[PC] 1UP Withdraws NWN2 Review

Quarter to Three Discussion.

Basically, reviewer Matt Peckham gave Neverwinter Nights 2 a 5 out of 10, not because it has poor storytelling, no roleplaying, bad combat, or any other elements that could be bad about the game (I honestly don't know), but because it's a D&D game, that emulates the P&P ruleset.

Originally Posted by review

*Note* these are excerpts that were posted on the RPG Codex *Note*

As a contemporary CRPG, on the other hand, NWN2 leaves a lot to be de-sired, and that's too bad, because these are the guys who brought us Planescape: Torment and Icewind Dale 2 therefore they are the guys I'm least inclined to take issue with.

But issues exist, and defining them is really no more complex than saying, "Hello D&D superchrome, buh-bye storytelling and character development (you know, those things you're supposed to "immerse" yourself in)." The idea seems to be that we're meant to rah-rah about a superabundance of feats, spells, races, prestige (advanced) classes, and math-equation tickers full of the usual "I attack you with a +4 sword of --" booooooring. Fine, sure, dandy&but when is a "role" not a "role"? Simple: when it's a rule to a fault.

Worse -- and blame this on games like Oblivion -- NWN2's levels feel pint-sized: Peewee zones inhabited by pull-string NPCs with no existence to speak of beyond their little playpens. Wander and you'll wonder why the forests, towns, and dungeons are like movie lots with lay-about monsters wait-ing patiently for you to trip their arbitrary triggers. As if the pencil and paper "module" approach were a virtue that computers -- by now demonstrably capable of simulating entire worlds with considerably more depth -- should emulate.

In all fairness, it's not entirely developer Obsidian's fault. D&D certainly puts the "rule" in role-playing, and a madcap base of D&D aficionados is no doubt ready to string me up for suggesting that faithful is here tantamount to folly (to these people, I say: "Go for it, NWN2's all you've ever wanted and more"). Call me crazy -- I guess I'm just finally weary of being led around on a pencil-and-paper leash and batting numbers around a glorified three-dimensional spreadsheet in a computer translation that should have synthesized, not forklifted.

Nothing says awesome like getting somebody to review a game in a genre they hate.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

How can you possibly give NWN2 a good review. It uses the same design and system that failed in the original. The game gets a poor review because it's just simply NOT fun. You can't enjoy this game because the whole time is being devoted to, OMG my RING OF APPEARANCE and my +2 thing-a-ma-bob and my SWORD OF HAMSTER DESTROYER. Even if you reduce the game to a basic hack 'n slash it fails miserably. The fact that your character NEVER feels powerful. Even approaching the most cliched of monsters like rats and suddenly the player is worried whether they remembered to equip their +4 vs disease breastplate so they don't get waylaid. Each encounter is such a big deal, the game is slow and painful. Not fast and visceral like a hack 'n slash should play like.

I learned my lesson after I bought the hype and the original NWN. Never again. I'll pass. Just because the game uses a faithful representation of the pen & paper rule set doesn't mean it works. NWN is flawed right from the get go.

5/10? I say 2/10

A bad game is a bad game is a bad game. NWN is one of them.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by JackyBoy

Each encounter is such a big deal, the game is slow and painful. Not fast and visceral like a hack 'n slash should play like.

But it's not.. you know.. a hack 'n slash. You can't complain about Doom being a crappy racing game.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Shit I have to say I haven't heard much news about the game at all. A reviewer giving the game a 5/10 just because he dislikes the genre is dumb however. I have yet to play NWN2 though.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Glad I don't go get reviews from that site.

I'll stick with Gamespot until Greg Kasavin leaves, thank you very much.



If it's anything like the original I'll be happy. Aside from Oblivion (which disappointed me quite a bit, sadly) I haven't seen any CRPGs that could get my attention. Hell, the only games that I find worth getting for the PC these days are first person shooters, and in most cases, those are multi-platform releases.



And yes, comparing NWN to a hack n' slash is asinine. Maybe you could get a job reviewing at 1UP though, couldn't make the site any worse.

I was speaking idiomatically.

That's funny. Greg Kasavin isn't exactly held in very high regards around here and in the gaming community in general. He gets called all sorts of harsh names from forum users. Personally I like reading his reviews. In fact I like most reviews from gaming publications. I'll take a professionally written review that uses proper English sentencing and structure any day before a user review. The absurdity of this whole mess is the NWN2 review comes from a guy which gave Icewind Dale an 87% and suddenly he's a genre hater because he's not afraid to call NWN2 for what it is. Okay boss.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

I was disappointed in the original NWN for some of the same reasons he mentions. The whole thing felt like an excuse to pore over minutiae, which left a bad taste in my mouth when I went in expecting a great story or the same kind of character building in an MMO or a game like Diablo 2, that helps the user feel unique. The D&D ruleset really is kinda boring, as far as skills go.

I'm still buying the second one with the hope that my friend actually plays with me this time, and we get the most out of the multiplayer component.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by JackyBoy

That's funny. Greg Kasavin isn't exactly held in very high regards around here and in the gaming community in general. He gets called all sorts of harsh names from forum users. Personally I like reading his reviews. In fact I like most reviews from gaming publications. I'll take a professionally written review that uses proper English sentencing and structure any day before a user review. The absurdity of this whole mess is the NWN2 review comes from a guy which gave Icewind Dale an 87% and suddenly he's a genre hater because he's not afraid to call NWN2 for what it is. Okay boss.

Is that so? I honestly had no idea. Then again, don't really care what the game community thinks on that subject.

A lot of people at gamespot I don't agree with, but of the games Kasavin has reviewed that I own, I tend to agree with. I barely get reviews from anywhere else anymore...since I barely buy games anymore it works out.

Most amazing jew boots

Quote:

How can you possibly give NWN2 a good review.

Don't know, haven't really played it, but you'll note that isn't the point of this thread.

I mean, I hate D&D myself, but you don't go criticising a car because it isn't a motorcycle.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

I don't know anything about this game in particular, but generally I don't disagree with the idea that games can be reviewed by people who aren't fans of the genre.

The car/motorcycle comparison is, I think, kinda off, since this IS an RPG, and the guy mentions Planescape: Torment, which, I think, clearly means that he does like good RPGs. Yes, apparently he does not like D&D, but what can you do; giving the review to a D&D nerd might also skew the review. And, either way, I think reviewers with no personality/personal preferences are worthless when internet is available to everyone and there are already a million sites that offer the same objective, dry reviews and all give games virtually the same scores (just look at Gamespot/IGN).

Besides, 5/10 is not a terrible score, and apparently there are other faults with the game as well (see penultimate paragraph in Brady's quote). I actually think it's kinda shitty that mediocre games always get 7/10 (reviews in Edge being one of the few exceptions, I think).

There's nowhere I can't reach.

If games get the same scores they aren't being reviewed objectively, they're being reviewed lazily.

Reviewers have to write keeping in mind that their audience is going to be interested in the game they review in the first place. Bearing that, they have to consider the game based on its own merits and what it set out to do. They also have to keep in mind the people who wouldn't be a fan of the gameplay if it appeals to a niche.

That said, this is an awful review. He criticizes elements of the game for being precisely what it wants to be, a Dungeons & Dragons toolset, claims that P&P emulation is obsolete (despite claiming to love Planescape and IWD2), and balks at the design of the game because it isn't like Oblivion.

The addendum shouldn't have been "for fans of D&D" it should've been "for readers who hate D&D."

I hate D&D. I have very little interest in the game outside of Obsidian's involvement, but if I was asked to review the game, I wouldn't criticize it for trying to faithfully re-create the D&D ruleset. Instead I'd probably say that it's impossible to have a truly faithful recreation without turn-based combat.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Well, the game can be an accurate translation of D&D and still not perform well as a PC RPG, which is what I think Aardark was going for, and what I think the review wanted to ultimately say. It just doesn't transfer well.

Here's the complete review, for those interested.

Quote:

As everything-the-original-did -- and more -- follow-ups go, Neverwinter Nights 2 deserves a banner&something like "mission accomplished." Think the sequel to Jurassic Park, where Spielberg's all "You want more dinosaurs? I'll show you more dinosaurs..." As a contemporary CRPG, on the other hand, NWN2 leaves a lot to be desired, and that's too bad, because these are the guys who brought us Planescape: Torment and Icewind Dale 2...and therefore they are the guys I'm least inclined to take issue with.

But issues exist, and defining them is really no more complex than saying, "Hello D&D superchrome, buh-bye storytelling and character development (you know, those things you're supposed to "immerse" yourself in)." The idea seems to be that we're meant to rah-rah about a superabundance of feats, spells, races, prestige (advanced) classes, and math-equation tickers full of the usual "I attack you with a +4 sword of --" booooooring. Fine, sure, dandy...but when is a "role" not a "role"? Simple: when it's a rule to a fault.

Ever loyal bites
I'm cruising for a bruising (don't I know it), but NWN2 is a splash of cold water to the face: A revelatory, polarizing experience that -- in the wake of newer, better alternatives -- makes you question the very notion of "RPG by numbers." It foists Wizards of the Coast's latest v3.5 D&D system (a molehill that's become a mountain at this point) onto your hard drive with stunning fidelity, then tacks on dozens of artificial-looking areas vaguely linked by forget-table plot points you check off like grocery to-do's.

Sure, the interface is sleeker with context-sensitive menus and a smart little bar that lets you more intuitively toggle modes like "power attack" and "stealth," but with all the added rule-shuffling, NWN2 seems like it's working twice as hard to accomplish half as much. Worse -- and blame this on games like Oblivion -- NWN2's levels feel pint-sized: Peewee zones inhabited by pull-string NPCs with no existence to speak of beyond their little playpens. Wander and you'll wonder why the forests, towns, and dungeons are like movie lots with lay-about monsters waiting patiently for you to trip their arbitrary triggers. As if the pencil and paper "module" approach were a virtue that computers -- by now demonstrably capable of simulating entire worlds with considerably more depth -- should emulate. It's like we're supposed to park half our brain in feature mania and the rest in nostalgic slush, and somehow call bingo.

The dungeons feel especially stale, so linear and inorganic they might as well be graph-paper lifts filled with room after room of pop-up bogeymen (Doom put them in closets; NWN2 just makes the closets bigger). Maybe you'd rather chat with the dumb NPCs that speak and sound like extras in a bad Saturday morning cartoon? Oh, boy -- there's the portrait "plus" sign! Time to shuffle another party member (improved to four simultaneous) through the level-up grinder, which you can click "recommend" to zip past...but then, what's the point?

Rule-playing game
In all fairness, it's not entirely developer Obsidian's fault. D&D certainly puts the "rule" in role-playing, and a madcap base of D&D aficionados is no doubt ready to string me up for suggesting that faithful is here tantamount to folly (to these people, I say: "Go for it, NWN2's all you've ever wanted and more"). Call me crazy -- I guess I'm just finally weary of being led around on a pencil-and-paper leash and batting numbers around a glorified three-dimensional spreadsheet in a computer translation that should have synthesized, not forklifted.

That five-of-10 is actually a hedge, by the way. For D&D fans who want to play an amazingly thorough PC translation of the system they're carting around in book form, it's proba-bly closer an eight or nine. But if, like me, you want less "rules for rule's sake" and more depth and beauty to your simulated game worlds, you can certainly find more exciting prospects. Part of the reason we call them "the good old days" and think fondly of games past is that it's always easier to love what we don't have to play anymore.

Looking at the whole thing, it's easier to see why it was pulled, because it does come off more like a blog post than an actual review. It would be interesting to me to see more sites let this kind of stuff go and then watch all hell break loose on their message boards.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Quote:

Well, the game can be an accurate translation of D&D and still not perform well as a PC RPG, which is what I think Aardark was going for,

I know full well what Aardark was going for, and I tried to demonstrate why Peckham failed to come across that way. He focuses on the failings of the game because of the D&D ruleset without explaining why it's a poor roleplaying game.

Nevermind either that Icewind Dale 2 wasn't a good roleplaying game. It was real-time w/ pause tactics. Which doesn't make any sense because there's nothing about real time combat that's tactical. So he's already lost credibility with the people that actually played IWD2.

I was speaking idiomatically.

In the writer's defense, he did add:

Quote:

That five-of-10 is actually a hedge, by the way. For D&D fans who want to play an amazingly thorough PC translation of the system they're carting around in book form, it's probably closer an eight or nine.

So it's not as though he assumed out-of-hand the reader would agree. Also, I'm sort of pleased to see a game review nowadays that doesn't tick off aesthetics and call it informative. But the general tone of the review is a bit unprofessional (for a non-personal news'n'reviews site, certainly), and unfortunately only the 'hedged' score will be the one people remember (because in Internetland, hard numbers always trump 1000-word analysis). Still, counterpoint would've been a better option than pulling it entirely. That's the stuff that fuels censorship cries.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

There's no defense for that kind of sloppy writing. He tries to make himself above criticism by throwing a bone to D&D fans after patting them on the head for their cute little rule system.

That review was anything but informative.

FELIPE NO

What if it was an informative, well-written review? Would it still have been pulled?

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

No. It's far from impossible that NWN2 is a terrible game. The review was pulled because it wasn't professional, and according to the editor-in-chief, didn't live up to 1up's editorial standards. Which is hilarious because it means that the review shouldn't have been published in the first place.

It's not as if reviewers haven't pissed off a fandom before. Look at the review for Dark Messiah of Might & Magic and tell me that isn't professional, despite the low score given for a very hyped game. This is just the first time when dissenters have had very relevant points.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Quote:

"Hello D&D superchrome, buh-bye storytelling and character development (you know, those things you're supposed to "immerse" yourself in)."

That's what it's supposed to be. I for one don't have time to get buddies together and sit out 50 hours of gameplay to do a campaign when the PC simplifies and hastens what the pen and paper cannot.

Sure it's not a contender for game of the year, but skeptics said the same thing about KOTOR (which I note is this same D&D base) and look at that. He's trying to compare it to Oblivion which aims for totally different styles of gameplay. In fact, I recall people whining about rats being too powerful in that game as well.

He whines about all the feats spells abilities, etc. and claims that they have no aspect of the "Role" in RPG. Role is for your specialization. In fact, you can be pretty darn specific and base your actions in the game on that role you choose. Dialog gives options for a reason, staying true to the D&D roots that the game is 100% trying to meet.

For someone looking for a comparison to Oblivion's style, he's indeed looking into the wrong game and genre.

Most amazing jew boots

Likewise, this game shouldn't be compared to, say, Half Life 2. It should be compared - favourably I might add - to games like Dungeon Siege and Balder's Gate II (Okay, maybe not quite Balder's Gate II).

Yes, it's no Planescape: Torment, but I can get behind games that actually ask you to use your imagination for character development. Sometimes, a game being bland forces you to fill in the gaps (either that or stop playing, I'm aware I may be defending a dead horse that everyone else is flogging, but I'm willing to give it a shot).

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.