Gothic 3 - Review @ IGN

[space captain]

face it the game is horridly screwed and some people dont have enough "fanboyism" to overlook it

i told ya the american reviews would tear it to shreds

 

[Lethal Weapon]

I gave gothic 3 a shot for about 4 hours and I would have to agree with this review for the most part. The bugs completely destroy the game, in 4 hours I had 2 "wheres the guru" errors that crashed me to desktop and encountered about 10 really obvious bugs that any play testing would have picked up.

*I sold all my stuff to a merchant then reloaded and noticed the merchant now had a reduced amount of gold equal to what I had sold before. Obviously an issue with the clearing of data when loading games.

*I managed to kill 3 orc ELITES and a couple of regular warriors with ease and was then killed in about 2 seconds by a bloodfly.

*Fell through the ground once

*Not really a bug but the NPC conversdations are appalling and a lot of options should have really have been repeatable questions i.e. you only get one chance to ask milten if you can with him even though he is still sitting at the camp, meanwhile Gorn lets you ask anytime you like.




Gothic Newbie? Hardly - There were immediate consequences in Gothic 1 and 2.....For example in Khornis you could only beat up people in the harbour district and even then they would often have some kind response after you beat them up or it would influence a particular quest. Does this happen with Gothic 3's "one line" of dialogue NPCs?

In Gothic 2 towards the end of the game, if you were a merc, you could kill a merc and the other mercs would assist you. You could go on and kill every1 in Onar's farm without any consequences. You could kill every1 in Khorinis; the bystanders would flee in fear and Lord Andre would make you pay a fine of only 50 gold pieces.

What people like the reviewer and yourelf miserably fail to grasp is that in Gothic 3 as well as in the previous installments, the consequences of your actions depend on your reputation. You claim you have played Gothic 2 but I somehow highly doubt it. If you did you wouldn't have been killed by a low level critter in a matter of seconds and you would have taken the trouble to properly configure your hardware and the ini files to get a good performance, according to the guides in this very site.

You sound like a troll to me.

 

[txa1265]

You sound like a troll to me.

He's no troll - he is simply not happy with Gothic 3. Personally I love the game, haven't crashed or frozen or gotten stuck or *anything* yet and I'm level 45 and now in the desert. But many people are having *real* issues, the game is clearly not polished, there are bugs, quest issues and so on. He's not making that stuff up. Bringing Dungeon Lords into it is a bit of a 'baiter', but hey ...

 

[Melvil]

Gothic 3 isn't your mommy, it isn't a family member, it won't save you from death and it isn't going to feed you, so please fanboys, stop defending it like the holy grail

When I finished Gothic 1/2 I wanted more, I wanted it to go on and on and on. With Gothic 3 I wanted it to end about 2/3 of the way through. The quests were repeditive errand quests and the overarching story didn't have enough streamlining for my liking. The first two installments had a great balance between freeform and linear story line which was why I rate those games as two of the finest pc rpg's ever.

Gothic 3 is a bloated mess which didn't help itself by having technical problems out the wazoo!

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

The reviewer is obviously a Gothic newbie as he complains that beating up a friendly NPC with no immediate consequences is immersion breaking. I guess he found Oblivion's psychic guards with stealing a loaf of bread automatically making you the most wanted man all over Cyrodiil much more realistic. He didn't even discover that spamming the right mouse button is more effective than spamming the left mouse button. I'm not at all surprised that he failed to utilize the large variety of combat moves and instead had to exploit the AI together with constant saving/reloading. Oblivion's click-festing combat is, as it would seem, perfectly all-right.

- In earlier Gothics, consequences ARE there.

- All German magazines (and Olnigg, too) also complain that EVERY fight is in principle winnable WITHOUT combat moves. Just with constantly hacking on the mouse button ...

Edit : Just to make it clear : The devs themselves agreed that combat is highly unbalanced and will be better in a few patches !
As far as I know, they even *know*of that "mouse-hammering" style combat !

 

[curious]

gothic 3 isn't the kid that beat you in school
the teacher that failed you or wouldn't give you an a
the girlfriend that left you or you never got
or that really painful crap that took 15 minutes

...and neither are piranha bytes

so why does everyone feel the need to have such anger?
you're not 'saving' anyone the anguish of playing it by complianing
its definately different than prior gothics in many ways so new people
will like it where as some old ones won't--that's life--change
gaming may comprise a large amount of alot of our lives, but
they are just games which you play and somebody else made!

 

[bjon045]

In Gothic 2 towards the end of the game, if you were a merc, you could kill a merc and the other mercs would assist you. You could go on and kill every1 in Onar's farm without any consequences.

This is a bug and it can happen anywhere in any chapter. I've had town guards slaughter innocent civilians that I have attacked in the upper quarters of Khornis.

You claim you have played Gothic 2 but I somehow highly doubt it. If you did you wouldn't have been killed by a low level critter in a matter of seconds and you would have taken the trouble to properly configure your hardware and the ini files to get a good performance, according to the guides in this very site.

You sound like a troll to me.

*The reputation systems are completely different. In Gothic 1 and 2 you either belong to a faction or you don't.

*I never said I was killed by a low level critter in gothic 2, I said I was killed in 2 seconds by a bloodyfly in gothic THREE after killing 3 orc ELITES....

*Performance is not as issue I have a rather high end machine, the issues are all the bugs I listed.

*I have played through Gothic 1 and 2 numerous times.....I can quite easily take multiple orc elites in gothic 2 towards the later chapters. I've cleared the entire valley of mines of all available orcs/wargs in the second chapter without using any exploits. Of course it must be because I am not as skillful as you, thats why I was stunlocked to death in about 2 seconds. It certainly wasn't a bug that was partially fixed in the 1.08 patch and is supposed to be fully addressed in a future patch that will address melee combat. No, it certainly must be my skill level *faints*

 

[Gorath]

Edit : Just to make it clear : The devs themselves agreed that combat is highly unbalanced and will be better in a few patches !
As far as I know, they even *know*of that "mouse-hammering" style combat !

"in a few patches"?
As I understood Mike PB wants to make one more patch and that´s it.

 

[curious]

simple analogy

fans of the dixie chicks before but not after 'going political'/criticizing the president
=
fans of gothic series before gothic 3 but not after pirahna bytes offering more freedom/choices/world with less polish/depth/traditional story line

 

[txa1265]

Not such a simple analogy

Are you saying it is politically trendy to bash G3 & PB right now?

 

[lostnumber]

I think most of the level headed complaints are a mixture of request and disappointment. The precedent set by G1 and G2 had everyone's expectations set reasonably high. Without a doubt G3 failed to deliver. I could back that last claim up but what's the point? The IGN article does a good job of summing up a large portion of the detracting arguments levied by many forum members.

Gothic 3 is nothing more than a product. As we know, the quality of a product is largely determined - in the long run - by its target market. If something of poor quality makes it to market, the market complains and demands a better product. Such complaints are the impetus for change. Companies that deliver an improved product succeed and companies that don’t fail. Without complaint, impassioned or otherwise, nothing would change. If everyone turned a blind eye, bought the game like mad, and gave G3 10/10 reviews with nominations for GOTY we would wind up with a G4 that closely resembles G3. If no one complains there will be no improvement. Complacent delusion is just as bad as wanton criticism. Combat is boring, bugs are bad, perks are missing or underdeveloped, ambient sounds are broken, NPC pain sounds are annoying, dialogue is shallow, and the quest log is horrible; that's just naming a few.

If you don't believe my "change" argument just look at the release notes for the patch that fixed the stun lock issue. By and large, the most common complaint was about wild boars and their stun lock inducing attack. What happens? Boom, we get a patch to address it, and the fix is highlighted by a comment in the release notes.

There is no need for defense or offense, just unadulterated judgment. PB is a company; they don't care if our comments hurt their feelings. PB wants our hard earned money, and I'll give them mine if they give me a worthy product. If anything is going to hurt PB it is telling them that G3 is a great game and that nothing needs to be changed! If G3 was a better game it would have sold more and PB would have seen more money. I just want a better product, that's all; constructive criticism of a product is an effective means of attaining this end.

 

[lostnumber]

Just one more patch?! I hope it's a good (read: large and effective) one.

 

[Lethal Weapon]

This is a bug and it can happen anywhere in any chapter. I've had town guards slaughter innocent civilians that I have attacked in the upper quarters of Khornis.

This again shows your utter failure to comprehend Gothic's reputation system. I'll take the trouble to explain, not for you, but for all those who happen to read these comments.

How an NPC will react in any given situation is determined by a large number of factors. In G2, if you were a novice, and attacked another novice, the mages would interfer; not so if you were a mage yourself; you could then beat up novices at will.

Attacking a merchant in Khorinis would provoke an immediate response by all bystanders if you were a level 1 nobody. But once you achieved paladin status people would cheer you. Were you a dreaded dragon hunter? They would flee in terror.

A guard will attack a civilian if he's under the impression that he started the fight. Even then he will think twice depending on the civilian's status.

As a mercenary, draw your weapon in the market square and everyone turns hostile. But as a militia man, no problem at all.

A high mage will get his ass kicked if he dares look a mercenary the wrong way. But a guildless character can beat the crap out of any mercenary without any consequences.
Why? Because it's just friends fighting.

At the end of the game you are so powerful and *everybody* knows it, that very few will dare oppose you. Usually they will either flee or assist you. They know they have no other choice. *Certainly not a bug*.

After having completed Gothic 3 I may assure that this is the exact system used. I' m not going to go into details as I would have to give spoilers. The only difference this time is that you get to see the exact reputation numbers and NPC names are colored according to their disposition. It would seem that this makes things easier. Well not easy enough for some people I guess.

@Alrik

I would be grateful if you would explain how you can defeat a minecrawler at level 1-5 with simple button-mashing. I'm playing on hard mode and I have to use combos. 'Broken' and 'unbalanced' are two different things. And Gothic 3 combat is certainly not broken.

@lostnumber

we are in total agreement. But there is a huge difference between constructive critique and poor reviews. Also keep in mind that the same sites have given very high scores to a number of buggy and bad games.

 

[Dez]

A bit offtopic, but I think this needs to be said about reviews in general.

Many journalists praised half-life 2 like it was a gift from heavens. Some (*cough* pc gamer) even claimed it to be "the best game all time". I don't know what they were smoking, but I want the same stuff! It wasn't a revolutionary game, like it's predecessor was. Half-life 1 is still a blast because of:

1) Level design. Just think of black mesa complex! I must have played it non-stop that xmas. And the game was long. When you thought you had seen it all, the game set a totally location for your.

2) Different kind of puzzles that kept the playing experience fresh throughout the game. For example do you remember the unbeatable monster in the rocket tube? Can't kill it with guns? So whats the most obvious thing to do?

3) guns. Unlike in hl2. they were diverse, powerfull and fun.

4) Structure of a game, in other words there were no clear levels. When playing it felt like was I finding my way naturally from a begining to an end.,

5) Ai and enemies At that time it was nothing like we had seen before. I still remember my first contact with Marines as a one of the best gaming moments ever. And each of the xen aliens behaved totally diffenrely too.

6) Scripted scenes. No more watching some boring cutscenes, let the player be part of them!

Half.life 2 certainly had many of those elements, but the game was less fun and it didn't offer anything new aside gravity gun. I'm still wondering how i can't see the same greatness in it as many of those journalists see.

Its the same thing with games like oblivion, black and white. Overpraised and overhyped. When playing them i feel like i'm playing a whole different games than those journalists did.

So in a way it didn't come to me as a surprise that most of the press couldn't understand g3. Certainly it ain't the best game out there, but it doesn't derserve such bashing. In many reviews it is said that its annoying that player doesn't know what to do? heck it isn't a game's duty to do that. Use your brains damnit. The beauty of g3 is the freedom of doing what ever you like, but just be ready to carry the consiquences! Some gamers cry why the orcs attack you...well why do work against them then?

Most of the journalists simply try to find the negative things instead of focusing what is good. Do those negative things weight more than all the good things? Is 4 out of 10 a fair score? I think not. I have played great deal of different games over the years. I have owned consoles (nes, sega megadrive, psx), and computers (amiga and many pcs). And if I simply put love this game, its rather odd for me that many of those game-journalits can't see the good sides in this game. Maybe i'm just a blind fan-boy. Well so be it if i'm having fun

 

[curious]

@lostnumber
-i completely agree with most of what you are saying but i think it is jowood who wants our money. i am sure pirahna bytes would have waited a few more months for release if they had there way. pirahna bytes is the 'creativeness' in the equation and while i can't speak for them most creative peoples endeavours strive for the best that they can do and while their staff is small, it has gotten larger so everyone agreeing on creative direction has probably become more difficult. gothic 3 may be just an object, but the game has lots of beauty to it, and the talent/love put into it is undeniable. i love the game but would give it a much lower score than the other gothics because of its release state ~85% but after the next patch i would bump it up almost 10% more. it still is the best rpg in a long time to me.

oh and for the record i would give oblivion an 82-83%. theres was actually lowered from 85% simpily for the audacity they showed by releasing the smallest size patch of any game in the last five years! ironic for a game that is suppose to be the biggest.

a games rating should also not really reflect how much you like the game unless you count the tilt category. for example i enjoyed gothic 3 infinitely more than oblivion but their scores were similar. unfortunately most reviewers use the exact opposite logic and there tastes are usually horrible and all to similar.

@mike
i wasn't saying that people bashing the dixie chicks was political. i was trying to point out that artists take different directions and often have to ostracize a portion of their fan base. but no one owns an artist and i think when people get upset with peoples artistical direction shifts they need to look at the fact that they didn't care about the person who created it as much as they derived 'pleasure' from it and now since they aren't recieved this 'pleasure' they are upset. this is a problem with modern culture and so many products, the connection to their production and creators is lost and is usually devoid of meaningful emotion.
do i think much about my shoes, no. but hundreds of years ago if the town shoemaker made you some shoes, i bet you would be grateful to him if they kept your feet dry and warm all winter long. to me if games lose this special bond to the creators...then i guess i will have outgrown gaming.

 

[Elwro]

I'll take the trouble to explain, not for you, but for all those who happen to read these comments.

Thanks, it was an interesting read.

 

[roqua]

I don't follow curious, what bond? I never felt a bond with any company, even ones that I'm a fanboy of, like Troika.

And unlike games, musicians usually have a following, whereas games or series have a following. Its not really comparable. If you make a game with a 2 or 3 in the title as part of a series, it should fit in that series or not change drastically. The same could sort of be said for the music industry. Mike D couldn't expect that Beastie Boys fans would all pick up his Country Mike album. And if the Beatles came out with a White Album 2 that was a rap or techno album (yes I know this is silly) I'm sure the fans that would buy it expecting the usual Beatles (yes I know they also changed drastically over the years) type album would be validly disapointed.

If I follow what you are saying, you might be saying that the G1 and G2 fans aren't true fans since they don't want what should be the true focus of their fandom (fanness?), PB, to explore the gothic series creatively? But what if you are a fan of the creation and not the creator? ANd what are the limits?

Would Rockwell still be popular if he started painting child pornography? Should his fans, through being a fan of him and connected to him, be supportive of his child pornography? Or were they a fan of him because they like what he makes, and should stop being a fan when he stops making what they like?

I like creations, not creators. Because creations are steady and reliable when it comes to getting what you like, creators are fluid and changing and the next thing they create you might not like. Being a fan of someone/a group that used to make creations you like, but stopped doing that, seems a little silly to me. Just as some of the fans of the Dixie Chix stopped liking them (even though the music stayed the same) because of a political disagreement. But being a dixie Chix fan in the first place ment you like country music, and are therefor retarded and tasteless to begin with.

 

[bjon045]

This again shows your utter failure to comprehend Gothic's reputation system. I'll take the trouble to explain, not for you, but for all those who happen to read these comments.

Childish comments don't help your credibility.

You seem to have missed the point of what I said again. I said the system in gothic 2 is FACTION based. i.e. you join the paladins and you get the benefit of being a paladin. You become a dragon hunter you get the benefits of being a dragon hunter.

You are not rated on a scale as in Gothic 3 based on your reputation in the current town or with a particular group.

Attacking a merchant in Khorinis would provoke an immediate response by all bystanders if you were a level 1 nobody. But once you achieved paladin status people would cheer you. Were you a dreaded dragon hunter? They would flee in terror.

They certainly didn't do that in the savegame I just tested as a Paladin before leaving for final isle. There was no cheering, even lord Andre came running.

A guard will attack a civilian if he's under the impression that he started the fight. Even then he will think twice depending on the civilian's status.

This is the bug I was talking about. Happens with the mercenaries too sometimes in the second chapter. I have seen no evidence of "status" having anything to do with it. It is quite humorous watching the town ground drive their sword into an innocent civilians chest though.

As a mercenary, draw your weapon in the market square and everyone turns hostile. But as a militia man, no problem at all.

Just did it as a mercenary . Got the calls to put my weapon away as per usual.

Well not easy enough for some people I guess.

Learn how to make an argument without insulting someone. Read what I have written next time and don't take it so personally Or is Gothic 3 your "baby"?

 

[Lethal Weapon]

It is interesting that you keep describing G2' reputation system as a bug. Do you have a save as a mage? Load and go in the Khorinis market square then draw your weapon. Nobody will say anything, since mage =highest authority.

I was not talking about Lord Andre running after you, but about the civilians. Try murder a civilian as a very high level dragon hunter. No other civilian will dare say anything. Now murder a mercenary. Watch how the other mercs assist you. Do the same as a novice for example and observe the different behaviours. Now try and start a fight with Sentenza and lure him at the city barracks. See what happens.

I might be wrong about some of the details since it's been a while and I can't recall everything. But this is not the point. The point is that there is always a rationale for every different behaviour and NPC behaviour changes as the game progresses according to your guild, power and reputation. It is exactly the same with Gothic 3.
Sure you can't join a guild in Gothic 3 but having a 75% reputation with a faction is equivalent for all purposes. Sure you can't see the reputation numbers in Gothic 1+2, but they are still there. You can tell from how people behave differently as the game progresses, even though your guild remains the same.

Is Gothic 3 my baby? Most certainly not. But, having invested 200+ hours already, I think I have more things to say about the game than someone who has played for less than 4 hours.

[edit] I just remembered that after having killed almost everyone in the market square, a maid was screaming at me: "Didn't you have enough?". How's that for immersion? And the only way mercs would attack another merc in the second chapter would be in case of an unfair fight, such as Bulco beating you up, especially if you just stood there doing nothing to defend yourself (after he warns you to leave Onar's farm a couple of times, he will attack you with no provocation). Now I'll be leaving these fora for a while since I've started a new G3 game.

 

[bjon045]

It is interesting that you keep describing G2' reputation system as a bug. Do you have a save as a mage? Load and go in the Khorinis market square then draw your weapon. Nobody will say anything, since mage =highest authority.

Nowhere did I say the reputation system is a bug. I said it is a bug when sometimes they help you murder an innocent civilian or one of their buddies. It can happen right at the start of the game and has nothing to do with you being high ranking.

Is Gothic 3 my baby? Most certainly not. But, having invested 200+ hours already, I think I have more things to say about the game than someone who has played for less than 4 hours.

4 hours was more than enough for me to wipe the game and wait for a patch to do something about the broken combat. Again I say, read what I wrote. I never wrote anything about the reputation system in Gothic 3, I wrote about the reputation system in Gothic 2, and I asked a question "Does this happen with Gothic 3's "one line" of dialogue NPCs?" which you did not seem to answer.