Best RPGs of 2012? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Wookieetank

2012-12-06, 10:56 AM

Actually I think The Walking Dead is a good old-style Point-and-Click Adventure. Those deserve to get some love even more than RPGs.

And Dark Souls would probably be in the same category as Diablo 3, Torchlight 2, and Borderlands 2, don't you think?

The action bits of Walking Dead do fall in the Point-and-Clik Adventure, but the plot and story control is very much in the same syle as ME and other RPGs of recent years.

And Dark Souls is nothing like Torchlight 2 (don't own D3 or B2 so I can't compare) in my opinion, even when TL2 is played on Elite Hard Core. Dark Souls is much more of an Action/Exploration/learn by dying/survival/sometimes horror/RPG leveling game unlike the mad clicking, crazy ammount of looting rinse and repeat of TL2, D3 and the like.

Krazzman

2012-12-06, 10:57 AM

I root for Legend of Grimrock... although I don't really got any motivation to play it again... dunno why... just no energy.

Darksiders 2 has quite a few more RPG-elements than the previous game had.
It is that awesome that I barely could stop playing it... I bought it on a friday and well had over 24 hours of played time by the end of sunday...

Tera could be considered as MMO even if it was a total failure (yes it was) because of the publisher and a few other aspects.

Zevox

2012-12-06, 11:34 AM

Not listed so far:

Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning
The Last Story
Xenoblade Chronicles
Tales of Graces F

I haven't played the first and have played very little of the second and third though, so I cannot judge them at this time.

Of those I played this year, Mass Effect 3 is the best, Devil Survivor 2 in second, Tales of Graces F in third. ME3's only real problem is the ending, but it had some fantastic parts in Tuchanka and Rannock, which pretty much took care of the plotlines I was invested in. Devil Survivor 2 was very good, but I was a bit disappointed to discover that in the end the story is pretty much just a fusion of Devil Survivor 1's and SMT: Nocturne's. Tales of Graces I was quite happy with as far as the combat goes, and I enjoyed the story and characters for the most part, but was disappointed that it wasn't up to the standards set by some other games in the series (Abyss, Vesperia).

Dragon's Dogma had good combat, but pretty bad writing, and it was a little too close to a sandbox game for me - too many sidequests, slightly oversized overworld, not enough focus on the story. Worth playing (albeit not at the original full $60 price tag), but not something I'd put in any "top games of the year" list.

And... huh, I guess those four are all the RPGs I played this year. Well, the new ones, anyway - I also played Blue Dragon and re-played Persona 4, but those aren't from this year.

Zevox

warty goblin

2012-12-06, 11:59 AM

I liked the Game of Thrones RPG. Took a while to get rolling, but the last chapter was spectacular. That it managed a rather compelling rumination on the some of the key ethical sticking points in the book didn't hurt either. Plus I liked the combat, it felt appropriately brutal and the armor system hit the right notes of authenticity through simple rules.

Sipex

2012-12-06, 12:53 PM

Borderlands 2 is shooter with RPG elements, don't know if that goes too far off the mark though.

Chen

2012-12-06, 01:02 PM

Mass Effect 3 is by far the best RPG this year. The ending was poor (although the extended cut did help), but otherwise it was fantastic. Tuchanka and Rannock had powerful stories in them. And the gameplay itself was top notch. Xenoblade Chronicles was also an excellent game, but it was released last year wasn't it? Only the N/A localization was released this year (not sure if that still counts). I'd still take Mass Effect over it though.

tonberrian

2012-12-06, 01:04 PM

Persona 4 may not be from this year, but Persona 4 Golden is. And it is awesome.

Sipex

2012-12-06, 03:14 PM

So Yora, why do you specifically need RPGs from this year? Is it just that you keep up so well with RPG trends that anything made before you already have?

Rustic Dude

2012-12-06, 03:23 PM

Hiro Protagonest

2012-12-06, 04:44 PM

Well, uh, technically, STALKER: Call of Pripyat takes place this year. :smalltongue:

Far Cry 3, while not quite as good as the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series, is still a quality game that's in the same genre (open-world FPS with good story). While you are inexplicably a total badass despite being a regular civilian suddenly thrust into a stressful situation, and the crafting system doesn't make much sense (seriously, why do I need LEOPARD hides, specifically? Why can't tiger or bear or alligator work?), it's still a fun game with multiple approaches to missions, a lot of sidequests, and a solid story (much better than Skyrim's).

psilontech

2012-12-06, 05:00 PM

Well, technically, Baldur's Gate Enhanced Edition came out this year.

So, there's that.

The Dark Fiddler

2012-12-06, 05:10 PM

Devil Survivor 2

Ah, yes, Devil Survivor 2 has to be the game I'm happiest with this year. The story isn't super amazingly awesome, but it's decent... I absolutely love the gameplay, though. I hope Devil Survivor 3 goes even further, bigger and better and all that stuff. It might just be enough to push the series into must-have territory.

No, I'm not entirely certain of what I mean by bigger and better and all that stuff.

Persona 4 may not be from this year, but Persona 4 Golden is. And it is awesome.

Ah, Persona 4... the only game I played this year that I enjoyed more than Devil Survivor 2. If you haven't played it yet, then Persona 4 Golden is probably worth picking up, since P4 was amazing by itself and I've mostly heard good things about P4G. Atlus game's aren't for everyone though, so beware.

Zevox

2012-12-06, 05:14 PM

Xenoblade Chronicles was also an excellent game, but it was released last year wasn't it? Only the N/A localization was released this year (not sure if that still counts).
Xenoblade Chronicles was this year in NA, yes. And it originally came out two years ago, since the initial release was only in Japan. :smalltongue:

Persona 4 may not be from this year, but Persona 4 Golden is. And it is awesome.
Yeah, but that's still just a remake, not a new game. Expanded remake, granted, but a remake nonetheless.

Zevox

Yora

2012-12-06, 05:21 PM

So Yora, why do you specifically need RPGs from this year? Is it just that you keep up so well with RPG trends that anything made before you already have?
No, I was just noticing on a German CRPG Forum that this year had a massive drop in new users and post, which made me notice that there weren't any big RPGs this year that would make people looking for forums where they can find help with the games.
And I was wondering if it's just me who missed all the great RPGs of this year, or if there had actually been a major dry spell.

So there were quite a couple of games, but none really made much of a ripple in the pond except for Mass Effect 3 and maybe Kingdoms of Amalur in early spring. And ME3 made gaming history for proabably the most despised blockbuster game in recent memory, so that's not exactly tipping the scales for 2012 as a year of great RPGs.

Starbuck_II

2012-12-06, 05:28 PM

Dishonored is RPG: you have stats, you have levels (well skill points like skyrim you have to find), health, etc.
So vote for it.

warty goblin

2012-12-06, 10:07 PM

No, I was just noticing on a German CRPG Forum that this year had a massive drop in new users and post, which made me notice that there weren't any big RPGs this year that would make people looking for forums where they can find help with the games.
And I was wondering if it's just me who missed all the great RPGs of this year, or if there had actually been a major dry spell.

So there were quite a couple of games, but none really made much of a ripple in the pond except for Mass Effect 3 and maybe Kingdoms of Amalur in early spring. And ME3 made gaming history for proabably the most despised blockbuster game in recent memory, so that's not exactly tipping the scales for 2012 as a year of great RPGs.

I wouldn't call a year with slightly fewer releases a major dry spell really. It's just that we've had a lot of RPGs the last couple years, so most of the developers are working on new ones instead of releasing games they've been making. More a temporary decline I suppose. Not like the total wasteland that is the current RTS market.

Next year is looking better. Larian's got a game coming out, and that's always reason for joy.

Triaxx

2012-12-06, 11:32 PM

Skyrim: Dawnguard?

Actually I'd second Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition.

Honestly I can't think of another RPG I was even interested in playing.

Avilan the Grey

2012-12-07, 06:58 AM

Well Mass Effect 3 is the obvious WRPG choice. The only other one I can think of would be DIshonored, if that counts as an RPG.

Opperhapsen

2012-12-07, 08:42 PM

Well Mass Effect 3 is the obvious WRPG choice.
I think ME3 gets disqualified for being bad, featuring a magic racist space ninja, and retroactively making the rest of the series worse. :smallannoyed:

Zevox

2012-12-07, 09:02 PM

I think ME3 gets disqualified for being bad, featuring a magic racist space ninja, and retroactively making the rest of the series worse. :smallannoyed:
Except for the part where it was none of those things, rather being a very good game that just happens to have a bad last ten minutes.

Zevox

GloatingSwine

2012-12-07, 09:03 PM

I think ME3 gets disqualified for being bad, featuring a magic racist space ninja, and retroactively making the rest of the series worse. :smallannoyed:

You forgot about how the magic racist space ninja is essentially the kind of character that 13 year olds create as their self insert for Bleach fanfiction.

It's pretty hard to reccommend a standout RPG for 2012, since the best RPG experience I had in 2012 was Fallout: New Vegas and that's old.

I've heard consistently good things from people who aren't insane about Dragon's Dogma though.

Opperhapsen

2012-12-07, 09:20 PM

Except for the part where it was none of those things, rather being a very good game that just happens to have a bad last ten minutes.

Zevox

Well Zevox, I may not be able to convince you of the lack of quality of the writing in ME3. (But it was bad, really bad. The ending was but one of many really bad things.)
And as for ruining the reapers, well you may LIKE your reapers pathetic, useless, easily beaten, and controlled by a hologram kid with the exact motivation and intelligence of someone made up ten minutes before a deadline, but I certainly do not.

But the magic racist space ninja is objectively there.
He's a Chinese magic ninja (He uses magic swords to make magic slashes through the air that makes magic cutting winds) from space. We know he's Chinese because of his name and the fact that he LITERALLY HAS SLANTED SLITS FOR EYES.

Zevox

2012-12-07, 09:24 PM

Well Zevox, I may not be able to convince you of the lack of quality of the writing in ME3. (But it was bad, really bad. The ending was but one of many really bad things.)
That would be extraordinarily hard to do, yes, given that the events on Tuchanka and Rannoch were frankly better written and more compelling than anything in ME1 and all but some loyalty quests in ME2.

And as for ruining the reapers, well you may LIKE your reapers pathetic, useless, easily beaten, and controlled by a hologram kid with the exact motivation and intelligence of someone made up ten minutes before a deadline, but I certainly do not.
Oh, I don't like the Reapers at all. I never have. Their whole "you cannot understand us" BS was one of my biggest complaints about the first game, and I doubted from the moment I first spoke with Sovereign that they could be made compelling villains. That the explanation we eventually got for them was bad doesn't surprise me, because they never made sense to begin with.

But the magic racist space ninja is objectively there.
He's a Chinese magic ninja (He uses magic swords to make magic slashes through the air that makes magic cutting winds) from space. We know he's Chinese because of his name and the fact that he LITERALLY HAS SLANTED SLITS FOR EYES.
It's the "racist" part which makes that false. He's asian, yes, but there's nothing racist about his portrayal. I also find it extremely strange to complain about his "magic" given it is just biotics, which has been in the series from the start.

Zevox

Opperhapsen

2012-12-07, 09:36 PM

It's the "racist" part which makes that false. He's asian, yes, but there's nothing racist about his portrayal. I also find it extremely strange to complain about his "magic" given it is just biotics, which has been in the series from the start.

Zevox
So... the slanted slits for eyes are totally fine by you?
Well okay then, there's the fact that the only Asian character in the third game is a magic ninja assassin .
Then there's the issue of the character's entire motivation being unleaded racism. (This is canon)

As for him being magic, well he has a blade that shoots biotic cutting waves through the air (Finally completely invalidating any notion that biotics were anything but space wizards, since there are now biotically enchanted items)

Zevox

2012-12-07, 09:56 PM

So... the slanted slits for eyes are totally fine by you?
Well okay then, there's the fact that the only Asian character in the third game is a magic ninja assassin .
The eye thing is just a mask. It's a stupid looking one, sure, but just a mask nonetheless.

As for him being a magic ninja, so what? You could certainly argue that's a stereotype, but it's only so because ninjas come from an Asian culture to begin with.

I'll certainly not argue that Kai Leng was a well-written or well-designed character in any respect, but the simple fact that he's portrayed as ninja-like while also being Asian does not add up to him being a racist character from where I'm sitting.

Then there's the issue of the character's entire motivation being unleaded racism. (This is canon)
That must come from the books, because his motivation is never mentioned in the game (I've never read the books). Which is a problem - I completely agree with criticisms that importing him from the books, particularly as haphazardly as they did, was a bad move.

However, I will say that I don't see how the character being personally racist (against aliens, I'm assuming, given he works for Cerberus) is a problem. That's a legitimate character trait, as long as it's not being glorified or something, and while I can't speak to whether it is in the books, it isn't in the game, since again, it's not even brought up.

(Finally completely invalidating any notion that biotics were anything but space wizards, since there are now biotically enchanted items)
See, I'm not bothered by that. Biotics have always been magic. Everything associated with eezo and the mass effect is, and biotics most of all since there's really no reason why, even if a substance like eezo could exist, it would somehow impart its abilities onto people. Dropping any pretense to the contrary would be fine with me.

I realize at least that that is at least in part a matter of taste though.

Zevox

warty goblin

2012-12-07, 10:58 PM

Well Zevox, I may not be able to convince you of the lack of quality of the writing in ME3. (But it was bad, really bad. The ending was but one of many really bad things.)
And as for ruining the reapers, well you may LIKE your reapers pathetic, useless, easily beaten, and controlled by a hologram kid with the exact motivation and intelligence of someone made up ten minutes before a deadline, but I certainly do not.

I think explaining the Reapers was probably a mistake regardless of what they went with. Omnicidal sentient spaceships don't need explanation to be compelling villains, all they need is to be there. Really, they're more compelling when they're just that way, and you don't get to know why. That they turned out to be galactic daycare attendants making sure everybody shared - With Genocide! - was stupid to the nth degree, but anything was going to be a disappointment.

It didn't help that Mass Effect was always very much play-it-safe comfortable space opera. Pretty much anything but Shepard Wins Everything Forever (and maybe dies) was going to come off as an ass-pull. Arguably the most challenging and ambiguous ending they could have pulled off is leaving the Reapers unexplained. Deep statements about the Nature of Life or whatever the hell they were going for really needs some harder hitting underpinnings, and Mass Effect is about the fluffiest sci-fi out there. Even something as cut-rate nonsensical as Crysis 2 is built around more challenging ideas about human interaction with technology.

Zevox

2012-12-07, 11:22 PM

I think explaining the Reapers was probably a mistake regardless of what they went with. Omnicidal sentient spaceships don't need explanation to be compelling villains, all they need is to be there. Really, they're more compelling when they're just that way, and you don't get to know why. That they turned out to be galactic daycare attendants making sure everybody shared - With Genocide! - was stupid to the nth degree, but anything was going to be a disappointment.
I largely agree, but I don't think they really could leave the Reapers unexplained. They're just so out-there as to beg an explanation. They're robotic, so they must necessarily have been created by someone, but who would make something like them, and why design them to do what they do? Or why are they doing what they are if they weren't originally designed for it?

Basically, I don't think that leaving them unexplained would work any better because they make just as little sense without an explanation as with one.

Zevox

warty goblin

2012-12-08, 12:30 AM

I largely agree, but I don't think they really could leave the Reapers unexplained. They're just so out-there as to beg an explanation. They're robotic, so they must necessarily have been created by someone, but who would make something like them, and why design them to do what they do? Or why are they doing what they are if they weren't originally designed for it?

Basically, I don't think that leaving them unexplained would work any better because they make just as little sense without an explanation as with one.

Zevox

I'm not sure I'd say they wouldn't make sense if left unexplained. They wouldn't have been fully understood, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Their role in the story was perfectly intelligible from about half way through ME 1; I'm not sure how knowing their motivation and creator enhances that.

The Reapers struck me from pretty much the moment Sovereign told me he was beyond my comprehension as something better left that way. The thing with things beyond comprehension is that the text can't explain them, because any explanation is a literal comprehension. An ending that dropped a lot of hints about possible reasons for the Reapers, but ultimately left it open ended would have worked much better in my opinion than plonking the player down and yelling "THIS IS THE TRUTH" at them. The latter option destroys the alienness and mystery of the Reapers, and replaces it with a set truth. If the truth didn't suck that would be one thing, but the truth sucked and given the set-up of the Reapers was pretty much guaranteed to suck.

But I don't mind if a game doesn't lay out every aspect of itself like a documentary providing source references. Ambiguity and room for interpretation are good things in a story, it's what gives the audience room to engage with the narrative. Laying everything out and telling me what everything means - the 'objective' truth of everything - is really just boring. Games don't leave things open to interpretation often, but it can work spectacularly well. Spec Ops: The Line is probably the best example.

Any way we can count Spec Ops: The Line as an RPG? It'd pretty much wrap up the thread.

Zevox

2012-12-08, 01:18 AM

The Reapers struck me from pretty much the moment Sovereign told me he was beyond my comprehension as something better left that way.
Yeah, as I said earlier, that particular moment was one of my biggest complaints with ME1. Sovereign and the Reapers are machines - they're someone's creation, by definition. They cannot be beyond comprehension.

I know they're supposed to be inspired by the Cthulu mythos and all, what with the squid design and brainwashing people by just being near them, but if they actually wanted villains that could pass as "beyond comprehension," they needed to make them more alien. They needed to be organic, or what we'd recognize as organic in any event. Making them machines just undermines any attempt to portray them that way so badly.

(Though personally I dislike any attempt to play a "you just can't understand it" card in general, since the writer must be able to understand it to write about it, but that's kind of a meta thing. One I can't get rid of in myself, however.)

But I don't mind if a game doesn't lay out every aspect of itself like a documentary providing source references. Ambiguity and room for interpretation are good things in a story, it's what gives the audience room to engage with the narrative. Laying everything out and telling me what everything means - the 'objective' truth of everything - is really just boring. Games don't leave things open to interpretation often, but it can work spectacularly well.
I agree with that, but I don't think the Reapers are a case where that could be done. At least for me, leaving them "open for interpretation" would, for the reasons I gave before, leave them just making no sense anyway. At best it would come off to me as if the writers really wanted to stick to the "they can't be understood" thing, at worst it'd come off as the writers just being too lazy to come up with an explanation.

Besides, without an explanation for their actions, the Reapers are just monsters. Generic, no-motivation killing machines (literally). I wouldn't call that a better story.

GloatingSwine

2012-12-08, 05:44 AM

I largely agree, but I don't think they really could leave the Reapers unexplained. They're just so out-there as to beg an explanation.

Not really.

Cosmic horror, which is what the Reapers are supposed to have been, is weakened the more you know about it because it distracts from what the point is supposed to be, which is how people react to its presence.

Leaving the Reapers as an unexplained force means that the story can focus on what matters, which is how people are responding to the fact of the Reapers. We know what they do, why isn't important, what's important is what we do about it.

That's one of the things Dragon Age almost did well. The Darkspawn are never really explained, the Archdemon is just a roaring monster and the Darkspawn themselves display no more animus than does the weather. What matters is how their imminent threat causes the society of Ferelden to react, by turning on itself rather than uniting in common cause. (Which is why it was a mistake to drop the Orlais plotline that was supposed to be in the game, becuase the leading antagonist character is Loghain, and it basically underpinned all his motivations. That could have been more useful to the story than any amount of elves and dwarves fantasy bull****.)

Yora

2012-12-08, 06:05 AM

I think the Reaper explaination is quite simple:
Someone once build an AI that went rogue and decided that AIs will naturally destroy all organic life in the galaxy. So to stop that, it killed all advanced civilizations that could create AIs and also al other AIs not under its control. That way organic species as a whole can live, because it only destroys those that could make AIs. Other AIs would destroy all organic species. The idea that it would be kinder to store the dead people in reapers instead of just destroying them is wonky, but what would you expect of a rogue AI? Also, since the Reapers depend on organics, they can't just destroy all of them or they die out as well.
And in the end, it probably realized that every time it gets more difficult to destroy the advanced civilizations and that it's impossible to find all the data caches people are hiding before they go extinct. So the options are:
- Give up! These organics think they can keep AIs from destroying all life? Well, good luck.
- Give, up! part two. Give the organics the Reapers to do with what they want. No sense in throwing away good hardware.
- Ask the organics kindly if they will Reaper-fy themselves voluntarily. That way the original plan is still a success. Which leaves only the question why the AI does not force this on the organics and lets an organic chose if this should happen or it should give up.

Zevox

2012-12-08, 10:55 AM

Not really.

Cosmic horror, which is what the Reapers are supposed to have been,
Yeah, might want to note my last post for my take on that matter.

That's one of the things Dragon Age almost did well. The Darkspawn are never really explained, the Archdemon is just a roaring monster and the Darkspawn themselves display no more animus than does the weather.
Yeah, I don't see that. Unlike the Reapers, the Darkspawn don't come off as remotely an attempt at being "cosmic horrors." They're ultimately just a bunch of Orcs (and Ogres, and a couple of other fantasy monsters) lead by a Dragon, just going by different names. They're not the good part of DA:O - that falls to the subplots and to Loghain.

Actually, the best thing they ever did with the Darkspawn was the Architect in Awakening, telling us that they're basically forced to do what they do, being controlled by some unknown force that they hear as a song, and without which many of them go insane. That makes them actually somewhat tragic, and it's a plotline that I very much want them to continue. If only they hadn't given you the option to kill the Architect, thereby shooting themselves in the foot on being able to make him a central character in a future title...

warty goblin

2012-12-08, 11:40 AM

Not really.

Cosmic horror, which is what the Reapers are supposed to have been, is weakened the more you know about it because it distracts from what the point is supposed to be, which is how people react to its presence.

Leaving the Reapers as an unexplained force means that the story can focus on what matters, which is how people are responding to the fact of the Reapers. We know what they do, why isn't important, what's important is what we do about it.
While I agree revealing the why on the Reapers diminished them, I can't say they come off as really cosmic horrorish. They simply care too much about humans et al for that. What Lovecraft got right about this sort of thing is that the things from beyond time and space aren't just alien and incomprehensible, but that they don't even care about humanity.

Showing up every ten thousand years to deliberately kill everything isn't cosmic horror, it's purposefully being a right bastard. Mysterious motivation can still work for being right bastard; Iago's motivation is entirely opaque throughout Othello. It makes the ending not just tragic, but unsettling because we're denied understanding of why all those terrible things happened.

While Mass Effect isn't Shakespeare by a very long shot, it could have had the same effect. Leaving the Reapers unexplained could have been played as a final defeat, one area that Shepard cannot conquer. Which, after the Special Snowflake Shepard worship that is the entire plot, would be an entirely appropriate, and I think quite welcome, dramatic reversal.

That's one of the things Dragon Age almost did well. The Darkspawn are never really explained, the Archdemon is just a roaring monster and the Darkspawn themselves display no more animus than does the weather. What matters is how their imminent threat causes the society of Ferelden to react, by turning on itself rather than uniting in common cause. (Which is why it was a mistake to drop the Orlais plotline that was supposed to be in the game, becuase the leading antagonist character is Loghain, and it basically underpinned all his motivations. That could have been more useful to the story than any amount of elves and dwarves fantasy bull****.)
Nah. As Zevox said, the darkspawn are orcs. They don't need explanation because they're a completely unoriginal genre staple that exist solely to provide a threat the hero can look good killing.

If you want to focus down on the actual people, make them the threat. This is what the Witcher games get very right; most of the magical beasties boil down to (very very dangerous) pest control. The real threat to life is always the simmering war between humans and non-humans.

Morty

2012-12-08, 01:46 PM

Personally, I expected the Reapers to get some sort of explanation. In a space opera like Mass Effect, inscrutable and incomprehensible threats don't fit. What went wrong, in my opinion, is that they tried to justify their existence. They tried to give the Reapers some sort of rationale and a reasonable purpose. They fixed it later, bit by bit, but in the original ending it really did look this way. That's my look on this, anyway. I'm not sure whether I'd prefer the Reapers not to get any sort of explanation over what we actually got.

Falgorn

2012-12-08, 01:57 PM

Haven't we beaten the ME3 horse to death already? I understand that we're talking about 2012 RPGs, but this seems like a bit much.

My favorite RPG this year is Far Cry 3 (tied with Borderlands 2). "Like Skyrim, With Guns," they say. I've enjoyed the gameplay a ton, and the story is rather compelling, so yeah. I feel the same about Borderlands 2, but I never end up having fun on single player, so there's an issue there, but it's so silly that it's impossible to hate.

EDIT: Wait, was only thinking of shooty-killy RPGs. Walking Dead was the best RPG of the year, hands-down.

warty goblin

2012-12-08, 03:29 PM

Far Cry 3 is tempting (or it would be if I bit the bullet and hooked my gaming rig up to the internet), but there's something a bit...offputting about it. I guess mostly I don't want Skyrim with guns because RPG elements don't add much to a shooter in my book. The great thing about an open world FPS is wandering around in an immersive setting shooting things; crafting and perks don't really add to that. If anything they subtract from it.

Part of it is that shooters are to my mind about player skill. Adding overt character skills just decreases the emphasis on learning to play the game better by making the game easier. I liked it in Far Cry 2 or Crysis 1/Warhead/2 that at the end of the game combat was more lethal and harder at the end than at the beginning because there were more, harder enemies, but I wasn't any tougher. Victory required a mastery of the game's basic systems, not exploiting and unlocking every more powerful ways to break them.

So yeah, I'm sticking with Game of Thrones for my choice. We need more RPGs about guilt ridden grizzled older men.

Avilan the Grey

2012-12-08, 04:29 PM

Haven't we beaten the ME3 horse to death already? I understand that we're talking about 2012 RPGs, but this seems like a bit much.

However unlike the (un)dead horse of the Ending (tm) the discussion about the ethics of game reviewers is a far more interesting one.

Zevox

2012-12-08, 04:42 PM

However unlike the (un)dead horse of the Ending (tm) the discussion about the ethics of game reviewers is a far more interesting one.
Methinks you're mixing up two threads Avilan - that one's going on in the Mass Effect thread proper. This one was discussing the game in general, and most recently the Reapers in particular.

Zevox

Avilan the Grey

2012-12-08, 04:56 PM

Methinks you're mixing up two threads Avilan - that one's going on in the Mass Effect thread proper. This one was discussing the game in general, and most recently the Reapers in particular.

Zevox

Hey, see what happens when I watch a taped NFL game and don't pay attention. Sorry.:smallredface:

Opperhapsen

2012-12-08, 08:04 PM

The eye thing is just a mask. It's a stupid looking one, sure, but just a mask nonetheless.

As for him being a magic ninja, so what? You could certainly argue that's a stereotype, but it's only so because ninjas come from an Asian culture to begin with.

I'll certainly not argue that Kai Leng was a well-written or well-designed character in any respect, but the simple fact that he's portrayed as ninja-like while also being Asian does not add up to him being a racist character from where I'm sitting.
...
He's a ninja with literal slanted slits for eyes.
Literal slanted slits in place of actual eyes. (It's not a mask, that's his replacement face)
You're saying this isn't racist because he's an Asian character. (Played and written by white dudes):smallannoyed:

Then you go on to claim that ruining the villains is okay because they were always bad, and admit to several cases of terrible writing.
I think my original point stands. :smallannoyed:

Zevox

2012-12-08, 10:43 PM

...
He's a ninja with literal slanted slits for eyes.
Literal slanted slits in place of actual eyes. (It's not a mask, that's his replacement face)
:smallconfused: What? Sure as heck didn't look that way. It looks like a mask.

If that's true, then yeah, that's pretty bad. Still a problem that stems from importing the character from the books, though.

Then you go on to claim that ruining the villains is okay because they were always bad,
No, I explained my personal opinion of those villains, in response to your statement implicitly questioning that. You'll note that I've said from the start that the last ten minutes of the game are bad, which is where said "ruining" of the villains takes place.

and admit to several cases of terrible writing.
The ending, which I've said from the start is bad, and Kai Leng, who I will agree is certainly not well-written (although I'm not as bothered by him as you seem to be), yes. Neither can make the entire game bad on their own however, especially since they stand in contrast to the excellent parts of it, not as examples of its norm.

Tiki Snakes

2012-12-08, 11:17 PM

...
He's a ninja with literal slanted slits for eyes.
Literal slanted slits in place of actual eyes. (It's not a mask, that's his replacement face)
You're saying this isn't racist because he's an Asian character. (Played and written by white dudes):smallannoyed:

I'm not entirely sure if that's actually the case.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2kpj6cX7e1rt4ubxo1_400.png
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2kpj6cX7e1rt4ubxo2_1280.png
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2kpj6cX7e1rt4ubxo3_500.png

It looks more like his visor is just one of the many in the game that have opaque lenses. The little light-stripe/whatever that is doesn't seem to quite match up with where his eyes would be, whereas the glossy, sunglasses-ish bit very much does.

Chances are he's got cyber-eyes, sure. Likely that whole region is a mess of stolen reaper-tech. But that very much looks like a visor over the top, possibly hooked directly in to his upgrades.

Morty

2012-12-09, 06:21 AM

To divert from Mass Effect for a moment, I think Of Orcs and Men deserves a mention. It's not the best RPG of this year, by any metric, but it does have a well-written story and some clever gameplay elements. I hope we get a sequel with a bigger budget and more polish.

warty goblin

2012-12-09, 10:22 AM

I'm not entirely sure if that's actually the case.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2kpj6cX7e1rt4ubxo1_400.png
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2kpj6cX7e1rt4ubxo2_1280.png
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2kpj6cX7e1rt4ubxo3_500.png

It looks more like his visor is just one of the many in the game that have opaque lenses. The little light-stripe/whatever that is doesn't seem to quite match up with where his eyes would be, whereas the glossy, sunglasses-ish bit very much does.

Chances are he's got cyber-eyes, sure. Likely that whole region is a mess of stolen reaper-tech. But that very much looks like a visor over the top, possibly hooked directly in to his upgrades.

And we all know it can't possibly be a racial stereotype if there's a spurious in-universe justification for it, right?

To divert from Mass Effect for a moment, I think Of Orcs and Men deserves a mention. It's not the best RPG of this year, by any metric, but it does have a well-written story and some clever gameplay elements. I hope we get a sequel with a bigger budget and more polish.
I like Of Orcs and Men, it just needs to break up the combat a bit more. Game of Thrones had the same problem to some degree, but in Orcs and Men I feel like all I do is beat people to death. The combat's good, but it just needs the occasional bit of exploration to spread it out a bit more. Not every room must have a stupid little goblin in it.

Morty

2012-12-09, 10:39 AM

warty goblin

2012-12-09, 01:38 PM

This is what I'm talking about when I say "more polish", yes. More interesting locations with more things to do other than fighting, more variety among enemies, things like that. I was also a little disappointed in the lack of conclusion to Styx's storyline, but that's subjective.

I actually like most of the environments in Orcs and Men that I've seen (I haven't finished the game yet though). They had a nice low fantasy look to them, and most of the character designs are quite solid.

I genuinely like the combat as well. It's nicely lethal - it's positively joyous to knock 50% off an enemy's health with a single, and there's some nice things about using particular attacks against enemies based on enemy weapon types. I like it that the game encourages the use of different tactics against dudes with spears than dudes with swords. Arkail's rage is a nice way to balance his raw power as well. I just would like more than ten feet between combats.

What I've really enjoy about of Orcs and Men is the writing though. There's actually nuance and respect shown to both sides that isn't just tokenistic. Orcs aren't put on a pedestal, humans aren't painted with a uniformly black brush. Amazingly, it's protagonist-driven for the most part - note the lack of a mentor figure explaining everything. And it generally keeps moving forwards, although I could have done with less rambling around in sewers.

Actually, that goes for pretty much any RPG ever. Less sewers please.

Morty

2012-12-09, 02:10 PM

My complaint about the locations is that they're invariably cramped corridors with only one way to go and a series of fights between you and your goal. Sometimes you can take a detour and get some gear (although what those goblin-sized pieces of armor are doing all over the place is beyond me). It just feels rather artificial and constraining.
I do agree the writing is good, though. I have some complaints, such as the aforementioned issue with Styx's personal story, but I won't go into detail if you haven't finished it yet.
But I can definetly subscribe to the "less sewers please" appeal.

Sipex

2012-12-10, 09:28 AM

No, I was just noticing on a German CRPG Forum that this year had a massive drop in new users and post, which made me notice that there weren't any big RPGs this year that would make people looking for forums where they can find help with the games.
And I was wondering if it's just me who missed all the great RPGs of this year, or if there had actually been a major dry spell.

So there were quite a couple of games, but none really made much of a ripple in the pond except for Mass Effect 3 and maybe Kingdoms of Amalur in early spring. And ME3 made gaming history for proabably the most despised blockbuster game in recent memory, so that's not exactly tipping the scales for 2012 as a year of great RPGs.

Oh! In that case, what about Paper Mario Sticker Star? I haven't played it yet (and am avoiding other's rants/raves/opinions about it) but it just came out this past November.

I thought we had to stick to the consoles you outlined in your first post.

GloatingSwine

2012-12-10, 12:19 PM

Yeah, might want to note my last post for my take on that matter.

Cosmic Horror isn't really about alienness and incomprehensiblility, it's about inexorability. That the universe just has this inexorable force which will, completely uncaring, end you and all that you know and care about. Which is what the Reapers are, and is all they need to be. They come around every 50,000 years and wipe the mold off the planets, all you need, the story can't come from that, it has to come from what people do in the face of a threat of that scale.

Yeah, I don't see that. Unlike the Reapers, the Darkspawn don't come off as remotely an attempt at being "cosmic horrors." They're ultimately just a bunch of Orcs (and Ogres, and a couple of other fantasy monsters) lead by a Dragon, just going by different names. They're not the good part of DA:O - that falls to the subplots and to Loghain.

No, they're not cosmic horror, they are, as you rightly say, orcs. And orcs are just fantasy weather, they're never going to be the good bit of the story because they're just orcs, which is why it's a good thing that Dragon Age never tried to make the story about them, it's about how Ferelden reacts to them, and the actual climax of the tale where all the interesting conflict is resolved is the Landsmeet.

Haven't we beaten the ME3 horse to death already?

I can see a few lumps of gristle on the floor still.

Hawriel

2012-12-12, 11:00 PM

So... the slanted slits for eyes are totally fine by you?
Well okay then, there's the fact that the only Asian character in the third game is a magic ninja assassin .
Then there's the issue of the character's entire motivation being unleaded racism. (This is canon)

As for him being magic, well he has a blade that shoots biotic cutting waves through the air (Finally completely invalidating any notion that biotics were anything but space wizards, since there are now biotically enchanted items)

Zevox gave a pretty good counter argument for Kai leng being a 'racist character'.

As far as the 'magic sword' and how it invalidates biotic powers, well your mistakin. Biotics are not wizards. They have a biological ability to manipulate gravity and mass. It's not like Harry Potter muttering pig Latin and waving a stick. As for technology invalidating the ability, well you do realize that every race except the asari need cybernetic implants to actually use the power right?

Back to the OP topic.

I thought the Walking Dead was a rather nice game. It had it's flaws. Items going missing because the game does not want you to use them any more. Really why did that monkey wrench disappear when I really could have used it to bash in heads? It's strength was the story well written characters. I believed these to be people I can connect with. If you do not care about Clem then well, there is no hope for you.

Opperhapsen

2012-12-13, 12:18 AM

Zevox gave a pretty good counter argument for Kai leng being a 'racist character'.

He did not.
There is no excuse, none.

Saying it's okay because "he's Asian" is tantamount to declaring blackface okay.
Saying it's okay because "he's from the books" means nothing, because this presentation of him was made for the game.
Saying it's okay because it's not his actual face is pointless because that's still part of his character design.

And leaving aside the fact that he is a magic racist space ninja, he's still the worst character to grace an RPG since... I literally can't think of an equally bad character. :smallannoyed:

As far as the 'magic sword' and how it invalidates biotic powers, well your mistakin. Biotics are not wizards. They have a biological ability to manipulate gravity and mass. It's not like Harry Potter muttering pig Latin and waving a stick. As for technology invalidating the ability, well you do realize that every race except the asari need cybernetic implants to actually use the power right?
There is a major difference between "Telekinesis" and "My blade makes magic waves of cutting electricity that spawn from my brain". :smallannoyed:

Zevox

2012-12-13, 03:32 AM

Saying it's okay because "he's Asian" is tantamount to declaring blackface okay.
It's a good thing that I never said that, then. I said that him being Asian and a ninja does not, in itself, make him a racist character. Which I stand by - claiming that is pure nonsense from where I'm sitting. Somehow you got from there to me using that defend the eyes thing too, which I never did.

Saying it's okay because it's not his actual face is pointless because that's still part of his character design.
Perhaps my point on that part wasn't clear. If that is a mask, then it seems to me that it's just another failed attempt at making the character look cool - like pretty much every other aspect of his design. Thus, not racist.

If you're correct and it's a physical replacement for his face, however, I agree that that seems rather racist. There's no reason for cybernetic implants designed to replace a damaged portion of a person's face to be designed like that, unless as some exaggerated mockery of slanted eyes, which would be racist.

And leaving aside the fact that he is a magic racist space ninja, he's still the worst character to grace an RPG since... I literally can't think of an equally bad character. :smallannoyed:
Oh, I can think of worse. Final Fantasy 13 in particular has some of the most grating, melodrama-prone characters ever, and unlike Kai Leng they're cast as the main protagonists.

Xondoure

2012-12-13, 03:50 AM

As much as I love Mass Effect, Kai Leng should never be justified. He is a horrible insult to the games and everything that came before him. The fact that the plot can't get over how "badass" he is just makes it worse.

Really the problem with ME3 is the whole AI vs. Organics thing get's pulled back out of nowhere after Legion (and Rannoch) had pretty much brought closure to the discussion. Speaking of Rannoch, when the Reaper started preaching at me that Organics and Synthetics could never work together, I was pretty pissed there wasn't a "what are you talking about? That doesn't make any sense! Was that your motivation? Because last time I checked Sovereign thought that was hilarious" option.

Terry576

2012-12-13, 05:50 AM

tensai_oni

2012-12-13, 06:47 AM

Perhaps my point on that part wasn't clear. If that is a mask, then it seems to me that it's just another failed attempt at making the character look cool - like pretty much every other aspect of his design. Thus, not racist.

Just because something is supposed to be cool doesn't mean it's not racist. Racial stereotyping goes both ways.

Oh, I can think of worse. Final Fantasy 13 in particular has some of the most grating, melodrama-prone characters ever, and unlike Kai Leng they're cast as the main protagonists.
Except that Final Fantasy XIII protags:
1. Get better, it's called character development
2. Have a well-explained, in-character reason to act the way they do

RagingKrikkit

2012-12-13, 03:37 PM

Except that Final Fantasy XIII protags:
1. Get better, it's called character development
2. Have a well-explained, in-character reason to act the way they d

Actually, speaking of, I just beat XIII-2 last night (still working on XIII), and, honestly, I loved it. The combat systems reminds me of VI, the characters were very well developed, and the story was incredibly engaging. My only complaint is the ending, but not in a ME3 way. To put it in as non-spoilery of a way as possible: cliffhanger. Now I have to wait another year to finish the story. Nontheless, it's still done very well, even ifI did see it coming, and doesn't leave me feeling "what the hell, you ended it there?!" like Halo 2 did. Sorry, I just had to drop a rave.

warty goblin

2012-12-13, 05:33 PM

The Game of Thrones game is permanently forever cancelled from RPGship, for a terrible camera angle (that is unchangeable), bad controls, combat ripped from games like DAO, KOTOR, KOTOR, and BG and done badly, and the fact that the graphics resemble a game 10 years prior.

Seriously. That's not a good RPG.

Personally I found GoT's graphics completely acceptable. Technically they weren't a marvel by a long shot, but they were at least as solid as something like the Dragon Ages. And unlike the Dragon Ages, the art style wasn't crap on a stick.

While I can see disliking the combat, for me it worked. Weapon choice really mattered, both in terms of what class you chose and what weapons you used against each particular enemy. Most of the abilities played off of each other nicely, particularly once Mors and Alester met up, which helped them feel less like 'hit 1.2x harder' and more like tactics to create and exploit weaknesses in the enemy's defense. There's legitimately too much of it in the game, but I found it did a better job of capturing the feel of being armed with a big hunk of sharp metal and needing to beat the people right in front of you than most real-time pause RPGs come close to.

I think the fixed camera played into this, by focusing right down on the combat. A sword fight isn't a strategic big picture, it's about sticking something sharp into the person trying to kill you right now. Zooming out and moving dudes around from overhead doesn't make the action more intense, it makes it feel like I'm playing a really small RTS. While that's fine in its place, the focus of GoT was solidly on two people and their actions, not on the big picture. The camera played its part in emphasizing that.

Wolf_Haley

2012-12-13, 05:40 PM

I hate how quick people are willing to pull the racist card, next thing you know the black guy from Metal Gear Risiing is gonna get called racist for having braids.....oh wait

And yo 999 and Radiant Historia, to totally awesome RPGs that came out recently that beat out alot of things storywise, adn theirs Phantasy Star Online 2, such a great game.

Zevox

2012-12-13, 05:45 PM

Just because something is supposed to be cool doesn't mean it's not racist. Racial stereotyping goes both ways.
Yet if it's sole purpose is to look cool, which is definitely how it comes off to me, then it has nothing to do with his race. It's just one of many things about his design that is a hodge-podge of elements from other characters and archetypes that are considered cool/badass, which don't work with Kai Leng.

Edit: Perhaps an example would help here. When I see Kai Leng, I don't get the impression that the white lights for eyes have anything to do with asian slanted eyes. Rather, I'm reminded of this sort of thing:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_YsrghimGTpU/TQPpovSbEjI/AAAAAAAAADU/BehLi0yLEe8/s1600/Batman%2521.png
And that's just the most obvious example. It's a common phenomenon among animated superheroes in particular for characters wearing masks to have their eyes inexplicably become white slits, pretty much just because it looks cool. That's what it seems to me like Leng's design is going for.

Except that Final Fantasy XIII protags:
1. Get better, it's called character development
Not for me they didn't - I found them just as unbearable by the end of the game as throughout the earlier portions. Heck, I found Vanille got more annoying as time went on. Early on I was actually kind of glad to have a more upbeat character around, but then she developed a tendency to make dramatic speeches that, while not as annoying as the other characters' melodrama, certainly got irritating in their own right.

And yo 999 and Radiant Historia, to totally awesome RPGs that came out recently that beat out alot of things storywise, adn theirs Phantasy Star Online 2, such a great game.
Actually, Radiant Historia was early last year, and 999 was two years ago.

Wolf_Haley

2012-12-13, 05:51 PM

Man I'm slacking, tho0ught Historia was this year same with 999.

Wookieetank

2012-12-14, 09:33 AM

Man I'm slacking, tho0ught Historia was this year same with 999.

I'll second both of these as awesome games though. And if you needed any sort of motivation to check out Radiant Historia: "The game's development team mostly consists of Atlus staff who previously worked on Megami Tensei games like Nocturne, Persona 3 and Strange Journey as well as the Etrian Odyssey series." ~wikipedia

Actually, speaking of, I just beat XIII-2 last night (still working on XIII), and, honestly, I loved it. The combat systems reminds me of VI, the characters were very well developed, and the story was incredibly engaging. My only complaint is the ending, but not in a ME3 way. To put it in as non-spoilery of a way as possible: cliffhanger. Now I have to wait another year to finish the story. Nontheless, it's still done very well, even ifI did see it coming, and doesn't leave me feeling "what the hell, you ended it there?!" like Halo 2 did. Sorry, I just had to drop a rave.

Yay, someone else who liked XIII-2. BE WARNED THAR BE SPOILERS AHEADI was actually impressed that they ended it the way they did, particularly with the backlash with the death of a certain character in VII. I very much enjoyed the whole, just because you set out to save the world, doesn't mean you actually acomplish it, and in this case inadvertantly help cause the end of the world. I honestly would love to see more games like this, not everything in life has a happy ending, so why should games all end happily?

RagingKrikkit

2012-12-14, 02:29 PM

Yay, someone else who liked XIII-2. BE WARNED THAR BE SPOILERS AHEADI was actually impressed that they ended it the way they did, particularly with the backlash with the death of a certain character in VII. I very much enjoyed the whole, just because you set out to save the world, doesn't mean you actually acomplish it, and in this case inadvertantly help cause the end of the world. I honestly would love to see more games like this, not everything in life has a happy ending, so why should games all end happily?

Don't get me wrong, they did the ending very well, but now I have to wait for a year to finish the story. Halo 2's ending went like "Yeah, last level, let's do this! Wait, are those the credits?" But this was more like "Wait, what? Nononononononon this is bad this is bad this is bad this is bad this is BAD how do I fight this... aw, crap. Actually, my favorite moment was the dream sequence, when it gives you the "end the adventure?" option. I mean, Serah has accomplished everything she set out to do. She has her sister and fiancee/husband back, everyone she cares about is with her, and the hand being extended to her is offering perfect happiness. But at the same time, Caius is still out there, plotting to destroy the world. It's really the definition of self-sacrifice, but you, the player have to make that choice.

warty goblin

2012-12-14, 06:34 PM

Started a new game of Kingdoms of Amalur. Gotta say it's moving up in my estimation. Playing on hard from the beginning, ignoring crafting completely, and focusing on spellcasting and rogue skills makes for some fairly interesting combat. Sure in some sense I'm playing stupid compared to my previous all-melee character, who smashed heads like chicken eggs, but I'm having more fun. Seems to me that's playing smart.

Surrealistik

2012-12-14, 10:42 PM

Dark Souls obviously.

Rising Phoenix

2012-12-18, 10:17 AM

Shouldn't The Journey also be considered? Certainly the best game of 2012 for me.

If you have a PS3 get it. If not watch a play through in HD if possible.

Zevox

2012-12-18, 11:20 AM

Shouldn't The Journey also be considered? Certainly the best game of 2012 for me.

If you have a PS3 get it. If not watch a play through in HD if possible.
:smallconfused: Is that an RPG? Nothing I've heard of it would indicate such, and looking at how a few websites categorize it, I'm seeing it called an Adventure game or Platformer, not an RPG.

(Personally, what I've heard of it makes it sound extremely dull, too, but I don't have a PS3 at this point anyway, so I couldn't play it even if I wanted to.)

Rising Phoenix

2012-12-18, 09:15 PM

:smallconfused: Is that an RPG? Nothing I've heard of it would indicate such, and looking at how a few websites categorize it, I'm seeing it called an Adventure game or Platformer, not an RPG.

(Personally, what I've heard of it makes it sound extremely dull, too, but I don't have a PS3 at this point anyway, so I couldn't play it even if I wanted to.)

Adventure probably covers it best, but after watching a playthrough it really does have rpg elements when you meet someone else in-game. I dunno though if it would qualify as an rpg on these qualities (it does for me at least).

If you don't like visually stunning, slow paced games that make you think and feel and aren't about high scores and blasting foes into oblivion, this is obviously not for you. But I still recommend you watch a playthrough of it. A HD one in a quiet, dark room were no one will disturb you for an hour and a half.

Zevox

2012-12-18, 09:52 PM

If you don't like visually stunning, slow paced games that make you think and feel and aren't about high scores and blasting foes into oblivion, this is obviously not for you. But I still recommend you watch a playthrough of it. A HD one in a quiet, dark room were no one will disturb you for an hour and a half.
I can like all of those things. I actually have never seen a purpose to tracking high scores. Lack of combat is a bigger issue for me personally, but sometimes games can pull it off.

I think my issue is more that the description I always get goes as thus: the game involves you walking across a desert, then climbing up a mountain, and that's about it. Somehow this is made a great experience through some unspecified artistic quality to the game. My reaction goes as thus:
- Walking across a desert, absent some challenges to make it engaging, sounds very dull.
- Scaling a mountain could be fun, in a challenging platformer, but nobody indicates that such is what is going on there.
- Unspecified artsiness makes me wary at this point, probably because I was so let down by the last game I played that people praised in that manner, Shadow of the Colossus.

There's also the simple fact that those I've seen talk about it don't reference the two things that I most look for in games, story and gameplay (preferably, but not exclusively, combat), but rather call it an "experience" without referencing what about it that applies to.

Eldariel

2012-12-18, 10:19 PM

Actually, speaking of, I just beat XIII-2 last night (still working on XIII), and, honestly, I loved it. The combat systems reminds me of VI, the characters were very well developed, and the story was incredibly engaging. My only complaint is the ending, but not in a ME3 way. To put it in as non-spoilery of a way as possible: cliffhanger. Now I have to wait another year to finish the story. Nontheless, it's still done very well, even ifI did see it coming, and doesn't leave me feeling "what the hell, you ended it there?!" like Halo 2 did. Sorry, I just had to drop a rave.

Huh, I might actually give XIII-2 a go then, given VI had just about my favorite combat system out of the series and the characters were my biggest gripe with XIII.

Rising Phoenix

2012-12-18, 10:21 PM

I can like all of those things. I actually have never seen a purpose to tracking high scores. Lack of combat is a bigger issue for me personally, but sometimes games can pull it off.

I think my issue is more that the description I always get goes as thus: the game involves you walking across a desert, then climbing up a mountain, and that's about it. Somehow this is made a great experience through some unspecified artistic quality to the game. My reaction goes as thus:
- Walking across a desert, absent some challenges to make it engaging, sounds very dull.
- Scaling a mountain could be fun, in a challenging platformer, but nobody indicates that such is what is going on there.
- Unspecified artsiness makes me wary at this point, probably because I was so let down by the last game I played that people praised in that manner, Shadow of the Colossus.

There's also the simple fact that those I've seen talk about it don't reference the two things that I most look for in games, story and gameplay (preferably, but not exclusively, combat), but rather call it an "experience" without referencing what about it that applies to.

I understand where you are coming from, but I think you don't need to worry about two of those points. The desert is absolutely stunning, it makes you think and feel, same for the mountain. The reviews are vague for a very good reason: They don't want to spoil the experience or the story. (and IMO their reservations are very well placed.)

But the best way to answer your concerns is by watching a play through or, better, playing it.

Here you go. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_KrjxD8djo)

I'll recommend again a quiet dark room, head phones on, and an hour and thirty minutes when no one will disturb you. :smallsmile:

I wish I had PS3 just for this game...:smallfrown:

Clistenes

2012-12-18, 11:27 PM

Question: I am somebody who enjoyed Baldur's Gate I and II, Icewind Dale I and II, and Neverwinter Nights I and II...is any new D&D-based game out there for me?

I gave Dragon Age: Origins a try, and while I ended the game, I didn't enjoy it so much as the 2nd, 3rd and 3.5 edition games I mentioned earlier. I would really like to play another 3.5 edition-based game.

Zevox

2012-12-19, 01:05 AM

I understand where you are coming from, but I think you don't need to worry about two of those points. The desert is absolutely stunning, it makes you think and feel, same for the mountain.
Uh, I have to say, that statement actually makes me worry more. It seems to imply that the visuals are the part which is supposed to "make you think and feel," which almost certainly would not work for me. And it reminds me of some of the responses I got when I asked about why people liked Shadow of the Colossus after I played it and found it disappointing, which tended to often reference the visuals and "atmosphere," things which did absolutely nothing for me in that game.

But the best way to answer your concerns is by watching a play through or, better, playing it.
True. And considering one of those costs money and the other doesn't, there's a clear choice for me there.

Rising Phoenix

2012-12-19, 01:37 AM

Uh, I have to say, that statement actually makes me worry more. It seems to imply that the visuals are the part which is supposed to "make you think and feel," which almost certainly would not work for me. And it reminds me of some of the responses I got when I asked about why people liked Shadow of the Colossus after I played it and found it disappointing, which tended to often reference the visuals and "atmosphere," things which did absolutely nothing for me in that game.

True. And considering one of those costs money and the other doesn't, there's a clear choice for me there.

Whatever floats your boat. :)

Zevox

2012-12-19, 02:37 AM

...okay, having watched that full thing, I can definitely say that is not a game for me. It's pretty. It's creative, I guess. But it's not much else. It certainly doesn't look fun.

The thing it most reminds me of is actually a movie, Fantasia. Which is not a good thing coming from me, since I was thoroughly bored the one time I saw Fantasia.

Genre-wise, yeah, Adventure game is by far the most accurate description. Platformer would be stretching the definition of that genre, a lot. RPG I don't see at all.

Rising Phoenix

2012-12-19, 03:04 AM

RagingKrikkit

2012-12-19, 02:49 PM

Huh, I might actually give XIII-2 a go then, given VI had just about my favorite combat system out of the series and the characters were my biggest gripe with XIII.

Well, what I meant was that the combat system flows out of VI. It's a modified form of the XIII system, which in turn runs off a more in-depth version of the gauge from VI. XIII-2 also makes an interesting blend of the Sci-fi and Fantasy genres, which the fans declare XIII did not. And, on top of all that, XIII-2 uses random encounters, something that the FF games haven't seen in a good while.

Hiro Protagonest

2012-12-19, 03:13 PM

Quick question. Does anyone know of any good Persona 4 playthroughs (preferably Golden)? Having seen some various bits of it on Totalbiscuit's Top 10 list for 2012 (apparently he does count Golden as a valid 2012 game), it looks pretty interesting.

Eldariel

2012-12-19, 08:11 PM

Well, what I meant was that the combat system flows out of VI. It's a modified form of the XIII system, which in turn runs off a more in-depth version of the gauge from VI. XIII-2 also makes an interesting blend of the Sci-fi and Fantasy genres, which the fans declare XIII did not. And, on top of all that, XIII-2 uses random encounters, something that the FF games haven't seen in a good while.

Hm. Random encounters are a massive minus but maybe I'll fare. Either way, I'll have to find out.

RagingKrikkit

2012-12-20, 04:43 PM

Eldariel

2012-12-21, 01:38 AM

Really? I've never heard of a FF fan not liking the random encounters. But anyway, it's handled in a manner that allows you to choose weither to fight or run before the battle even starts. Although it does also make it incredibly easy to get preemptive strikes.

Random encounters are a minor minus in my books; I've always dealt with them but I don't necessary like them. I prefer Chrono Trigger-style "enemy on the map" approach, doubly so with the positioning-dependent skills in the system. But there are four Final Fantasies on my list of favorite games (IV, VI, VII, X) so it's not a dealbreaker or anything.