Arryosha
Learned
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2019
- Messages
- 146
It seems to be the consensus view on and off the Codex that while Risen is decent--even good--it does not come close to the greatness of Gothic 1 and 2. This is evidenced by the fact that Risen doesn't even make it on the most recent Codex ranking.
I agree with the familiar criticisms of Risen, but to me those criticisms either apply roughly equally to Gothic 2 or are balanced out by other things that Risen does better. At best, I think Gothic 2 just edges out Risen.
I'm not dead set on that view. In fact, I assume I must be missing something. I'll just mention three of the most common criticisms of Risen and explain why, to me, they don't seem to justify the common view.
First, Risen's main quest takes a nose dive in the second half. It's anticlimactic and feels rushed. This is certainly the case. But while Gothic 2's main quest doesn't seem anticlimactic or rushed, it never seemed all that great either. I found Risen's main quest and story to be in some ways more interesting and compelling.
Second, the magic system in Risen is disappointing. I'll admit to never having played a mage in Gothic 2, despite spending 100+ hours in it (I always suspected it wasn't good). But based on what little I know, I have to assume Risen is a step back. However, this disadvantage is balanced by Risen's much improved melee combat.
Finally, there is the lack of originality. Gothic 2 used largely the same formula as 1, but back in 2003, it still felt fresh. But in Risen, it often feels like you've played this game before (if you've played the Gothics). Here, I think a case can be made that Risen loses to Gothic 2. Risen's new setting is interesting and I prefer it to Gothic's, but it's not enough. However, to my mind, at least, this problem doesn't seem weighty enough to justify the view that Gothic 2 is MUCH better than Risen. At most, it makes Gothic 2 slightly better.
Other aspects of the game seemed roughly on a par. Story, world building, characters, factions, quests.
But as I said, I assume I must be missing something, and I'd be happy to know what. Or I'm irrational. For what it's worth, I think Gothic 1 is better than both games, and maybe that is part of the explanation for my view. Thanks in advance for the replies.
I agree with the familiar criticisms of Risen, but to me those criticisms either apply roughly equally to Gothic 2 or are balanced out by other things that Risen does better. At best, I think Gothic 2 just edges out Risen.
I'm not dead set on that view. In fact, I assume I must be missing something. I'll just mention three of the most common criticisms of Risen and explain why, to me, they don't seem to justify the common view.
First, Risen's main quest takes a nose dive in the second half. It's anticlimactic and feels rushed. This is certainly the case. But while Gothic 2's main quest doesn't seem anticlimactic or rushed, it never seemed all that great either. I found Risen's main quest and story to be in some ways more interesting and compelling.
Second, the magic system in Risen is disappointing. I'll admit to never having played a mage in Gothic 2, despite spending 100+ hours in it (I always suspected it wasn't good). But based on what little I know, I have to assume Risen is a step back. However, this disadvantage is balanced by Risen's much improved melee combat.
Finally, there is the lack of originality. Gothic 2 used largely the same formula as 1, but back in 2003, it still felt fresh. But in Risen, it often feels like you've played this game before (if you've played the Gothics). Here, I think a case can be made that Risen loses to Gothic 2. Risen's new setting is interesting and I prefer it to Gothic's, but it's not enough. However, to my mind, at least, this problem doesn't seem weighty enough to justify the view that Gothic 2 is MUCH better than Risen. At most, it makes Gothic 2 slightly better.
Other aspects of the game seemed roughly on a par. Story, world building, characters, factions, quests.
But as I said, I assume I must be missing something, and I'd be happy to know what. Or I'm irrational. For what it's worth, I think Gothic 1 is better than both games, and maybe that is part of the explanation for my view. Thanks in advance for the replies.