which is now below 40€! Interest renewed! Maybe my time has come...

Now I am supposed to pay 20$ for an indie game with bad graphics and quite frankly, pretty simple gameplay? I don't know. Maybe playing the demo some more will win me over, but right now I just don't know.
I believe I am at least twice as likely to buy something for ten-something than for twenty. There is a huge difference between a 1 and a 2 in front.


PS:
I wonder how that refund works. Is it enough to send an email saying "This sucks. I want my money back!"?

 

[Charles-cgr]

PS:
I wonder how that refund works. Is it enough to send an email saying "This sucks. I want my money back!"?

Yes, it is.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

I sometimes pay more for lunch.

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

Once again, this was standard for the time. Everything was blocky, it was the best available. So why pay $20 for a 2010 game that has the same issues as games from the 80's? Just go to eBay and get the originals with huge game manuals. Especially since half of the people here never played them, as you claim.

So, something that was perfectly fine and didn't stand in the way of enjoyment in the games long past is a #1 issue here that makes the game completely unplayable?

You disgust me, you retarded, hypocritical fucking next-gen cocksucker in disguise. The market changed? Well fuck me sideways, I thought it changed for the fucking worse and people keep ranting day and night how they can no longer play something like the classics, and when something finally is released, dumb shitheads like you and your clique of dickmongers crawl out of your holes, writing it off because of shoddy graphics? I'll be fucking damned, wasn't it said gazillions of times that pretty graphixxx are supposed to be the least concern and it's gameplay that matters? What the fuck would it change if it was text-based, for example? You could wank yourself to death over playing 'such oldschool stuff!!!!'? No, I'll tell you now what would happen: you'd be here, in this very thread, yelling that text-based games are a thing of the fucking past and the market has changed and it would even be better if it had graphics done in ms-paint.

This is exactly the same thing as fucking Knights of the Chalice. Was THAT game ugly as shit? No. The graphics were basic, but functional. And what were many dumbfucks saying? 'Oh lawdy, it's like 20 years ago, sux', 'dat perspective, I ain't playin' that'. Hope you already pre-ordered Skyrim you spoiled piece of shit so the bloom can gouge your eyes out while you jack off to the changed market that brought this magnificent piece of art style.

Frictional? There's more than one guy working in Frictional. Just by the fucking way.

God save the fucking queen. Decline of the Codex of the highest fucking intensity

Excellent comment, excellent.

Just reread this thread, and thought it was another perfect example of what Trash brought up earlier regarding the 'Graphics are more important than gameplay'.

I enjoyed this game too. Quite a good dungeon crawler if anyone is interested.

Bullshit. I just don't pay full price for most games, only a few I am really excited about.

I bought Galactic Civilizations for 5€, great buy. Got Mount&Blade very early, very cheap. I had lots of fun with that. I bought Minecraft right before beta, for 14$ or so.
I forgot what I paid for Eschalon Book I. Didn't buy Book II yet, started the demo and got distracted.

I believe I paid 20€ for Bloodlines, and 30 for The Orange Box. Some of my more expensive buys. I refrained from buying SC2 so far because of the price - which is now below 40€! Interest renewed! Maybe my time has come...

Now I am supposed to pay 20$ for an indie game with bad graphics and quite frankly, pretty simple gameplay? I don't know. Maybe playing the demo some more will win me over, but right now I just don't know.
I believe I am at least twice as likely to buy something for ten-something than for twenty. There is a huge difference between a 1 and a 2 in front.


PS:
I wonder how that refund works. Is it enough to send an email saying "This sucks. I want my money back!"?

Well, I didn't know you were a moron too. Economy of scale. You want something made for you when you represent a niche market? Pay more or say goodbye to it and enjoy Dragon Age 2.

Again, this is why wargamers have three publishing studio's, while old school RPG lovers have.....none!

 

[felipepepe]

Excellent comment, excellent.

Just reread this thread, and thought it was another perfect example of what Trash brought up earlier regarding the 'Graphics are more important than gameplay'.

I enjoyed this game too. Quite a good dungeon crawler if anyone is interested.

You reread the whole thread and found this comment the best? Really?

Is not just about bad (not old, BAD) graphics distracing you from the game, is about a believable world, the so argued about "immersion".

There are many games you sometimes became impressed by how cool what you are seeing is, like when you first became the Slayer in BG2 or seeing Frank Horrigan slaying some dudes in the wasteland. That's not being a graphic whore, is just great game design pushing the player further in to the world. Them why can't you be distracted or annoyed by the weird stock images and bad design?

Well, I didn't know you were a moron too. Economy of scale. You want something made for you when you represent a niche market? Pay more or say goodbye to it and enjoy Dragon Age 2.

Your logic is so bad that implies Dragon Age 2 cost less than this game.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Once again, this was standard for the time. Everything was blocky, it was the best available. So why pay $20 for a 2010 game that has the same issues as games from the 80's? Just go to eBay and get the originals with huge game manuals. Especially since half of the people here never played them, as you claim.

So, something that was perfectly fine and didn't stand in the way of enjoyment in the games long past is a #1 issue here that makes the game completely unplayable?

You disgust me, you retarded, hypocritical fucking next-gen cocksucker in disguise. The market changed? Well fuck me sideways, I thought it changed for the fucking worse and people keep ranting day and night how they can no longer play something like the classics, and when something finally is released, dumb shitheads like you and your clique of dickmongers crawl out of your holes, writing it off because of shoddy graphics? I'll be fucking damned, wasn't it said gazillions of times that pretty graphixxx are supposed to be the least concern and it's gameplay that matters? What the fuck would it change if it was text-based, for example? You could wank yourself to death over playing 'such oldschool stuff!!!!'? No, I'll tell you now what would happen: you'd be here, in this very thread, yelling that text-based games are a thing of the fucking past and the market has changed and it would even be better if it had graphics done in ms-paint.

This is exactly the same thing as fucking Knights of the Chalice. Was THAT game ugly as shit? No. The graphics were basic, but functional. And what were many dumbfucks saying? 'Oh lawdy, it's like 20 years ago, sux', 'dat perspective, I ain't playin' that'. Hope you already pre-ordered Skyrim you spoiled piece of shit so the bloom can gouge your eyes out while you jack off to the changed market that brought this magnificent piece of art style.

Frictional? There's more than one guy working in Frictional. Just by the fucking way.

God save the fucking queen. Decline of the Codex of the highest fucking intensity

Excellent comment, excellent.

Just reread this thread, and thought it was another perfect example of what Trash brought up earlier regarding the 'Graphics are more important than gameplay'.

I enjoyed this game too. Quite a good dungeon crawler if anyone is interested.

Why do you consider it a good dungeon crawler? Good in comparison to which dungeoncrawlers? Is it really good or are there older dungeoncrawlers that outclass it? What was most enjoyable about it?
How does it compare to dungeoncrawlers with better graphics? Does it offer something that they don't?

Well, I didn't know you were a moron too. Economy of scale. You want something made for you when you represent a niche market? Pay more or say goodbye to it and enjoy Dragon Age 2.

Again, this is why wargamers have three publishing studio's, while old school RPG lovers have.....none!

No. Wargamers have three publishing studios (and are ready to pay a lot for wargames) because wargaming has never suffered the drop of quality that cRPGs did and wargaming never depended on giant teams and big publishers to be able too make good games, so they are able to deliver games that either look much better or have much more sophisticated mechanics than the older titles and often they can deliver both good looks and good gameplay.
While cRPGs used to have Vogel which made old-school cRPGs with watered-down combat and ugly graphics until he went crazy and made a low-budget Bioware RPG, wargamers got Gary Grigsby, which was making more and more sophisticated wargames, released WitP and WPO (both of which have good graphics) and when he got insane, he created a huge micromanagement hell WitE with good graphics.

The difference isn't that wargamers are better audience. The difference is that wargamers actually get games worth paying a lot for and worth playing a lot which are often made by veteran designers with over 20 years of experience.

Wargamers still have their Panther Games, Gary Grigsby and SSG which are still making good wargames.
The last time old-school cRPG players had anything near that calibre was when Sir-Tech and Troika Games were still alive and both of them were killed off by distribution chains/publishing, not because their fans didn't want to buy their games.

 

[SkepticsClaw]

Well, I didn't know you were a moron too. Economy of scale. You want something made for you when you represent a niche market? Pay more or say goodbye to it and enjoy Dragon Age 2.

Your logic is so bad that implies Dragon Age 2 cost less than this game.

FFS, shut up about 'logic' when you clearly have no grasp of even basic reasoning. Only in your unfathomably stupid mind could an argument about how hobbyists should expect to pay for products tailored to their niche magically transmogrify into 'LOL COS THIS COST $20 AND DA2 COST $60 THAT MEANS THAT HE IS STUPPPIDIDID UEHFIUEHFIUAHFEI"

fuck.

 

[GarfunkeL]

I love that thanks to Brazil, UEHFIUEHFIUAHFEI is now a legitimate adjective on the Internet.

The difference is that wargamers actually get games worth paying a lot for and worth playing a lot which are often made by veteran designers with over 20 years of experience.

While that is true, I'd like to point out that there is plenty of shitty indie (and not so indie too) projects amongst the wargaming niche. Overall, wargamers have plenty to choose from, whereas RPG-gamers... don't. At least, nowhere near the same amount.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

The difference is that wargamers actually get games worth paying a lot for and worth playing a lot which are often made by veteran designers with over 20 years of experience.

While that is true, I'd like to point out that there is plenty of shitty indie (and not so indie too) projects amongst the wargaming niche. Overall, wargamers have plenty to choose from, whereas RPG-gamers... don't. At least, nowhere near the same amount.

Yes. And the main reason is general lack of talent and good design ideas among indie RPG developers.
Since the old-school RPG developers either went mainstream and work on MMORPGs or Next-gen or quit developing games altogether, old-school RPG market is basically a wasteland of mediocrity with rare good titles like KotC (allegedly - I have never played the full version) or ADOM.
Maybe if the Troika guys would go indie instead of closing the doors or Brian Fargo would still produce Wasteland-style games but with more sophisticated mechanics and prettier tiles, things would be comparable to the wargaming market.

Anyway, RPG-gamers have a choice - there are many of high-quality wargames that are better than mediocre cRPGs .

 

[felipepepe]

Well, I didn't know you were a moron too. Economy of scale. You want something made for you when you represent a niche market? Pay more or say goodbye to it and enjoy Dragon Age 2.

Your logic is so bad that implies Dragon Age 2 cost less than this game.

FFS, shut up about 'logic' when you clearly have no grasp of even basic reasoning. Only in your unfathomably stupid mind could an argument about how hobbyists should expect to pay for products tailored to their niche magically transmogrify into 'LOL COS THIS COST $20 AND DA2 COST $60 THAT MEANS THAT HE IS STUPPPIDIDID UEHFIUEHFIUAHFEI"

fuck.

So you think that he is right, just shouting "Economy of scale" explains all?

If this was about a professional and talented developer creating a fantastic, deep and polished game tailored just for a niche, your argument would be right. This is an completly amateur game, to put it on the same level as wargames developers is simply absurd. You clearly have no idea how complex and carefully made those games are, compared to the "oh, it haz old-school dungeon crawling" only selling feature of Underwolrd.

The real Economy of Scale vs Niche Economy in this case is wargames being sold at higher prices than mainstream AAA games, something not even amazing adventure games developers are capable of doing and this game will never get close to. Even at $20 is ridiculous.

 

[Charles-cgr]

"oh, it haz old-school dungeon crawling" only selling feature of Underwolrd.

Looks like you ended up giving it try. Thanks for that.

 

[felipepepe]

"oh, it haz old-school dungeon crawling" only selling feature of Underwolrd.

Looks like you ended up giving it try. Thanks for that.

Well, correct me then. What does your game offers me that hasn't already been done 20 years ago, with greater polish (and I dare say, better looking) ? Even on your website, the main seeling point is "party based crpg game mechanics you loved back in the early days of roleplaying".

I actually tried the demo, and found myself playing neither one of the old classic games nor a modern remake, but something wierd, trapped in between. Thye game just tries to hard, I feel like it's always pointing to me "look, that's just like the old games!", with some game design decisons made clearly just to be "old-school", instead of improving the game. It's really a hard sell, being inferior to both the original ones like Eye of the Beholder and to the modern crawlers, like Dark Spire. And both of them are also available for around $20.

EDIT: I'm in no way against you trying to make a dungeon crawler today. I applaud to that. But I'm against this ideia that it is "the only crawler of 2010" (i'ts not), so we have to be gratefull for it, no matter if it's good or not. That is bad, for the RPG community and even for you. And I really doubt that even half of the people here blindly defending your game have brought it, or even tried it.

 

[Charles-cgr]

I didn't mean to correct you. I figured you had tried it & I thanked you. No irony.

My main selling point isn't that it haz old school dungeon crawling. It is that the dungeon design, plot, quests, mob attributes, general mechanics and other ingredients (including sound design) work together to make a game that many people reported having a lot of fun playing.

There's really no point arguing. I did the best with what I had (no prior programming knowledge, no art skills & no capital). Not good enough for you.Good enough for a few others (about 150). End of discussion.

It does kind of get to me to read you refer to it as a shitty game that isn't even better than what it sets out to be (the gall of me). And your argument with Blackadder (who did buy the game & he isn't the only one here) is fallacious. Yes, economy of scale matters. Small niche, higher price than could be expected. That doesn't mean it should be pricier than DA2. That would be way, way more than could be expected.