Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Am I gay?


  • Total voters
    113
Self-Ejected

Safav Hamon

Self-Ejected
Village Idiot The Real Fanboy
Joined
May 15, 2018
Messages
2,141
And not only is it a 40 hour traditional CRPG, but it has everything the codex claims to love. Turn-based combat, party creation, open world, joinable factions, branching questlines, ect.

It hits every single mark of what a CRPG should be, while also being quite polished. Yet only 18 pages of attention? There's no logical explanation!
 

deama

Prophet
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
4,414
Location
UK
Here are some points I remember when I played the game on release:
-Poorly optimised, had to cap the fps to like 30/40 and even then my GPU (970gtx) kept hovering between 65-70 degrees celcius.

-Harder to speedhack than usual, because it wasn't that well optimised I couldn't speedhack it enough so the turn based combat was slower than what I'd like it to have been.

-loading times were long, though that was back when I had a HDD.

-character progression was crap, I remember after a certain level (around mid of game) my characters basically stopped growing in power because I maxed all of their relavent skills, so I ended up randomly spending points into shit I didn't need/want because I didn't know what to do with them.

-As mentioned above about character progression, the attributes from character select didn't feel all that impactful as compared to something like fallout; basically too much soyarism for my tastes.

-turn based combat was ok, but around mid point of the game started to get more dull, not sure why, maybe I'm remembering this badly because I got pissed I had to spend skill points on shit; or maybe there just wasn't that much to it.

-story was just ok, it started to get more interesting once you landed in that other place (was it scotland?) and spoke to the king, but wasn't enough to keep holding me so I gave up.

That's all I remember from off the top of my head, there might have been one or two other things, like I don't remember my opinion on that map travel survival thing they had going.
Also, I don't remember the loot for some reason?
 
Last edited:

Deitti

Augur
Joined
Sep 2, 2011
Messages
111
Vikings is a good game, although i played it after all the patching was done, which most likely increased my opinion of it.
 
Self-Ejected

Safav Hamon

Self-Ejected
Village Idiot The Real Fanboy
Joined
May 15, 2018
Messages
2,141
None of that is remotely true.

Encounter design is varied and interesting throughout the entire game. There are many branching sidequests with multiple gameplay affecting outcomes, so quest design is top notch.
 
Last edited:
Unwanted

SlumLord

Unwanted
Edgy
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
152
Location
Thirdworldia
I don't like snowbunny settings and having to click on every single crate.
You sound like a nigger. Figures most of you porchmonkeys prefer the Detroit-like setting of Fallout.


As for why Vikings failed, there are 3 glaring reason:

(1) the presence of a timer (I don't care how generous they made it, some people simply refuse to buy a game that has a hard-coded limit)

(2) lack of loot and itemization... on release, the game had something like 2 armor pieces IIRC... also, you'd kill 10 enemies with sweet-looking gear, and couldn't loot any of it... rinse and repeat for the next 30 fights

(3) bland setting and aesthetics... nothing wrong with vikings or the north, but the devs should've sprinkled some fantasy into it (in addition to big-tit bitches wearing chainmail bikinis - that always puts the nerds in a spending mood)
 

Modron

Arcane
Joined
May 5, 2012
Messages
10,049
Vikings was my 2017 rpg of the year (along with Fallout Nevada) over Elex, Tales of Wuxia, and Battle Brothers. I still have yet to play D:OS 2 yet but given I was generally lukewarm about the first one and the changes to initiative and armor I doubt I would rate it anywhere near as well.
 

Kem0sabe

Arcane
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
13,093
Location
Azores Islands
None of that is remotely true.

Encounter design is varied and interesting throughout the entire game. There are many branching sidequests with multiple gameplay affecting outcomes, so quest design is top notch.
Stop trying to pass off the game as anything else than a barrel looting simulator.
 

Rahdulan

Omnibus
Patron
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Messages
5,114
Because I have yet to play Conquistador.

retsenziia-na-expeditions-conquistador_8c93.jpg
 
Joined
May 4, 2017
Messages
631
I think you could have made a greater service to the game actually reviewing it without being spoilerish instead of trying to publish it like if you were the developer itself or one of the countless guys getting payed for reviewing products in a great way
 

Abu Antar

Turn-based Poster
Patron
Joined
Jan 19, 2014
Messages
13,564
Enjoy the Revolution! Another revolution around the sun that is. Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
It's a good game, but it doesn't excel at anything, imo. I preferred the first game. At least that game stood out more to me. Here, they just went with the crowd and made a more traditional rpg.
 

TemplarGR

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck Bethestard
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
5,815
Location
Cradle of Western Civilization
I haven't played it because i am on Linux and can't be bothered to play it with WINE/Proton right now. Perhaps in the future. Fuck them for not providing a native port.

Still, there is a port for Conquistador and i have played that, and all i saw was a Heroes of Might and Magic wannabe. What's so special about those games?
 

Mark Richard

Arcane
Joined
Mar 14, 2016
Messages
1,192
It's called Expeditions: Viking, no S at the end. Viking is used in its native context as a term to describe the action (to go Viking), not a culture or nationality. This tells you three things:

- That Expeditions: Viking emphasised historical authenticity.
- That I'm a NERRRRRRRD and the target audience for Expeditions: Viking.
- That the repetition of the simple mistake made throughout this thread is another symptom of the same problem - no one played Expeditions: Viking.

:negative:
 

Sarkile

Magister
Patron
Joined
Aug 13, 2003
Messages
1,382
Expeditions: Viking was probably one of the better games I've played in the last year and a half. It wasn't necessarily polished or had great graphics, but the historical setting was pretty well done and the turn based combat was intuitive enough to jump into without large amounts of study or concentration. It was an amazing follow-up to several glasses of beer.
 

AwesomeButton

Proud owner of BG 3: Day of Swen's Tentacle
Patron
Joined
Nov 23, 2014
Messages
16,289
Location
At large
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath
Two main reasons I haven't given it much attention, although it's been in my backlog since I got it on a 50% discount at some point this year (I think).

1. I wanted to finish Conquistadors first, which will probably not happen.
2. There has always been a game with more hype around it which has had me more interested in playing it - for this year it has been KCD, Deadfire, PKM, Hitman.

I'm not prejudiced against vikings, it's more a matter of being in the mood for such a setting. It should be noted that the games that generate the biggest threads here are not those which are the most liked, but those which spark the biggest arguments.
 

Generic-Giant-Spider

Guest
I'm not prejudiced against vikings, it's more a matter of being in the mood for such a setting. I

This.

I like vikings but when it comes to historical stuff it's down there with feudal Japan as something I need to be in the mood for to be captivated by. The game itself could be really good if you're into the historical setting especially, but it's wasted if I'm only half invested. I could get into KCD much more easily because the Holy Roman Empire has always been one of the most interesting time periods to me which can very easily cause me to lose hours due to the immersive quality.

With that said, I did have Expeditions: Viking on my watch list but I'd probably be more inclined to play Conquistador between the two titles since once again that time period holds more appeal.
 

Deleted Member 22431

Guest
Besides a poor excuse of combat system and non-existent resource management? Nothing. The graphics are great thou.
 

TemplarGR

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck Bethestard
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
5,815
Location
Cradle of Western Civilization
Two main reasons I haven't given it much attention, although it's been in my backlog since I got it on a 50% discount at some point this year (I think).

1. I wanted to finish Conquistadors first, which will probably not happen.
2. There has always been a game with more hype around it which has had me more interested in playing it - for this year it has been KCD, Deadfire, PKM, Hitman.

I'm not prejudiced against vikings, it's more a matter of being in the mood for such a setting. It should be noted that the games that generate the biggest threads here are not those which are the most liked, but those which spark the biggest arguments.

For a game to spark big arguments, it has to be liked, both by the people who defend it AND by the people who try to troll/be edgy and shittalk it...
 

Avonaeon

Arcane
Developer
Joined
Sep 20, 2010
Messages
604
Location
Denmark
A buggy launch, limited marketing reach and non-fantasy setting I think are some of the biggest factors why it is less known.
Time limit didn't help and I don't think we emphasised the differences from conquistador enough.
 
Joined
May 8, 2018
Messages
3,535
(c) despite what people constantly say, most people aren't interested in a grounded historical setting as opposed to a fantasy or sci fi one -- the ones who are are the ones who follow Expeditions threads

When people say they want a historical setting they usually have in mind one or two specific settings rather than the entirety of human history. Vikings in particular are everywhere nowadays and we are all probably a bit tired of them.

I want this guy.
YEKwKsp.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom