Macworld Reviews GF5[G5]

[The Ratt]

Review

 

Personally I think the author makes the story sound a little too complex to what it really is, and also used a mediocre build running through the game.

 

Other thoughts?

[A less presumptuous name.]

First: It is nothing like diablo 2, which is the game I play when not playing geneforge. Geneforge requires a whole different set of skills, whereas Diablo is the original hack n' slash.

 

Second: Who actually dies the first few times through a dungeon? I die maybe 5 times in a game, depending on how risky I take it. This guy has no idea how to play the game well.

 

Third: "Since the mythology of Geneforge is built around the magical Shapers, when selecting a class you’ll want to pick something that has strong shaping abilities. But the Shaper creatures aren’t particularly innovative in terms of gameplay"

This guy really has no idea what he's talking about.

 

Fourth: "Simply, there are so many plots, subplots, and characters to keep track of that only dedicated RPG fans won’t be turned off." This guy is a wimpy noob. The complex story line is one of my favorite parts of these games.

 

Fifth: "While the lack of graphical sophistication lends the game to an old school feel, the monotonous environments and unidentifiable characters make it hard to feel attachment to the world." – (See the threads about playing too much Geneforge)

 

Sixth: "With six classes" – Did he not notice the ability to switch to the original three shaper classes? (noob)

 

Well, we all know how wonderful these games are.

[nikki.]

Originally Posted By: Master1

Second: Who actually dies the first few times through a dungeon? I die maybe 5 times in a game, depending on how risky I take it. This guy has no idea how to play the game well.

I die sometimes, whilst playing the games, even if I've played through them many times. Other players will die too. A lot of people are not serious gamers, and will not know the ins-and-outs of how to make a tank character. So, sure, he might not know how to "play the game well", but it's a genuine criticism - the game should be balanced so that casual players don't end up dying 50 times in a zone, and other players don't think it's a cake-walk. I think the reviewer was (rather ham-handedly) saying that the balance wasn't quite right.

Quote:

Third: "Since the mythology of Geneforge is built around the magical Shapers, when selecting a class you’ll want to pick something that has strong shaping abilities. But the Shaper creatures aren’t particularly innovative in terms of gameplay"
This guy really has no idea what he's talking about.

No, it's true. Most of the creations have Geneforge-ish names, and looks, but the Fyora is just like a salamander. The drayks and drakons are clearly drakes and dragons. War Tralls and Battle-Alphabets are pretty much "trolls". There are one or two creatures, like the Vlish that I'd say is pretty innovative, in design, at least.

From a gameplay point of view, which I just realised the guy was talking about, they're basically just like summoned creatures, or, if you keep them around, additional party members. Except they do maybe one or two types of damage. This works for Geneforge, but it isn't a new thing.

Quote:

Fourth: "Simply, there are so many plots, subplots, and characters to keep track of that only dedicated RPG fans won’t be turned off." This guy is a wimpy noob. The complex story line is one of my favorite parts of these games.

Calling somebody a "noob" because they found the plot a turn-off isn't exactly fair. I've not played GF5, so I can't say what it's like, but from what I've read, it does sound like the most involved and complex plot JV has written. For me this is great, but maybe others disagree. Think about it. Previous Geneforge games were quite nice in that no previous experience was necessary. With everything from the past 4 games finally being tied up, I can easily see how just a basic understanding of the previous games would help somebody understand things a whole lot more. Furthermore, if there are a lot of things going off, between factions, NPCs, and so on, it's understandable that people might get confused.

Your other points seem far enough, although again, they are from a (I assume) fan of the series, who likes the graphics/plots of the games. I mean, I basically agree that the guy is reviewing it to compete against big budget games, but what's wrong with that? I also agree that he seems to have disliked the plot, and seems to have let that taint his view of the rest of the game (when you couldn't care less about the plot, you focus on other things, and that fireball spell really does start to look pretty ugly). But, I doubt that we Spiderwebbers are a typical representation of the Jeff's customers, and so we might be more prone to overlooking the fact that yes, every Shaper in the game looks exactly alike. Somebody who picks up the demo, but who doesn't necessarily know SW might not be so forgiving, and the review reflects this.

Just my two cents.

[A less presumptuous name.]

Fair enough. I never really considered myself a fantastic gamer, but on the two easiest difficulties, it was fairly simple.

However, it really irritates me that the guy is so against having a real plot. Most games these days focus on graphics and such, but it is really nice to get a plot that one can really get into. Today's big games mostly seem to be all about hack'n'slash, with maybe some strategy.

I realize i may be a bit biased, but I still think that they guy's bias really made the review seem worse than it should have been.

[Desmarestia]

Quote:

...tasks the character with hoarding lots of dropped loot in their pursuit of some goal. Of course, holding so much loot will encumber you in combat, so you also have to choose what loot you grab carefully.

Oh really?

Quote:

In a repetitive pattern, you’ll encounter the same poorly animated worms and troll-like creatures...

The animations are simple, but calling them poor straddles the line between matter of opinion and outright lie.

Quote:

...get used to seeing that same firebolt animation hundreds of times...

Wrong again.

Chris Holt may have been right to call Geneforge a niche game and plot-heavy, but the factual inaccuracies are inexcusable.

Quote:

Dated graphics; tedious combat; unapproachable story.

Why would you ever try a game described like this?

Considering the target audience, which is people unfamiliar with the series, this review was unfair. The fact that Spiderweb is a relatively small presence in the game world means that the negative bias of the article will turn away people who aren't already fans. I picked up GF4 without knowing anything about it and got hooked instantly. Had I known the game was "dated, tedious, and unapproachable," I wouldn't have bothered.

[Archaeolagent]

If I read that article, it would probably make me more likely to download the game. I know what I like in games, and I know that it's a relatively unpopular niche. Geneforge is not for everybody. It isn't anything like Diablo 2 -- but for people who play RPGs casually or not at all, the resemblance is probably uncanny.

[Acky]

I don't have G5, but from reading this, I think this guy only played threw once.

 

Master Archon

[Desmarestia]

People read reviews in different ways. Since I'm incredibly cheap, I'm hard to convince. And easily turned off by words like "tedious" and "unapproachable." I don't deny that Geneforge has some potentially unattractive, niche-appeal aspects. My issue is that Holt described them so negatively.

[*i]

Well, everyone's opinion is valid, including Holt's. Fortunately, if your opinion differs (which I suspect it would if you are around here), MacWorld is nice enough to offer the ability to comment. If you want counter this, post something articulate in response so you appear as an informed gamer with a different view and not as a fanboy.

[The Ratt]

His short three cons could be phrased more accurately.

 

Dated Graphics: Can't argue with this

 

Tedious Combat: I can understand that the combat in the game can be challenging, on second level difficulty I found it hard to deal with the swarms or enemies, and also there were several encounters where I survived on pure luck. From what he has said it would be more accurately phrased as repetative combat.

 

Unapproachable Story: While I agree that if you are unfamiliar with the game, the beginning of the game can be overwhelming, once you get into it it is very engrossing. Better phrased as overwhelming story.

[Dahak]

I'm not going to pretend that I know Jeff's marketing model, but there is the following to consider:

 

1. We have 2 general markets. First there are the new Spiderweb RPG gamers. I would attempt to rope these customers in using the latest game and interest them in the previous games. Easier to do with serial plot games like Avernum & Geneforge. Second are the previous buyers looking for a new game.

 

2. Both markets (and their segments) will likely read these reviews. Each will consider them differently.

 

Review analysis / comments

A.

"...lacks graphical sophistication or a quality soundtrack."

"It looks and plays like a game released 15 years ago."

 

Turn off for newcomers, expected by current customers. Also, I think Jeff did quite well with minimal animation. The colors are a bit bland, but they are varied and well coordinated.

 

B.

"Geneforge 5 reminds me of Blizzard’s Diablo series, which divides characters into different class types, features a distant third person isometric perspective, and also tasks the character with hoarding lots of dropped loot in their pursuit of some goal."

 

The Diablo series is series that has a large customer base. This comparison in a negative light will off put some customers. However, the comparison will nevertheless draw in good percentage of customers (even a 25% draw of Mac Diablo users is a solid number for Jeff) who want a game similar to Diablo. They will download and play the demo and then the game will stand or fall.

 

C.

"...you’ll encounter the same poorly animated worms and troll-like creatures..."

 

No argument from me. The worms are sickly looking and the comparison to familiar references is inevitable. Thankfully the Thahd don't turn to stone in daylight.

 

D.

"Since the mythology of Geneforge is built around the magical Shapers, when selecting a class you’ll want to pick something that has strong shaping abilities."

 

Um, yeah. That is one of the biggest lures about the GF series. Good work Jeff!

 

E.

" “Evolving” your creatures involves maxing out their stats as you gain experience, much like you would enhance your spells and weapons. Their appearance, actions, and use don’t alter save on a superficial level. Your “shaping” skills are limited to cookie-cutter creatures like dinosaurs and trolls, and then watch them change color as they get stronger."

 

Well, not completely true as they due have different attacks / strategies, but for the most part I'd agree. It would be nice to see the base creation changed in something other than color. This is could be a fair expectation of what gamers believe they should see. I don't know. I've played Jeff's game since Escape from the Pit some I'm rather familiar with his design and don't expect to see much beyond a color change.

 

F.

"I’m new to the Geneforge series..."

Bang! All other new gamers will identify and carry these presumptions into their first GF5 experience. Sorry to say it, but is true and inevitable.

 

G.

The most important part to any reader:

"Macworld’s buying advice

 

You have to give Spiderweb credit—the Geneforge series goes toe-to-toe with bigger publishers and humbly, but adeptly delivers quality gameplay and story. At $28, it won’t cost you much to check out. The hint book costs an additional $7 through Spiderweb’s online store, which is quite helpful for some of the more difficult puzzles and if you want to learn how to unlock some of the different endings. Geneforge 5: Overthrow is definitely a niche game, and therefore hard to recommend to a wide audience. If you enjoy deep, long RPGs with a complex storyline and love old-school turn-based combat then Geneforge 5 will make you nostalgically satisfied, like watching an old 80s movie would. If you’re a casual gamer, not an RPG fan, or don’t have several days to invest to understanding the Shaper society, then you’ve probably stopped reading this review paragraphs ago."

 

A fair assessment and I find nothing to particularly disagreeable.

 

Overall this article presents a mostly unbiased and well-targeted review. It address the common market's concerns over what they can expect to find in the game and it address what a new RPG player can expect.

 

The one thing I didn't see and should have seen was the mention of the free demo and how far it takes you. You can play the game for free to a point and still get a very good grip on well the rest of the game will be for the player. If this made been mentioned it could have the impact of drawing in more customers who might be willing to dismiss the game based on the review alone.

[Alorael at Large]

The Diablo analogy really isn't good. Turn-based and real-time combat are so different that wanting one and playing the other is incredibly unsatisfying. The game reminds me more of Baldur's Gate, really (yes, it still has real-time combat, but its movement and dialogue are much closer and it's actually an RPG). I can see why Diablo is used in terms of popularity, but I'm sure there are better RPG examples.

 

The reviewer dislikes the graphics. A lot. Well, that's fair. Poorly-animated seems wrong to me, though. There aren't many sprites and there aren't very complex graphics, but the animation seems smooth enough.

 

Creatures in your party aren't innovative, but I don't know of other games in which it's just you and your disposable critters. Still, it's not a mind-blowing innovation. On the other hand, while your creatures really don't ever do anything besides move and attack, their abilities do change pretty dramatically. I can understand his complaint, but it's also not a simple hierarchy of better and worse creatures. Rotdhizon or war trall or gazer? It's a real choice and it'll make a difference.

 

More importantly, he seemed to go straight to shaping. There are melee-reliant or magic-reliant builds that go easy on the shaping, although it's hard not to shape anything. He seemed to miss that much bigger character development decision entirely, which is rather strange given the fact that your first class choice makes it obvious. (He also missed three classes, but they're on another page in the character creation menu and, to be fair, they're clones of other classes.)

 

—Alorael, who is most baffled by the reviewer's approach to plot. He seems to think there's too much. Firstly, he seems unnecessarily negative about it. It's actually a selling point. Not to everyone, maybe, but to the target audience. Secondly, as Ratt pointed out, the story isn't really that complicated, and you can ignore a fair amount and still win. Conclusion: the reviewer was turned off by the old graphics and sound and never really got past his initial impressions.

[Randomizer]

The two screenshots are from Whitespire Pass and Isenwood's Spire so he probably only got through the demo. To someone trying Geneforge for the first time, the combat system is different enough that it's easy to die, especially if you have low dexterity and don't daze your opponents. Also GF5 is harder than the earlier games for the demo area if you aren't prepared for the artila acid attacks and the poison area effects.

[Lilith]

Quote:

You have to give Spiderweb credit—the Geneforge series goes toe-to-toe with bigger publishers and humbly, but adeptly delivers quality gameplay and story. At $28, it won’t cost you much to check out. The hint book costs an additional $7 through Spiderweb’s online store, which is quite helpful for some of the more difficult puzzles and if you want to learn how to unlock some of the different endings. Geneforge 5: Overthrow is definitely a niche game, and therefore hard to recommend to a wide audience. If you enjoy deep, long RPGs with a complex storyline and love old-school turn-based combat then Geneforge 5 will make you nostalgically satisfied, like watching an old 80s movie would. If you’re a casual gamer, not an RPG fan, or don’t have several days to invest to understanding the Shaper society, then you’ve probably stopped reading this review paragraphs ago."

A fair assessment and I find nothing to particularly disagreeable.

Anyone who thinks an 80s movie is old enough to evoke nostalgia is probably such a drooling neophile that their opinions aren't worth listening to on any subject.

Having said that, the rest of the review is pretty fair.

[Blurb]

Inaccuracies aside, I thought it was a fair review. A review offers opinions, so his take on the complexity of the storyline is just his outlook. That's what a reviewer does. Another reviewer might love that aspect. *shrug* I like that about all the Geneforge games. The gaming world has all varieties to offer. Those who just want hack-and-slash can surely find it out there.

 

When the reviewer says you must choose a strong Shaper character, that's really not a duh moment on his part. He probably tried one of the characters with poor Shaping skills and fell flat on his behind like many here have. So, to me, his observation is dead on and he is giving sound advice. It took me multiple attempts at different characters to even understand how to play this game and to find a character I could win the game with. And it's a strong Shaper character. I have all the games in the series (although I only got halfway through G4), and I found myself sinking fast with some builds that would have worked in other GF games. I think Jeff made this game tough, which plays to the hard-core players among his fan base and possibly some new players who like a high difficulty level. It is supposed to be designed as playable by those new to Geneforge, but maybe it really isn't for a lot of people. I am fond enough of the games to really give it a shot. I respect the advice on this forum and am willing to take the time to absorb it. Honestly, I would have failed miserably without it. I'm not sure everybody would do what I did and go that extra step.

 

As folks have already pointed out, there were some inaccuracies in the review. The encumbrance comment about the items in the pack stumped me. He must have had a real problem throughout the game with this misunderstanding. His comment about amnesia was confusing and also about his guide not talking in complete sentences and recovering from control by Shapers. What?? Does he refer to Mehken, who very quickly does begin to talk in complete sentences and who was not recovering from anything that I know of? Not to mention that the dialogue was perfectly understandable anyway, complete sentences or not. Nothing in the early game was difficult to comprehend. Also, his assumption about maxing creation stats may not be the best route to take (lots of essence involved, obviously), although I'm not sure how a new player would know this.

 

I've enjoyed playing the game, but I have to say that I don't find it the most playable game and think it should be more balanced character-wise. You should be able to win with any character and I'm thinking maybe the average player would not be able to do this. I think if this game is further reviewed, it might encounter some other negative observations just based on this aspect. Again, I like it, but I can understand the negatives, too.

[Ouroboros]

Quote:

The game allows you to use diplomacy and stealth in certain situations, but as any RPG-fan will tell you, the easiest way to gain experience is to level up through combat and quests

You can still get exp from diplomacy and stealth

Quote:

With six classes,

There are 9 classes.

Quote:

The combat uses a classic system involving items, spells, and creations as your tools of destruction.

Where is your weapon?

Quote:

That means you’ll get used to seeing that same firebolt animation hundreds of times in a given session playing Geneforge 5.

There are many diffrent spell, not just firebolt.

Quote:

the pets that you create are similar to ones you’d find in other RPGs

Any luck finding Khssyak in other game or Wingbolt ?

And I agree with the comment.

[Lilith]

Killing everything does, in fact, usually give you more experience than using diplomacy and stealth. Using diplomacy and stealth and then killing everything anyway gives you the most experience.

 

There are six classes. Three of them just have two different choices of graphic.

 

A weapon is an item.

[A less presumptuous name.]

Actually, I believe that the shaper variants of the classes have ever so slightly different stats. I can't remember exactly, and I'm going to go look in strategy central, but I believe there is actually a difference.

 

Quote:

CLASS ESSENCE SPELL ENERGY HIT POINTS

------------ -------- --------- ---------

Guardian 40 + 6/8 20 + 8/8 24 + 0.90

Warrior 10 + 7/8 20 + 8/8 28 + 0.90

Servile 10 + 6/8 16 + 8/8 30 + 0.90

 

Agent 10 + 7/8 20 + 14/8 20 + 0.75

Infiltrator 10 + 7/8 28 + 14/8 20 + 0.75

Sorceress 10 + 7/8 20 + 14/8 28 + 0.60

 

Shaper 10 + 8/8 20 + 12/8 20 + 0.60

Lifecrafter 10 + 8/8 28 + 12/8 20 + 0.60

Shock Trooper 10 + 8/8 20 + 14/8 28 + 0.75

 

Speaks for itself

(sorry, the formatting got messed up, but the real one is in strategy central.

[Lilith]

Yes, they're slightly different, but they're slightly worse in every case, so there's no reason to use the Shaper classes for their stats.

[Ouroboros]

My mistake sorry, but still there are 9 classes, I know they are identical but it still different.

[Alorael at Large]

The 80's were 19-29 years ago. That's long enough for nostalgia. Maybe not 50's nostalgia, but it's long enough that it doesn't exactly come up all the time in conversation and I imagine the state of the art has moved on.

 

The guardian is slightly better at shaping and magic in the very beginning with his essence boost. The warrior ends up better at everything.

 

—Alorael, who would consider them different classes if they actually where substantially different in play. They're not at all. The real benefit of finding the slightly less obvious Shaper classes is the benefit of playing a robed shaper instead of an ugly lifecrafter.

[jlsgaladriel]

Originally Posted By: slarty

It isn't anything like Diablo 2 -- but for people who play RPGs casually or not at all, the resemblance is probably uncanny.

That's a disconcerting observation: I'd expect that a reviewer of an rpg on macworld *would* be an expert at rpgs on the mac platform. What good is a review by someone unfamiliar with mac rp gaming?

Originally Posted By: blurb

When the reviewer says you must choose a strong Shaper character, that's really not a duh moment on his part. He probably tried one of the characters with poor Shaping skills and fell flat on his behind like many here have. So, to me, his observation is dead on and he is giving sound advice.

I think my biggest problem with the reviewer's assertion is that it reveals once again he's no expert. I've just finished playing a lifecrafter run, and yes, it was probably easier in some encounters than my first runthrough was.

But I'm a passable but certainly not expert player -- I find Disposal Vault really hard on *normal* difficulty, and the torment folks who post in this forum blow me out of the water -- and I nevertheless completed the game just fine my first time through with a low-on-shaping character.

If the reviewer had claimed, "shaping characters might prove easier to play than magic-based characters," I don't think I'd quibble, but he makes it seem as if heavy shaping is the only option, and that's just not true.

Originally Posted By: blurb

Inaccuracies aside, I thought it was a fair review. A review offers opinions...

See, I'm not sure I can divorce the inaccuracies from the opinions, since the opinions are based on the falsehoods.

If the reviewer's not a careful observer, not especially knowledgeable, and not very good at games, why should anyone respect his opinion?

Heck, I don't have any special stake in Geneforge reviews, other than my desire for Jeff to keep making good games, but the fact that MacWorld posted a review from someone obviously unqualified really makes me unhappy.

[Lilith]

Originally Posted By: jlsgaladriel

That's a disconcerting observation: I'd expect that a reviewer of an rpg on macworld *would* be an expert at rpgs on the mac platform. What good is a review by someone unfamiliar with mac rp gaming?

Not much. Game reviews are pretty much a joke and always have been. At best, the reviewers are biased; at worst, they're lazy and incompetent. Heck, most of the time you're lucky if they've actually finished the game they're reviewing.

[Alorael at Large]

Ironically, game consumer reports are quite good. You get lots of people who play a game and, finish or not, they're happy to weigh in. Individually all those reviews spewed on Amazon or wherever else are tripe. In the aggregate they're big, steaming mounds of tripe with little bits of delicious meat buried deep inside.

 

Fortunately, I am amused by tripe, so trying to find information in the review pile isn't so bad.

 

—Alorael, who really thinks the problem is not that the reviewer is inexpert or lazy, although both might be true. The problem is that he doesn't like the game he's reviewing for reasons that aren't really the game. He can't take the graphics, but more importantly he doesn't like the text/plot heavy genre of the game. I'd also expect someone who hates first-person shooters to give Deus Ex or Half-Life godawful reviews, and they're unhelpful to anyone who does like that style of game.

[Blurb]

I think there is evidence the reviewer did not finish the game. Most of the specific commentary has to do with the first section, like the odd comment about amnesia. Had I played the whole game, I doubt I'd even focus on the "guide" in the beginning and the dialogue early on. Also, as noted upthread, no mention of innovative creations like vlish or wingbolts.

 

Jls, the inaccuracies in his review certainly do diminish his credibility. That said, I commend you for successfully finishing the game with a weak Shaping character. It became so tough for me that I could not do it myself. I tried an Agent, a Servile, a Warrior, and a Sorceress. It became painful to play with each and every one ... except the Sorceress was a bit easier thanks to some strategy help from a forum member here. I'll add my voice to your I'm-not-a-great-player chorus, but maybe I belong in the I'm-a-wimpy-player-but-I-like-to-play-anyway camp.

 

Slarty, why play a Lifecrafter or a Shaper when you can play a Shock Trooper? Better health, more strength, and you get a boost in magic through items anyway. Okay, it's a female personna, so if that troubles, just use your cleverness and change the graphics.

[Paladin95]

I started playing Geneforge because Fire Emblem games weren't coming out fast enough. Niche? Yeah. And I've come to expect people to have a love-hate relationship with the genre. What I don't expect is a contributing editor of a major review website to worry so much about mechanics in what he must know is a highly specialized gaming style.

[*i]

Single person RPGs are a niche genre to begin with. Add the old school aspect and it gets even more so.

 

As I said, no one's opinion is any more or less valid than another. However, the general complaint I (and many others) have is that it appears this review is based on assumptions made from very limited information. It seems quite clear that he only played the first part. While first impressions are important, some of his comments show that he was merely making stuff up to fill in for knowledge he did not actually have.

 

This is not his fault. I'm sure he has deadlines and a limited time to play these games. What I do find annoying is that he did not say, up front, that he was basing his review on the first couple hours of gameplay. Granted, this probably applies to ALL of the games that they review, and by saying that for everything diminishes their perceived credibility. Does not make it right, of course.

 

I would not worry about what these reviewers say. In my experience, many of these "professional" reviewers are self-absorbed individuals that think they know everything and their opinion is fact. I'm not sure how many people actually take everything they say as such. So I would not fret too much. Jeff has gotten negative reviews in the past and still survives until this day.

[Øther]

Agreed. But I still think the reviewers should play past the demo.

[jlsgaladriel]

Quote:

I commend you for successfully finishing the game with a weak Shaping character. It became so tough for me that I could not do it myself....maybe I belong in the I'm-a-wimpy-player-but-I-like-to-play-anyway camp.

Hmm, well, I'm guessing that my internal min-maxer helped here: I very much decided early on that I would only put resources into one shaping tree and no other, so I wasted no money and no points in battle or magic shaping. (I'm not claiming that fire's the best tree in g5, not at all, just that it was a good thing to focus.)

And if you like to play geneforge, then you're probably the sort of person who likes to fiddle with different possibilities and try things out, and that's not wimpy at all! I bet now that you've played through, you'll find the other character types more possible, especially if you decide up front what areas you want to focus on, and what ones you'd want to drop.

[*i]

Quote:

But I still think the reviewers should play past the demo.

No argument here. However, I understand time limitations. If they cannot, I wish they would be more upfront with it. How hard would it be to qualify your review with "I played through the demo version and..."?

[Lilith]

Reviews basically exist to generate hype for the game companies that offer the biggest bribes. If reviewers had to admit that they rarely finish the games they play, they wouldn't be very good at achieving that purpose. (Seriously, many game publishers have a policy of withholding review copies from publications that have previously given their games a score below 80%.)

 

jlsgaladriel, where's your sig from? It seems familiar.

[Øther]

Quote:jlsgaladriel, where's your sig from? It seems familiar.

 

Isn't it from entering the summoning room in the challenge area?

 

I know about the reviews and everything, but I don't like it when people talk about stuff negativaly like they are experts and they have hardly played the game.

[Lilith]

You know, if you want to quote people, you can use quote tags.

[jlsgaladriel]

Quote:

jlsgaladriel, where's your sig from? It seems familiar.

It's flavour text from the north part of the disposal vault, before the waves of rotdhizons, urglaahks, and urdrakons descend...

[Lilith]

Oh, right, that.

 

Also the Gazers. Can't forget the Gazers.

[Øther]

That was the room. Sorry, couldn't remember where.Oh, and by the the way, you all forgot the corrupted ones.

 

 

I wish there would be some way for us to voice our complaints on reviews.

[jlsgaladriel]

Quote:

I wish there would be some way for us to voice our complaints on reviews.

well, there sort of is, in that there's a comment area below.

I actually clicked to begin to comment, but then realized macworld wanted a whole slew of registration information to allow it, and I was too lazy to set up another temporary email address to register. They don't deserve my real information.

[Alorael at Large]

There is. You can comment on it and your comments will be displayed at the bottom. You're not going to change the video game industry and its satellites by griping alone, but you can at least give a little more perspective for anyone curious enough to keep reading.

 

—Alorael, who wonders why, exactly, the Macworld bothered with G5. It's not a big enough title that it was obligatory unless Jeff's market clout is more substantial than anyone suspects. It's clearly not the writer's cup of tea. No money will come from it. It could be that breadth of review carries an air of legitimacy, or maybe reviewers have to put out enough bad reviews to seem like they're actually giving meaningful numbers and G5 looked like good, mediocre material.

[Lilith]

When a publication wants to throw a bone to "indie gaming" to show that they are "hip" and "with it", SW is the place to go, especially for Macs. It used to be Ambrosia, but nowadays they mostly make productivity software and occasionally port games that other people have made to the Mac.

[jlsgaladriel]

Quote:

It is nothing like diablo 2...

Oh! I think I've just figured out the similarity!

RPG games I prefer tend to have meaningful decision-making with respect to character build. Diablo, NWN2, World of Warcraft, and Geneforge all share this aspect: part of the fun is in the anticipation of the skills you're building up to, and in the decisions you need to make to get there.

The rpg games which bore me tend to be those in which character development involves no choices, or in which those choices don't matter. There was a for-the-time very pretty game, summoner, which I remember bored me to tears, because I didn't care about the development options available. There was a microsoft game, dungeon something (seige, maybe?), in which there were no character development choices at all, and the only appeal I remember was a very cute mule to carry loot.

I've always assumed that the developers of those latter games were just better at graphics than they were at making interesting games. It's more likely, however, that what interests some gamers is the opposite of what interests me, and those developers purposely dropped what for them seemed like tedious non-fighting parts.

So this reviewer might be saying, "hey! this game is icky in the way that diablo is! it wants me to *think* about my character development, and I just want to hit things!"

[Øther]

Quote:

You know, if you want to quote people, you can use quote tags.

I know, but I never remember the codes for those things and I have to go to a different page to find them. I do this just because it's faster, though I do go find the codes if its for italics and such.

[Lilith]

It takes a very special kind of person to dislike Diablo 2 for making them think too much.

[Alorael at Large]

Still, the point stands. In Diablo gaining levels gets you health and mana, basically. All other advancement is up to your allocation of points. Spiderweb has always similarly put the choice in the player's hands. In Diablo 2, it's hard to make even plausible choices and end up with an unplayable character that can't win if you grind for enough experience. In Geneforge you really can make apparently plausible character advancement decisions and end up having to restart or turn the difficulty all the way down if you want to progress.

 

—Alorael, who may be overstating it a bit. Certainly normal shouldn't be torturous for most casual players if they put any thought at all into making a character. This is particularly true of the demo area, and even more true of shaping classes, for whom strategy consists largely of having essence and making creatures with it. It's not terribly mentally taxing.

[Blurb]

I wonder if that indie game Web site will be reviewing the game? Does anybody know the one I mean? Dang. They have reviewed other Geneforge games, and pretty favorably if I remember correctly. I used to like to swing by there occasionally and check out their reviews and try out their recommended games, but it's been a while. (I feel like such a dork that I can't remember the site now.)

 

I know that Chris Holt did not *completely* ignore that this is an indie and therefore not out of one of the big houses, but I don't really think he gave that enough attention. There is a good side and bad side to independents. The lack of backing from a major game house is the obvious downside and accounts for lack of funds for fancy graphics and all the bells and whistles that come with it. The upside, as in indie films, is the freedom to create stories that aren't the standard commercial fare with the formulaic black/white, good guy/bad guy theme and that satisfying (if all too expected) good-guys-prevail ending. It's the thematic aspect that I wish had been more fully addressed. I guess that actually requires some sophistication, though.

 

He does make some observations that I think new players might make when playing the game, so I think his review makes some good points. It can be really a tough game to play. However, I'm thoroughly perplexed by his inability to follow the storyline. Is it that hard to follow? Is it because I'm a Geneforge fan that I didn't have a minute's trouble with the plots and subplots? Or.. is it that you really need to be a reader to play these games?

[Øther]

I like Spiderweb's games in that who the good or bad guy is depends on your moral beliefs, so no matter who says who is good or bad, your always right.

 

Quote:

However, I'm thoroughly perplexed by his inability to follow the storyline.

 

It has been stated and thought with almost certainty that the reviewer has finished the demo only

[Lilith]

Yeah, but there really wasn't anything very confusing in the demo. It honestly sounds like he just started skimming the text at some point halfway through the intro.

[The Ratt]

Well it does kind of rush into your first meeting with Rawal. You have very little idea what's going on when some person who you assume is very influential demands that you do something. At this point most people have very little knowledge about the shapers or a backstory, and have no idea where to go or what to do.

[*i]

Quote:

Well it does kind of rush into your first meeting with Rawal. You have very little idea what's going on when some person who you assume is very influential demands that you do something. At this point most people have very little knowledge about the shapers or a backstory, and have no idea where to go or what to do.

Rawal does tell you to see him in his spire and gives you pretty specific directions until you leave the Whitespires. Furthermore, a lot of the story background is given in the introductory text. As someone else said, it seems like the reviewer didn't read it very thoroughly. To say that one has no idea about the world around him is a bit disingenuous; it's like complaining a novel makes no sense despite the fact he skimmed the first chapter.

If he had said that the introductory text did too little to explain the background, fine, that's a valid opinion. I also grant you that we don't know everything at the beginning, but we shouldn't either. Maybe these days players expect everything spelled out to them in big bold letters, but part of the genre is to have the player to figure out a few things out for himself. If you actually take the time to talk to the people around you, a few basic things start making sense pretty quickly.

[Archaeolagent]

In any event, I wonder if this isn't a case of "any publicity is good publicity".

[*i]

As I've said earlier, Jeff has had plenty of bad reviews before. He's still around. I agree with Slarty, sometimes it's better for some people to have a slightly negative view than it is for more people to have no clue it exists at all.