Pimpin Reviews: Dragon Age Origins vs Rise of the Argonauts

Pimppeter2

New member
Dec 31, 2008
16,479
0
0
It's fitting that I reboot the Pimpin Reviews series with this review. For those who have been here long enough to remember, Rise of The Argonauts was my very first Review on the Escapist. Its been a bumpy year for Pimpin Reviews, with many ups and downs. So this is my catharsis, enjoy the many pimpin reviews to come.

[h4]Pimpin Reviews: Dragon Age Origins vs Rise of the Argonauts[/h4]​

Recommended music: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=em_asfslbow

Tid Bits
-Thanks to Labyrinth for the Pimpin Banner
-I KNOW this is long. But it would be appreciated a lot if you comment, even if you don't read it all. Or post your thoughts half way through and then come back the next day. I've worked very hard on this.
-Any reply that says "TL;DR" that is not a sarcastic response and I will lose it.
-Thanks for commenting


Intro
[img_inline caption=Dragon Age Origins
Platform: Xbox 360/PC
Genre: Dark Fantasy Role-playing
Modes: Single Player
Developer: BioWare width=200 height=300]http://image3.examiner.com/images/blog/EXID6894/images/dragon_age_origins_box_art.jpg[/img_inline]​



[img_inline caption=Rise of the Argonauts
Platform: Xbox 360
Genre: Action Role-Playing
Modes: Single Player
Developer: Codemasters width=200 height=300]http://static.gamecrazy.com/images/games/boxart/13246.jpg[/img_inline]​

I have been an RPG fan since I was a very little boy. To this day, The Elder Scrolls has been a major part of my gaming life; evident by the time, money, and even fan fiction I have put into it. With every major RPG release of the past years, one can usually find me in line ready to poor heart, soul, and time into these games. The title of this review may be a little tricky, because as usual with this series, this review is not a heated debate about which game is better. Instead, have you ever wondered why Dragon Age: Origins went Platinum Thrice [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.174163-Dragon-Age-Origins-Goes-Platinum-Thrice] while Rise Of the Argonauts fell into the dark void of "who cares". This review intends to point out what went wrong, and compare it to a similar game that went right. So buckle down, and get ready to have your very odd question answered.

The victim: Rise of The Argonauts

Released in the 2007 Holiday season, Rise of The Argonauts had promised not only to be the God of War killer for the Xbox, but also completely change what we have expected from the RPG experience as a whole. Going away from numerical stats and upgrades, and making the game more accessible to the action craving fans with its critical hits and non-scorecard combat, Rise of The Argonauts seemed to be the perfect game for anyone remotely interested in the lavish world of Greek Mythology. However, being released to lukewarm reviews and the utter indifference of the gaming community, one has to wonder, what went so wrong?​

Plot: Winner = Dragon Age: Origins

In Rise of the Argonauts, you explore the vibrant world of ancient Greece, and fallow a plot loosely based on the Myth of the Golden Fleece. For those familiar with Greek mythology, it should come to no surprise that the games Protagonist is Jason, King of Iolcus. Who the Escapists very own Jordan Deam [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/reviews/5612-Review-Rise-of-the-Argonauts] was quick to point out is "in fact actually not a hybrid of lolcats and lolwalrus's, but rather an ancient city in northern Greece." The game starts you off at Jason's wedding, which for a King of a major city oddly only has a couple handfuls of guests. Tragedy strikes and your beautiful Wife Alceme is murdered by a mysterious group of assassins who worship the Titaness Hecate and believe her to be the true ruler of Tartarus. In Greek mythology, a person must be given last rites in order for their soul to pass on from this world and face judgment in the one above. Jason refuses to allow these men to win, and descovers that by useing the Golden Fleece he could undo what history has done in order to revive his fallen love. From there, we set of on a presumed to be epic quest to gather up descendants of the gods to march our way into Tartarus and turn back the clock on the evil plan of these devious foes.

Dragon Age's story is much simpler, but much more effective. Set in the savage world of Ferelden, our hero must stop both the civil war lying on the horizon as well as an invasion of demonic like creatures called Darkspawn. After creating a hero and playing through one of six unique origins stories, you join the Gray Wardens; a group of warriors who are key in uniting the lands and taking down the other world threat. While Dragon Age's story may not seem better on the surface, the style of telling it and the depth behind it are what makes the game a much more worth while experience.

Sadly, neither game features a Tits or GTFO option

The impressive thing about Dragon Age is that while it stands by itself as a game, it has an entire lore behind each and every person. object, and site that you stumble across. Being loosely based on Greek mythology, that gives the developers of Rise of the Argonauts space to allow to create their own world in an already established setting. The problem however, is that we don't know which is the developers creation, and which was actual mythology. This isn't helped by other than the characters the game seems pretty vague, almost as if its trying to hide away inconsistencies.

Another major problem is the dialogue trees. In Rise of the Argonauts, the player gets to choose from one of four options that sides with one of four corresponding gods. There's Ares, Athena, Hermes, and Apollo; and if you haven't guessed it yet, the Ares options are variations of pseudo masculine bullshit, while the the Hermes options are variations of "wit". The biggest fault is that Jason is a set character, we can role play all we want an pick any option we choose, but that doesn't stop him from being the overall hero no matter how many Macedonians I tell to suck my Gyros. Sure, the same thing can be said for Dragon Age, but at least the choices are a bit more morally gray. And even while you're still the hero, its a more "ends justify the means" approach. If I chose to be the dick in Dragon Age, I am a dick to get the job done. If I choose to be a dick in Rise of the Argonauts, well, I'm just a dick. And that doesn't make for a very lovable character.

To an even worse extent, Rise of the Argonauts doesn't give the player enough control of the story, or even worse the conversation that you're in. The set conversation choices are unbelievably vague, and picking an option that you thought would start a fight will have you make empty threats for a couple of turns simply because there's no scripted fight scene for the segment. In Dragon Age, options have a much bigger effect on both the immediate effect as well as the overal outcome of the game. The most frustrating part of all of this was that there's no way for the player to interact with the cutscenes. Which in a modern RPG is something that just completely blows my mind.

Believe it or not this is also his orgasm face

Basically, while Dragon Age's story is not necessarily better than Rise of the Argonauts, the method it is told is far the superior. Quite frankly, Rise of the Argonauts is not a role-playing-game. Decision making hardly matters, and when the option is presented its mostly just for niche appeal. Role playing with Jason would have been more fun, if the character would have had some personality in the first place. Switching from passive aggressive behavior to over the top showboating from sentence to sentence is as schizophrenic as it sounds.

Gameplay: Winner = Tie

Now, this may come as a surprise, but Dragon Age could learn a thing or two about combat from Rise of the Argonauts. Both games allow the usage of various weapons, tactics, and styles. However, RotA combat is much more involving and aesthetically pleasing. The control schemes for both games are pretty simplistic, but pulling off a kill in Dragon Age is never as satisfying as brutally beating a satyr.

In Rise of the Argonauts, Jason is able to use four weapons; each dedicated to one of the four corresponding gods. The sword, agile and nimble is the tool of the quick footed messenger god Hermes. The Shield, protective and glorious is preferred by the sun god Apollo. The spear, strategic and deadly is the weapon of the Athena; the goddess of wisdom. And lastly, the vigorous and powerful mace is the favored of the God of War Kratos Ares. The most fun comes with the ability to quickly interchange these weapons mid battle. Wailing on a guy with your mace until his head cracks and then sticking your spear through his ribs is just orgasmic. There plenty of tricks you can use to impale, behead, and dice your opponents.

Alistair uses sword slash! It's super effective!

Conversely Dragon Age offers many weapons and styles, but limits them to different playthroughs. While specializing in more than one type of weapon or magic is plausible, its very inefficient. The game limits you to six power spaces, with potions eating up one or two spaces depending on style. Its not helped by the fact that there just not enough level ups in a playthorugh to full unlock the final powers in more than a handful of areas. So while you may do something clever like freezing an opponent and smashing him apart, critical hits like loping a darkspawns head off are too few to enjoy combat to the max.

The biggest problem of both games is that battles are awkwardly placed. Scrimmages in Dragon Age are often way too few, or way too frequent. In a heavily story based game like Dragon Age origins, its frustrating in the later levels to have to go through hordes of enemies to advance the plot. And it doesn't get much sweeter the second time around. Let's not beat around the bush, the combat in Dragon Age was a chore. Few entertaining sequences like plunging my blade through the heart of troll is not worth my five hundredth fight with another Hurlock Grunt. As for Rise of the Argonauts, there's simply not enough of it. After the opening sequence, its something like three and a half hours before you ever see foe again. For an action-rpg, thats inexcusable.

Speaking of unpardonable design choices, Rise of the Argonauts commits the most cardinal sin against RPG fans. I'm talking about no loot; nothing, nada, rein. Admittedly, its not much better for Dragon Age. The set inventory space and now where to store items is a hassle for some, and I never understood why my strength had to be higher for my warrior to wear certain pieces of heavy armor. I guess Bioware just has a sense of fashion; I wouldn't wear my level 200 leopard skin thong of awesomeness until I was at least a master in sexiness.

Don't believe this screenshot: the game is nowhere near as badass

But in RoTA they didn't even try; There's only a handful of of armors, and absolutely nothing to pick up from enemies. To my shock each armor was worse than the last, and other than the starting armor and the one picked up on the last quest there is absolutely no other one anyone with a sense of taste would ever wear. There's a couple of different weapons which can be collected through quests, and which to its credit are actually pretty good looking and useful, but some weapons don't match with the armor types and frankly look silly on Jason's back. Combine that with a lack of an inventory system and it isn't exactly a pleasant experience.

Companions: Winner = Dragon Age

Major features in both the advertising of the games as well as in the games themselves is the companions that you bring along. And a blind man could see that Bioware really knows how to make good companions. In RotA, you run into a dream team of Greek Mythology. From optimus prime look a like Hercules to badass action girl Atlantis, and while the characters look and feel good on the surface, they lack the depth and emotional value of Dragon Age. Its been a long time since I cared about other pixels in a video game, but I found myself not wanting to displease Allistar and took every chance to get closer to Morrigan.

The main problem is that there's not much interaction with the other Argonauts. While Herc and Jason share some serious bromance, the other characters really don't feel like they're ever needed. Achilles is also well developed, but this brings us to the next issue. RotA allows you to bring two other companions in any given mission, but with the serious bromance with Herc and Pan always complaining about being old and stuck inside, its hard to get to know any of the other Characters. There's no real personal missions like in DA:O, and without the intimacy bonus there was no real reason for a chauvinist like me to take along the female companion.

In case you were dying to know, she did get her tits out for me

Other than that, there's no real way to dig into a companions desires and wants. There was this hot and sexy ex-foe that everyone was warning me about talking with and was constantly flirting with me, but with only a handful of subjects to talk about, there was no reason to ever come back to her. Conversations are very one sided, and unlike in Dragon Age feel very set and forced. There little to no animation going on between the characters who just stand in position and blurt out their deapest desires to a man they just met half an hour ago. Really developers? I thought we got over this last generation.

The only plus with these companion is that they were just plain awesome to use in battle; Herc would hold up smaller foes while I smashed them in bits, and at that part it really felt like the epic adventure it was supposed to be. However, without the emotional value to any of these characters it felt like a massive waste of time to talk to any of them.

Graphics and sound: Winner = Dragon Age

Now Dragon Age isn't exactly what we'd call a looker, but RotA isn't something that is badly in need of a good polish. While the graphics do look a bit better than Dragon Ages', the constantly low frame rate and gigantic bumps in the ratio really make the game look unfinished. Tack that on with animation that looks straight up laughable, and you got yourself a product that needed about another couple of months more than from what it was released.

I still argue Oblivion still has the best companions

Believe it or not, there is a method to my madness; there's a reason that the recommended music is a Dragon Age song. The music in DA:O just makes it feel like an adventure of unseen proportions, and from title screen to credit rolls the acoustics never miss a beat to impress -literally-. To be honest, there was no single theme or track from RotA that was the slightest bit recognizable. If you googled Generic combat music, I'm sure there's a couple tracks more interesting than anything in Rise of the Argonauts.

Verdict

Its hard to judge a game on its own merits, and for that Pimpin reviews turns to its Vs series to find out just what went wrong. And from what we've seen, for Rise of the Argonauts its is quite a lot. Creating an epic adventure is more than just good combat. Looking back on RotA, there was not one single sequence that one defining sequence that would make this game unforgettable. Hype is a dangerous things, for popular games it can mar their reputation for years. But for lesser known games like Rise of the Argonauts, hype is the thing that leaves enthusiastic gamers more than a bit peeved. History has proved that Rise of the Argonauts was neither a genre defining game nor the God of War killer of our times, but a third rate bargain bin buy. An ambitious adventure, let down by lack of funds and abhorrent design choices.


You win this round, Dragon Age


Disclosures: Dragon was obtained via [Retail] and reviewed on the [Xbox 360/PC]. Approximately [78 hours] of play was devoted to single-player modes (completed 3 times)



Disclosures: The Rise of the Argonauts was obtained via [Rental] and reviewed on the [Xbox 360]. Approximately [13.5 hours] of play was devoted to single-player modes (completed 1 times)




  • Dragon Age DLC
    11th hour vs. NCIS/ NCIS plain
    Mass Effect 2
    Dragon Age:Origins Vs Rise of The Argonauts
    Adventure Quest (Flash)
    Empire: Total War
    Supernatural (possibly capsule only)
    Jak and Daxter: The Last Frontier vs Jak X
    Oblivion vs Dragon Age: Origins
    Condemned 1 (Request by Furburt)
    Okami
    Metroid Prime Trilogy (Request by NuclearPenguin)
 

FlyAwayAutumn

Rating: Negative Awesome
May 19, 2009
747
0
0
Dear lord that IS long. Don't worry I'll read the rest in a bit but I want to get this out of the way first.

I agree with your opinion entirely. If I tried to vocalise my opinion on this particular subject I could not end up with such a great review, truly this is how you say "Pimpin"

Edit: Alright done. I'm actually suprised to find out that i'm the very first on this thread. So *Ahem*
First
But seriously great review I dunno what else to say, other than you definitely carefully looked over the merits of each game, or not. Who knows?
 

Pimppeter2

New member
Dec 31, 2008
16,479
0
0
Great review, erm, I mean vs, I mean comparison thingy! :p I agree on many points, such as the combat being a bloody chore in Dragon Age :( Man, it really didn't feel like the combat was evolving or anything. It stayed the same throughout the game. But the characters were amazing. I really wanted to keep on talking to Morrigan and find out new stuff about her. I was really unhealthly obssessed with her :p Gj Bioware!

RotA, the idea, it should have been fucking epic! I can't believe it was that bad :( Greek mythology rocks! When you get it right I guess. Anyways, PimpP always a pleasure ;D Great job!
 

Onyx Oblivion

Borderlands Addict. Again.
Sep 9, 2008
17,032
0
0
RotA is 20 bucks. I'll pick it up, it not as bad as everyone made it sound after all. It's still bad, it seems. But playable bad.
 

Neonbob

The Noble Nuker
Dec 22, 2008
25,564
0
0
Well, that was five minutes well spent.
Thanks for that, Pimp!
I'm guessing you'd like the usual fee?
 

TheNumber1Zero

Forgot to Remember
Jul 23, 2009
7,346
0
0
*Begins Reading*

King of Lolcus. Ha!


*Reads more*

GTFO function, I could of used that in Dragon Age: Origins many times

*Reads even more*

I have to agree with you, the Combat In DA: O did make me think "Alright then, I place a Glyph, run like crap, and Shoot lightning at everything that comes near me. let's get this over with" when I prefer it to make me become giddy enough to shoot rainbows out of my pores.

*Reads still more*

No loot? RAAAAGEEE!

*Reads the rest*

I would say that was a well typed out Review, same as always. Job well done Pimpy, job well done.
 

Onyx Oblivion

Borderlands Addict. Again.
Sep 9, 2008
17,032
0
0
Pimppeter2 said:
Quite frankly, Rise of the Argonauts is not a role-playing-game. Decision making hardly matters, and when the option is presented its mostly just for niche appeal. Role playing with Jason would have been more fun, if the character would have had some personality in the first place. Switching from passive aggressive behavior to over the top showboating from sentence to sentence is as schizophrenic as it sounds.
Does this mean that you're one of those people who doesn't consider JRPGs to be RPGs?
 

Dragon Zero

No one of note
Apr 16, 2009
710
0
0
I feel a little let down from the RotA word of mouth because it does seem like rich ground for a really kick ass game. Perhaps another day, someone will find a good way to make a RPG set in an Ancient culture's mythology because not only would it be interesting to play, but could also introduce many to these rich myths (he says while remembering that he's yet to finish reading the Icelandic Sagas) which I feel would do them some good. I have to say that if nothing else, you've reminded me that I need to finish DA:O. I love the game but I just haven't had time to finish with all the other games on my plate. Perhaps I'll warm up that disc tommorrow.
 

Meggiepants

Not a pigeon roost
Jan 19, 2010
2,536
0
0
Here I am from the Random Complaints thread. Bravo for a shameless shill! I actually really enjoyed your review. At first, I thought, "Ooh, what's this game he's talking about? I haven't played that one!" But then I read your review and thought, "Ohhh, that's why I never played it." Very good review. And I agree completely with your opinion of the DA battle system. Variety is the spice of... rpg fights! Hopefully the expansion will be a little more exciting in that area.
 

EMFCRACKSHOT

Not quite Cthulhu
May 25, 2009
2,973
0
0
I must admit, when i first saw the title of this review, i thought you would be putting Dragon Age up against the movie XD As awesome as that would have been, i still very much enjoyed reading.
I must admit, i did enjoy the DA:O combat, but then again i played it on PC.
Still, if i see RotA for cheap i think i may just give it a whirl
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
Well, as I see things Dragon Age: Origins is actually an RPG, Rise Of The Argonauts isn't an RPG at all but claims to be one as an attempt to draw people in.

What makes an RPG is the idea that the stats are what determines the outcome of events, rather than your reflexs and actions as a player. Storyline and such have absolutly nothing to do with it. This is why say Nethack is an RPG, but Adventure games which are nothing but story are not.

It doesn't matter if you call a life bar "hit points", including upgradable weapons, or whatever else. If you hitting the buttons and fighting properly is the primarly influance then it's not an RPG. In Dragon Age, it was real RPG combat for the most part, which is unsatisfying for most people who are dedicated to action games and want that kind of a thrill. It was driven by stats, numbers, and invisible random die rolls. You had less outcome over what was going to happen than how you developed the numbers. Your "build" being more important than how fast you could click or manipulate a controller. The flashy graphics and deathblows involved were just icing on the cake when they existed.


The whole "Action RPG" label has been used as a cop out by designers who want to try and create action games with some customization options and hope they can both make action gamers feel "smarter" by saying it's an RPG, and rope in some of the RPG crowd as well.

An actual "Action RPG" is still stat based and has little to do with the abillity of the player. The "click fest" Diablo "Action RPGs" are an example because the outcome is determined by stats and numbers, you don't do much except click, however you do move in
real time. Real "action gamers" of course don't care for this because really there isn't anything they do that determines the outcome for the most part. It's all about managing resources, picking the right gear, and a good set of skills that compliment each other.

RPGS do not appeal to everyone, and less people than action games do. It's been this way for a long time (since gaming has become more mainstream).

Right now I feel that the RPG label is mis-used. Comparing Rise Of The Argonauts to say Dragon Age is sort of like trying to compare "Double Dragon" to the SSI Gold Box AD&D games back in the day. Even if someone decided to say that Double Dragon was an "RPG" due to the fact that both it and Dungeons and Dragons had the word "Dragon" in the title it would be the same as this comparison from where I'm sitting.

Sorry Pimpeteer, but I have to say I don't think this is one of your better comparisons because I at least feel that the games are differant enough to defy any real comparison.
 

Asturiel

the God of Pants
Nov 24, 2009
3,940
0
0
Neonbob said:
Well, that was five minutes well spent.
Thanks for that, Pimp!
I'm guessing you'd like the usual fee?
Dont do it, he's buying drugs with it.

Also very good 5 minutes.

Good review Pimp, even though I never intended to buy either game now I have knowledge to spat about ignorantly ahahahahah!

Also theres your bloody post, I shouldn't have said nething!
 

Neonbob

The Noble Nuker
Dec 22, 2008
25,564
0
0
Asturiel said:
Neonbob said:
Well, that was five minutes well spent.
Thanks for that, Pimp!
I'm guessing you'd like the usual fee?
Dont do it, he's buying drugs with it.

Also very good 5 minutes.
If he makes this stuff while buzzed, I'll happily supply his whacked out ass!
I like wasting my life with cool reads!
 

Pimppeter2

New member
Dec 31, 2008
16,479
0
0
Neonbob said:
Well, that was five minutes well spent.
Thanks for that, Pimp!
I'm guessing you'd like the usual fee?
I'll give you a special discount.

Also, I saw in another thread that you showed interest in reviewing. I've helped SAS, Onyx, Nuclear Penguin, and others start reviewing. If you Ever want to get a review going, I would be happy to help.

Onyx Oblivion said:
Does this mean that you're one of those people who doesn't consider JRPGs to be RPGs?
Now. you're going to have to excuse me for dancing around the subject. I don't consider JRPGs RPGS, the same way I wouldn't consider Mass Effect 2 and RPG. Now go find the socks that I just blew off. I consider JRPGs a genre of their own.


EDIT: Also, you'll have to pardon me guys but I'll try to get through all your posts sooner or later.
 

dmase

New member
Mar 12, 2009
2,117
0
0
I have to stop looking at threads that involve Dragon Age, FF13, or Bioshock 2 it makes me wanna just go out and buy it instead of waiting till they package the dlc with the game and i get a better deal.

Good review persuasive yet unbiased.
 

Neonbob

The Noble Nuker
Dec 22, 2008
25,564
0
0
Pimppeter2 said:
Neonbob said:
Well, that was five minutes well spent.
Thanks for that, Pimp!
I'm guessing you'd like the usual fee?
I'll give you a special discount.

Also, I saw in another thread that you showed interest in reviewing. I've helped SAS, Onyx, Nuclear Penguin, and others start reviewing. If you Ever want to get a review going, I would be happy to help.
Hooray! I love saving money.

...you are stalking me! I knew it!
*dances*

And thanks for the offer! If I ever work up the focus to review something, I'll pm you for some help.
*cheesy motivational thumbs up*
 

Asturiel

the God of Pants
Nov 24, 2009
3,940
0
0
Neonbob said:
If he makes this stuff while buzzed, I'll happily supply his whacked out ass!
I like wasting my life with cool reads!
Dont we all? I'm not saying he's doing this while high, I'm saying he does this while sober then gets high with the money!!!!
Pimppeter2 said:
Also, I saw in another thread that you showed interest in reviewing. I've helped SAS, Onyx, Nuclear Penguin, and others start reviewing. If you Ever want to get a review going, I would be happy to help.
Uh uh, eh I'd be a terrible reviewer never mind.

Wait I had something to say to you other than that.... OH YEAH Review Okami next.

Do it!!!!
 

Neonbob

The Noble Nuker
Dec 22, 2008
25,564
0
0
Asturiel said:
Neonbob said:
If he makes this stuff while buzzed, I'll happily supply his whacked out ass!
I like wasting my life with cool reads!
Dont we all? I'm not saying he's doing this while high, I'm saying he does this while sober then gets high with the money!!!!
Well, he kinda deserves a reward for it, then.
Pay da man!
 

Asturiel

the God of Pants
Nov 24, 2009
3,940
0
0
Neonbob said:
Well, he kinda deserves a reward for it, then.
Pay da man!
I only pay him for my prostitutes!

Unless hes pimping his reviews to me...WAIT NEVER I WONT BE SUCKED IN!...[sub]thats what he said[/sub]
 

Neonbob

The Noble Nuker
Dec 22, 2008
25,564
0
0
Asturiel said:
Neonbob said:
Well, he kinda deserves a reward for it, then.
Pay da man!
I only pay him for my prostitutes!

Unless hes pimping his reviews to me...WAIT NEVER I WONT BE SUCKED IN!...[sub]thats what he said[/sub]
...what, did you think he only had hoes?
He obviously expanded to print media too!
Fucking entrepreneurial!
 

Asturiel

the God of Pants
Nov 24, 2009
3,940
0
0
Neonbob said:
...what, did you think he only had hoes?
He obviously expanded to print media too!
Fucking entrepreneurial!
True, ill give him Asturiel Tokens, useful when I take over with my pants army.
 

Neonbob

The Noble Nuker
Dec 22, 2008
25,564
0
0
Pimppeter2 said:
*Laughs his ass off at Neon and Asturiel*

I love you guys.
I love you too, Pimp.
:-D
*hands ass back*
You'll need this, though.
Asturiel said:
Neonbob said:
...what, did you think he only had hoes?
He obviously expanded to print media too!
Fucking entrepreneurial!
True, ill give him Asturiel Tokens, useful when I take over with my pants army.
Pants...Army?
NEVER! I will oppose you with flamethrowers and many nuclear grenades!
*bloodthirsty roar*

...I think I need to lie down.
X-D
 

Asturiel

the God of Pants
Nov 24, 2009
3,940
0
0
Pimppeter2 said:
*Laughs his ass off at Neon and Asturiel*

I love you guys.
No homo? Or homo? I just need to clarify.

Awww what the hell, love you too pimp!
*Hugs*
*Takes hat* HAH LOWERED YOUR GUARD
*RUNS AWAY*
Neonbob said:
Pants...Army?
NEVER! I will oppose you with flamethrowers and many nuclear grenades!
*bloodthirsty roar*

...I think I need to lie down.
X-D
I think you do, just be quiet and let the pants strangle you peacefully!
 

Neonbob

The Noble Nuker
Dec 22, 2008
25,564
0
0
Asturiel said:
Neonbob said:
Pants...Army?
NEVER! I will oppose you with flamethrowers and many nuclear grenades!
*bloodthirsty roar*

...I think I need to lie down.
X-D
I think you do, just be quiet and let the pants strangle you peacefully!
I cannot be strangled! I am protected by bits of razor wire!
hahaaa!
I dare you to try it.
 

LewsTherin

New member
Jun 22, 2008
2,443
0
0
Another brilliant review, old bean. You have been hereby bequeathed with an honorary Holy Avenger +16
 

Asturiel

the God of Pants
Nov 24, 2009
3,940
0
0
Neonbob said:
I cannot be strangled! I am protected by bits of razor wire!
hahaaa!
I dare you to try it.
Oh I dare, I dare like the daredevil who never dared to tempt a dares wifes dreams!
 

Sassafrass

This is a placeholder
Legacy
Apr 6, 2020
51,250
1
3
Country
United Kingdom
Pimppeter2 said:
Also, I saw in another thread that you showed interest in reviewing. I've helped SAS, Onyx, Nuclear Penguin, and others start reviewing. If you Ever want to get a review going, I would be happy to help.
I wondered why my ears were burning a while ago...

Anyways, good review, Pimp. Enjoyable read and no mistakes from what I can see anywhere. Course, that maybe because I'm tired and can't find any but I'm pretty sure it's just that you didn't make any typos.

Looking forward to the Oblivion Vs Dragon Age review more then anything, though.
 

Neonbob

The Noble Nuker
Dec 22, 2008
25,564
0
0
Asturiel said:
Neonbob said:
I cannot be strangled! I am protected by bits of razor wire!
hahaaa!
I dare you to try it.
Oh I dare, I dare like the daredevil who never dared to tempt a dares wifes dreams!
OhhO!
You have some BALLS!
I shall have to remove them with bladed melon ballers!
>:-D
 

Asturiel

the God of Pants
Nov 24, 2009
3,940
0
0
Neonbob said:
OhhO!
You have some BALLS!
I shall have to remove them with bladed melon ballers!
>:-D
You dont have the gallstones!
Sassafrass said:
I wondered why my ears were burning a while ago...
That may have been me, sorry. I got a new flamethrower and you were right there!
 

Heart of Darkness

The final days of His Trolliness
Jul 1, 2009
9,745
0
0
All right, I'm going to leave some comments here. Not in the "Oh, this review is good, bravo!" category, but rather in an area that is more beneficial to you as a reviewer: criticism.

1. Grammar and mechanics: You need to proofread your reviews. You don't make a lot of big mistakes, but rather a lot of little ones, most notably your confusion of "its" and "it's" and just a general use of the apostrophe. There are also run-on sentences scattered throughout (comma usage), several spelling errors, and the ilk. You should probably run your reviews through a word processor first to get rid of some of the more obvious errors, and then proofread once again, post it, proofread again, and edit out any mistakes that slipped past the radar.

2. Use of pictures: This is more of a personal nitpick than anything, but your use of pictures in your review doesn't really jive with me. Rather than use pictures to enhance the content of the review that envelope the picture, you just use them for (perceived) humorous asides that really don't add to the review in the first place. Furthermore, your slight obsession with talking about sex/nudity just in the asides casts a shadow on your credentials as a reviewer, at least to me; are you actually playing the game for the game itself, or merely for the sex and nudity?

3. Pacing: I'm not saying it's a bad thing to divide your review into sections, but it didn't feel like it flowed to me. Some of your transitions between sections feel a tad clunky, and I found that, towards the middle, I wasn't reading, but rather skipping through. Again, this could be a personal nitpick, but it's just not holding my attention.

4. Format: Again, more personal, but italicize the game titles. It makes them easier to identify in the midst of your paragraphs. I'd also suggest to not use the strong emphasis beneath the pictorials, as they distract from the actual content; a weak emphasis will do the job quite nicely, without being too distracting from the actual review.

5. Research: Again, more personal nitpick, but it's in response to something ore specific:
Being loosely based on Greek mythology, that gives the developers of Rise of the Argonauts space to allow to create their own world in an already established setting. The problem however, is that we don't know which is the developers creation, and which was actual mythology. This isn't helped by other than the characters the game seems pretty vague, almost as if its trying to hide away inconsistencies.
I would like something cleared up here. Is this due to your lack of knowledge of Greek mythology, or do the developers actually really screw it up? Either way, it should be easy to distinguish what is myth and what is developer fabrication, even if it means taking a quick jaunt over to Wikipedia. I mean, the story about Jason and the Argonauts does exist. While I don't remember specifics, I'm pretty sure he wasn't after the Golden Fleece to revive his dead bride.

That's my criticism. It's not a bad review by any stretch; it's certainly better than some of the stuff I've seen on here. But there is still plenty of room for improvement.



dmase said:
Good review persuasive yet unbiased.
Really? I felt some bias coming from it, even if it's of the "no actual choice system doesn't constitute an RPG..."

Pimppeter2 said:
Now. you're going to have to excuse me for dancing around the subject. I don't consider JRPGs RPGS, the same way I wouldn't consider Mass Effect 2 and RPG. Now go find the socks that I just blew off. I consider JRPGs a genre of their own.
...which can be seen here. While I respect his opinion, I feel it's a tad narrow-minded, and that Rise of the Argonauts suffered a bit due to it. I can explain this in more detail if asked, but for now, I'm going to truncate this overly long post.
 

dmase

New member
Mar 12, 2009
2,117
0
0
Heart of Darkness said:
dmase said:
Good review persuasive yet unbiased.
Really? I felt some bias coming from it, even if it's of the "no actual choice system doesn't constitute an RPG..."
Possibly because i have a similar bias, i don't consider games rpg's if they don't have serious number stat crunching gaining manipulating on the side.

That specific post wasn't in the review and for the specific part where he said the moral choices weren't that prevalent, he said a similar thing about Dragon Age saying they where less cut and dry(paraphrased). I didn't sense any obvious bias and i don't bother looking any deeper because i'll end up re-reading something several times to get the tone.
 

Heart of Darkness

The final days of His Trolliness
Jul 1, 2009
9,745
0
0
dmase said:
Heart of Darkness said:
dmase said:
Good review persuasive yet unbiased.
Really? I felt some bias coming from it, even if it's of the "no actual choice system doesn't constitute an RPG..."
Possibly because i have a similar bias, i don't consider games rpg's if they don't have serious number stat crunching gaining manipulating on the side.

That specific post wasn't in the review and for the specific part where he said the moral choices weren't that prevalent, he said a similar thing about Dragon Age saying they where less cut and dry(paraphrased). I didn't sense any obvious bias and i don't bother looking any deeper because i'll end up re-reading something several times to get the tone.
The specific post wasn't in the review, yes, but not all reviewers make their bias known in their works. I tend to look at one's works as a whole, rather than as exclusive instances. Looking at the whole picture rather than the individual shapes.

And it could also come from my bias towards what I consider an RPG, which is a tad...complicated. For one, I see two different types of RPG: one that focuses on the literal semantic definition, and one that is a specific genre. If I wanted to explain this simply: Tetris is not an RPG, The Legend of Zelda is an RPG in the semantic sense (as you are playing a role), and games like Dragon Age: Origins and Final Fantasy IV are both RPGs in the genre sense. I don't divide genre RPGs into the useless WRPG and JRPG categories, but they are subcategorized in my personal definition to things that are more descriptive.

I also don't feel that stat crunching needs to be applied in overexcessive doses. A problem I have with some genre RPGs is the use of seventeen different stats, of which several are useful, and a majority of them don't really seem to have a purpose. Having things like CON and STA is nice, but it feels redundant to me and not really needed.

Furthermore (more directed toward Peter's post, not yours), I don't agree with the notion that 'JRPGs' =/= RPGs. I mean, technically, actors roleplay, and they roleplay as rather static characters. Just because protagonists in 'JRPGs' are static doesn't make it a less viable roleplay option; failure to immerse yourself in a static character may not be the fault of the game, but rather the fault of the player. That, and moral choice systems aren't always needed in RPGs.

...

I need to stop typing long posts in this section.
 

Pimppeter2

New member
Dec 31, 2008
16,479
0
0
Heart of Darkness said:
I need to stop typing long posts in this section.
Please don't!

If it wasn't so late I would make a very long post here.

But I think your misinterpreting my point with JRPGs. Which is completely my fault because like I said, I was dancing around the subject because after the review (and an article in the Games Section) I was too tired to fully explain myself. I'll get back to you tomorrow to kind of reexplain my position.

As for the criticism. I can't tell you how much I appreciate it. I'll tackle on that tomorrow as well. I'm just posting this now so you know that your comments are vary valuable to me; and to thank you for taking the time.
 

Heart of Darkness

The final days of His Trolliness
Jul 1, 2009
9,745
0
0
Pimppeter2 said:
Heart of Darkness said:
I need to stop typing long posts in this section.
Please don't!

If it wasn't so late I would make a very long post here.

But I think your misinterpreting my point with JRPGs. Which is completely my fault because like I said, I was dancing around the subject because after the review (and an article in the Games Section) I was too tired to fully explain myself. I'll get back to you tomorrow to kind of reexplain my position.

As for the criticism. I can't tell you how much I appreciate it. I'll tackle on that tomorrow as well. I'm just posting this now so you know that your comments are vary valuable to me; and to thank you for taking the time.
Haha, how about I stop when my long posts start diminishing in value? I have a bad habit of using too many meaningless adverbs and descriptors to describe my points, and a really bad habit of making needlessly complex sentences. So much so that I fear I'm going to lose my point amidst the text.

And I feel you (in a metaphorical sense). It's late here, too, so I might be misinterpreting what you said. Fatigue after being in classes from 7:30am to 7:30pm. And not getting enough sleep during the week...

And no problem on the criticism. I kinda suck at giving praise, because I hate just how shallow praise can sound at times (it's also the worst thing you can give to an artist or a writer, even trumping the generic "It sucks" as the most useless comment). And I shall look forward to hearing your thought about the comments.
 

pwnzerstick

New member
Mar 25, 2009
592
0
0
It is insulting to see Dragon Age: Origins compared to somthing as mediocore as Rise of the Argonauts.
 

BlueInkAlchemist

Ridiculously Awesome
Jun 4, 2008
2,231
0
0
Very well balanced and well written Vs review. I bow to your superior skills.

I also think the lack of a 'tits or GTFO' option is inexcusable.
 

Pimppeter2

New member
Dec 31, 2008
16,479
0
0
Heart of Darkness said:
All right, I'm going to leave some comments here. Not in the "Oh, this review is good, bravo!" category, but rather in an area that is more beneficial to you as a reviewer: criticism.
And now to dive into some criticism.

Heart of Darkness said:
1. Grammar and mechanics: You need to proofread your reviews. You don't make a lot of big mistakes, but rather a lot of little ones, most notably your confusion of "its" and "it's" and just a general use of the apostrophe. There are also run-on sentences scattered throughout (comma usage), several spelling errors, and the ilk. You should probably run your reviews through a word processor first to get rid of some of the more obvious errors, and then proofread once again, post it, proofread again, and edit out any mistakes that slipped past the radar.

Now I'm not trying to excuse myself here, but I try to get out my reviews on a weekly basis. So yes, polish doesn't get the attention it deserves. I do try and go over my review enough times even after it is out to clear some things up. Editing isn't one of my strongest suits, but I'm trying.

Heart of Darkness said:
2. Use of pictures: This is more of a personal nitpick than anything, but your use of pictures in your review doesn't really jive with me. Rather than use pictures to enhance the content of the review that envelope the picture, you just use them for (perceived) humorous asides that really don't add to the review in the first place. Furthermore, your slight obsession with talking about sex/nudity just in the asides casts a shadow on your credentials as a reviewer, at least to me; are you actually playing the game for the game itself, or merely for the sex and nudity?

Heh, this is a critism that I've heard before from people like [user]joethekeller[/user]. What I like to think is that I try to merge the sections of casual readers and other reviewer readers into my reviews. I try to break up my reviews in a way that leaves my casual reader less daunted. For a site like Game Critics which focuses heavily on the review aspect rather than entertainment value, I leave them out completely.

Heart of Darkness said:
3. Pacing: I'm not saying it's a bad thing to divide your review into sections, but it didn't feel like it flowed to me. Some of your transitions between sections feel a tad clunky, and I found that, towards the middle, I wasn't reading, but rather skipping through. Again, this could be a personal nitpick, but it's just not holding my attention.

That's a problem I really have with the VS reviews. The Vs review is much more structured. Usually, I despise breaking up reviews into segments. In my single game reviews, I would never do this. However, the VS reviews have not been perfected. I'm working on a style and method of doing them that doesn't involve breaking them. But for now, this works easiest and is most pleasing to the reader. I'm working on it though.


Heart of Darkness said:
4. Format: Again, more personal, but italicize the game titles. It makes them easier to identify in the midst of your paragraphs. I'd also suggest to not use the strong emphasis beneath the pictorials, as they distract from the actual content; a weak emphasis will do the job quite nicely, without being too distracting from the actual review.

Hmmm... To be truthful, I didn't italicize them because they had to come up so often. But I will. As for the captions part, I think I will do that from now on.

Heart of Darkness said:
5. Research: Again, more personal nitpick, but it's in response to something ore specific:
Being loosely based on Greek mythology, that gives the developers of Rise of the Argonauts space to allow to create their own world in an already established setting. The problem however, is that we don't know which is the developers creation, and which was actual mythology. This isn't helped by other than the characters the game seems pretty vague, almost as if its trying to hide away inconsistencies.
I would like something cleared up here. Is this due to your lack of knowledge of Greek mythology, or do the developers actually really screw it up? Either way, it should be easy to distinguish what is myth and what is developer fabrication, even if it means taking a quick jaunt over to Wikipedia. I mean, the story about Jason and the Argonauts does exist. While I don't remember specifics, I'm pretty sure he wasn't after the Golden Fleece to revive his dead bride

This is something I new would come up, this section was originally longer, but I snipped it due to the story part being twice the length of the other parts. The thing is that the developers keep the main picture of Greek Mythology, but fuck up the details. The most obvious case is with the character Atalanta. In Greek mythology, she was cast into the wild by her father who wanted a son and grew up there. Then she held races to find her suitor and some guy used the golden apples to make her stop while running to pick them up then Zues turned them into lions for being to prideful. (Yea I'm paraphrasing). But in the game her parents died on an island and she is raised my centaurs. And while this case seems trivial, its little things like this that obscure the entire picture.




Heart of Darkness said:
That's my criticism. It's not a bad review by any stretch; it's certainly better than some of the stuff I've seen on here. But there is still plenty of room for improvement.
Again, thanks for taking the time.
 

Heart of Darkness

The final days of His Trolliness
Jul 1, 2009
9,745
0
0
And now for the rebuttal!

Pimppeter2 said:
Heart of Darkness said:
All right, I'm going to leave some comments here. Not in the "Oh, this review is good, bravo!" category, but rather in an area that is more beneficial to you as a reviewer: criticism.
And now to dive into some criticism.

Heart of Darkness said:
1. Grammar and mechanics: You need to proofread your reviews. You don't make a lot of big mistakes, but rather a lot of little ones, most notably your confusion of "its" and "it's" and just a general use of the apostrophe. There are also run-on sentences scattered throughout (comma usage), several spelling errors, and the ilk. You should probably run your reviews through a word processor first to get rid of some of the more obvious errors, and then proofread once again, post it, proofread again, and edit out any mistakes that slipped past the radar.

Now I'm not trying to excuse myself here, but I try to get out my reviews on a weekly basis. So yes, polish doesn't get the attention it deserves. I do try and go over my review enough times even after it is out to clear some things up. Editing isn't one of my strongest suits, but I'm trying.
As I said, typing these up in a word processor, or at least running them through one before you post, will help to eliminate a lot of those errors. A few mistakes aren't bad, but when you miss tiny details like commas and apostrophes frequently, it adds up, and these omissions detract from the quality as a whole.

Heart of Darkness said:
2. Use of pictures: This is more of a personal nitpick than anything, but your use of pictures in your review doesn't really jive with me. Rather than use pictures to enhance the content of the review that envelope the picture, you just use them for (perceived) humorous asides that really don't add to the review in the first place. Furthermore, your slight obsession with talking about sex/nudity just in the asides casts a shadow on your credentials as a reviewer, at least to me; are you actually playing the game for the game itself, or merely for the sex and nudity?

Heh, this is a critism that I've heard before from people like [user]joethekeller[/user]. What I like to think is that I try to merge the sections of casual readers and other reviewer readers into my reviews. I try to break up my reviews in a way that leaves my casual reader less daunted. For a site like Game Critics which focuses heavily on the review aspect rather than entertainment value, I leave them out completely.
Er, I think you might have missed my point, or see it from a different angle. I mean, it's great you use the pictures to break it up, but you'll get more use out of the pictures if they at least somewhat relate to the text around them. Comedy is a good thing as well, but using pictures solely for entertainment value, again, detracts from the review as a whole. If you can, make the humor relative to the text or game, as well--using phrases like "tits or GTFO" detract from your credibility.

Also, don't refer to people as "casual" readers. Chances are, people will read your reviews in order to get information on the game, whether they've played it or not. Using pictures and captions smartly will also allow you to offer more to your readers, regardless of their reasons for reading.

Heart of Darkness said:
3. Pacing: I'm not saying it's a bad thing to divide your review into sections, but it didn't feel like it flowed to me. Some of your transitions between sections feel a tad clunky, and I found that, towards the middle, I wasn't reading, but rather skipping through. Again, this could be a personal nitpick, but it's just not holding my attention.

That's a problem I really have with the VS reviews. The Vs review is much more structured. Usually, I despise breaking up reviews into segments. In my single game reviews, I would never do this. However, the VS reviews have not been perfected. I'm working on a style and method of doing them that doesn't involve breaking them. But for now, this works easiest and is most pleasing to the reader. I'm working on it though.
Okay, then I can see why this happens. I do have a suggestion, though: just write your versus reviews in the same style as your single reviews, just with slight differences in paragraph structure. For instance, you could try doing this:

"P1: Intro
P2: Game 1's battle system
P3: Game 2's battle system as it compares to Game 1"

...or even just add it on to the end of the paragraph, comparing each aspect of each game to the other game's equivalent counterpart. Unique elements can still be talked about separately, and it still allows you to use more fluid transitions without resorting to the artificial segment headings. Just a thought, though.

Heart of Darkness said:
4. Format: Again, more personal, but italicize the game titles. It makes them easier to identify in the midst of your paragraphs. I'd also suggest to not use the strong emphasis beneath the pictorials, as they distract from the actual content; a weak emphasis will do the job quite nicely, without being too distracting from the actual review.

Hmmm... To be truthful, I didn't italicize them because they had to come up so often. But I will. As for the captions part, I think I will do that from now on.
Italicizing them helps your review to achieve higher levels of professionalism, so it's always a smart thing to do. Same with the captions; the more distracting they are, the less professional (unless, of course, that's your intention).

Heart of Darkness said:
5. Research: Again, more personal nitpick, but it's in response to something ore specific:
Being loosely based on Greek mythology, that gives the developers of Rise of the Argonauts space to allow to create their own world in an already established setting. The problem however, is that we don't know which is the developers creation, and which was actual mythology. This isn't helped by other than the characters the game seems pretty vague, almost as if its trying to hide away inconsistencies.
I would like something cleared up here. Is this due to your lack of knowledge of Greek mythology, or do the developers actually really screw it up? Either way, it should be easy to distinguish what is myth and what is developer fabrication, even if it means taking a quick jaunt over to Wikipedia. I mean, the story about Jason and the Argonauts does exist. While I don't remember specifics, I'm pretty sure he wasn't after the Golden Fleece to revive his dead bride

This is something I new would come up, this section was originally longer, but I snipped it due to the story part being twice the length of the other parts. The thing is that the developers keep the main picture of Greek Mythology, but fuck up the details. The most obvious case is with the character Atalanta. In Greek mythology, she was cast into the wild by her father who wanted a son and grew up there. Then she held races to find her suitor and some guy used the golden apples to make her stop while running to pick them up then Zues turned them into lions for being to prideful. (Yea I'm paraphrasing). But in the game her parents died on an island and she is raised my centaurs. And while this case seems trivial, its little things like this that obscure the entire picture.
Alright, then. I can see why this would be a bad thing to someone not familiar with Greek mythology, but to those who are familiar with it should still be able to see what the developers took poetic license with. In any case, though, I think that paragraph in the actual review could still use some clarification.

Heart of Darkness said:
That's my criticism. It's not a bad review by any stretch; it's certainly better than some of the stuff I've seen on here. But there is still plenty of room for improvement.
Again, thanks for taking the time.
No problem.
 

Pimppeter2

New member
Dec 31, 2008
16,479
0
0
Heart of Darkness said:
dmase said:
Heart of Darkness said:
dmase said:
Good review persuasive yet unbiased.
Really? I felt some bias coming from it, even if it's of the "no actual choice system doesn't constitute an RPG..."
Possibly because i have a similar bias, i don't consider games rpg's if they don't have serious number stat crunching gaining manipulating on the side.

That specific post wasn't in the review and for the specific part where he said the moral choices weren't that prevalent, he said a similar thing about Dragon Age saying they where less cut and dry(paraphrased). I didn't sense any obvious bias and i don't bother looking any deeper because i'll end up re-reading something several times to get the tone.
The specific post wasn't in the review, yes, but not all reviewers make their bias known in their works. I tend to look at one's works as a whole, rather than as exclusive instances. Looking at the whole picture rather than the individual shapes.

And it could also come from my bias towards what I consider an RPG, which is a tad...complicated. For one, I see two different types of RPG: one that focuses on the literal semantic definition, and one that is a specific genre. If I wanted to explain this simply: Tetris is not an RPG, The Legend of Zelda is an RPG in the semantic sense (as you are playing a role), and games like Dragon Age: Origins and Final Fantasy IV are both RPGs in the genre sense. I don't divide genre RPGs into the useless WRPG and JRPG categories, but they are subcategorized in my personal definition to things that are more descriptive.

I also don't feel that stat crunching needs to be applied in overexcessive doses. A problem I have with some genre RPGs is the use of seventeen different stats, of which several are useful, and a majority of them don't really seem to have a purpose. Having things like CON and STA is nice, but it feels redundant to me and not really needed.

Furthermore (more directed toward Peter's post, not yours), I don't agree with the notion that 'JRPGs' =/= RPGs. I mean, technically, actors roleplay, and they roleplay as rather static characters. Just because protagonists in 'JRPGs' are static doesn't make it a less viable roleplay option; failure to immerse yourself in a static character may not be the fault of the game, but rather the fault of the player. That, and moral choice systems aren't always needed in RPGs.

...

I need to stop typing long posts in this section.

I too divide RPGs into similar segments.

I wouldn't consider Mass Effect 2i to be an RPG in the vein of the genre, as say Dragon Age whichis a pretty much the definition of an RPG. I lump things like JRPGS, Mass Effect 2, and even games like Infamous and The Legend of Zelda into a category that is semi-separate from RPG territory. I think the main problem is that they're lumping these genre breaking games into places they don't fit.Mass Effect 2 was indeed a great game (IMO), but it was not the RPG experience of the year, and I think that effected some peoples opinion of the game.

There's nothing wrong with a static character to roleplay as. But my problem with Rise of the Argonauts is that Jason is neither of these things. He's not a blank slate, because the game doesn't offer any options to mold him into either side. I think that the game would have been the type to benefit from a morality bar. Jason also isn't a set character because the game simply doesn't devolve into character development enough. There's this part were you venture into the homeland of your wife, which really shows some of Jason's emotions and motivation, however the other parts of the game (85% of it) don't share the same theme. Simply, the game offered choices but they neither effected Jason nor did they make sense with the character they tried to make Jason to be. If he had been a fully fleshed out character, it would have been much easier to sympathize with him.



Therumancer said:
Well, as I see things Dragon Age: Origins is actually an RPG, Rise Of The Argonauts isn't an RPG at all but claims to be one as an attempt to draw people in.

What makes an RPG is the idea that the stats are what determines the outcome of events, rather than your reflexs and actions as a player. Storyline and such have absolutly nothing to do with it. This is why say Nethack is an RPG, but Adventure games which are nothing but story are not.

It doesn't matter if you call a life bar "hit points", including upgradable weapons, or whatever else. If you hitting the buttons and fighting properly is the primarly influance then it's not an RPG. In Dragon Age, it was real RPG combat for the most part, which is unsatisfying for most people who are dedicated to action games and want that kind of a thrill. It was driven by stats, numbers, and invisible random die rolls. You had less outcome over what was going to happen than how you developed the numbers. Your "build" being more important than how fast you could click or manipulate a controller. The flashy graphics and deathblows involved were just icing on the cake when they existed.


The whole "Action RPG" label has been used as a cop out by designers who want to try and create action games with some customization options and hope they can both make action gamers feel "smarter" by saying it's an RPG, and rope in some of the RPG crowd as well.

An actual "Action RPG" is still stat based and has little to do with the abillity of the player. The "click fest" Diablo "Action RPGs" are an example because the outcome is determined by stats and numbers, you don't do much except click, however you do move in
real time. Real "action gamers" of course don't care for this because really there isn't anything they do that determines the outcome for the most part. It's all about managing resources, picking the right gear, and a good set of skills that compliment each other.

RPGS do not appeal to everyone, and less people than action games do. It's been this way for a long time (since gaming has become more mainstream).

Right now I feel that the RPG label is mis-used. Comparing Rise Of The Argonauts to say Dragon Age is sort of like trying to compare "Double Dragon" to the SSI Gold Box AD&D games back in the day. Even if someone decided to say that Double Dragon was an "RPG" due to the fact that both it and Dungeons and Dragons had the word "Dragon" in the title it would be the same as this comparison from where I'm sitting.

Sorry Pimpeteer, but I have to say I don't think this is one of your better comparisons because I at least feel that the games are differant enough to defy any real comparison.

I see where you're coming from, but what bothered me with Rise of the Argonauts is that it was dead set with trying to label itself under the same title as games like Dragon Age pre and post release.

Had it been like say Bioshock, it would have changed my opinion on the game completely. (Mind, it wouldn't have made it much better, but still). The game sold itself like the RPG that was "hip" and it suffered from that.

There's nothing wrong with an Action Adventure with upgradeable elements and dialogue choices, but once it tries selling itself as the RPG experience then it pits itself against games like DA:O and Oblivion.
 

Heart of Darkness

The final days of His Trolliness
Jul 1, 2009
9,745
0
0
Pimppeter2 said:
I too divide RPGs into similar segments.

I wouldn't consider Mass Effect 2i to be an RPG in the vein of the genre, as say Dragon Age whichis a pretty much the definition of an RPG. I lump things like JRPGS, Mass Effect 2, and even games like Infamous and The Legend of Zelda into a category that is semi-separate from RPG territory. I think the main problem is that they're lumping these genre breaking games into places they don't fit.Mass Effect 2 was indeed a great game (IMO), but it was not the RPG experience of the year, and I think that effected some peoples opinion of the game.

There's nothing wrong with a static character to roleplay as. But my problem with Rise of the Argonauts is that Jason is neither of these things. He's not a blank slate, because the game doesn't offer any options to mold him into either side. I think that the game would have been the type to benefit from a morality bar. Jason also isn't a set character because the game simply doesn't devolve into character development enough. There's this part were you venture into the homeland of your wife, which really shows some of Jason's emotions and motivation, however the other parts of the game (85% of it) don't share the same theme. Simply, the game offered choices but they neither effected Jason nor did they make sense with the character they tried to make Jason to be. If he had been a fully fleshed out character, it would have been much easier to sympathize with him.
First off, take nothing of this as confrontational. I'm not trying to be that, but rather trying to engage in a conversation. Admittedly not the best place for it, but eh. I've derailed threads worse in the past.

You do need to clarify what "similar" segments mean, as I only gave my categories, not my subcategories of RPGs; namely, action, turn-based, pen-and-paper, tactical, and sandbox/open-world. Mass Effect seems like something that would fall into action RPG territory (but I haven't played the games in the franchise, so I can't say for certain). It's still technically an RPG, but maybe not in the same vein as Dragon Age: Origins or something like The Elder Scrolls franchise. Doesn't mean it's not an RPG, but rather that it takes the RPG perspective from a different angle.

And while I can see why you have problems with Rise of the Argonauts in terms of the main character, it seems like you dismiss the game from the RPG category for two petty reasons: lack of loot and lack of a morality system. Lack of loot isn't necessarily a bad thing, but is instead more realistic; why can you only harvest venom from certain specimens of poisonous spiders and and not others, and why is this dire wolf dropping gold and lockpicks? And while I can see why you have issues with RotA's morality system (with an implemented base but lack of influence on either character or story), it doesn't necessarily make it any less of an RPG; sometimes, perceived growth is enough to role-play.*

There's also the fact that not every game needs a morality system, and that morality systems are simply much, much too complex to actually work in anything other than pen-and-paper RPGs (Dragon Age: Origins circumvents the problem rather than solves it from what I've played of it, so meh). And, as an aside, I wouldn't go so far at to say that Dragon Age: Origins as the singular definition, just a high example, right down to the cliches.

[sub]*Either way, your opinions on why Rise of the Argonauts isn't an RPG actually creates a retroactive contradiction with one of your previous reviews. It's not important to the overall conversation, but it'd be nice if you can clear a few things up for me.[/sub]
 

Pimppeter2

New member
Dec 31, 2008
16,479
0
0
Heart of Darkness said:
Pimppeter2 said:
I too divide RPGs into similar segments.

I wouldn't consider Mass Effect 2i to be an RPG in the vein of the genre, as say Dragon Age whichis a pretty much the definition of an RPG. I lump things like JRPGS, Mass Effect 2, and even games like Infamous and The Legend of Zelda into a category that is semi-separate from RPG territory. I think the main problem is that they're lumping these genre breaking games into places they don't fit.Mass Effect 2 was indeed a great game (IMO), but it was not the RPG experience of the year, and I think that effected some peoples opinion of the game.

There's nothing wrong with a static character to roleplay as. But my problem with Rise of the Argonauts is that Jason is neither of these things. He's not a blank slate, because the game doesn't offer any options to mold him into either side. I think that the game would have been the type to benefit from a morality bar. Jason also isn't a set character because the game simply doesn't devolve into character development enough. There's this part were you venture into the homeland of your wife, which really shows some of Jason's emotions and motivation, however the other parts of the game (85% of it) don't share the same theme. Simply, the game offered choices but they neither effected Jason nor did they make sense with the character they tried to make Jason to be. If he had been a fully fleshed out character, it would have been much easier to sympathize with him.
First off, take nothing of this as confrontational. I'm not trying to be that, but rather trying to engage in a conversation. Admittedly not the best place for it, but eh. I've derailed threads worse in the past.

You do need to clarify what "similar" segments mean, as I only gave my categories, not my subcategories of RPGs; namely, action, turn-based, pen-and-paper, tactical, and sandbox/open-world. Mass Effect seems like something that would fall into action RPG territory (but I haven't played the games in the franchise, so I can't say for certain). It's still technically an RPG, but maybe not in the same vein as Dragon Age: Origins or something like The Elder Scrolls franchise. Doesn't mean it's not an RPG, but rather that it takes the RPG perspective from a different angle.

And while I can see why you have problems with Rise of the Argonauts in terms of the main character, it seems like you dismiss the game from the RPG category for two petty reasons: lack of loot and lack of a morality system. Lack of loot isn't necessarily a bad thing, but is instead more realistic; why can you only harvest venom from certain specimens of poisonous spiders and and not others, and why is this dire wolf dropping gold and lockpicks? And while I can see why you have issues with RotA's morality system (with an implemented base but lack of influence on either character or story), it doesn't necessarily make it any less of an RPG; sometimes, perceived growth is enough to role-play.*

There's also the fact that not every game needs a morality system, and that morality systems are simply much, much too complex to actually work in anything other than pen-and-paper RPGs (Dragon Age: Origins circumvents the problem rather than solves it from what I've played of it, so meh). And, as an aside, I wouldn't go so far at to say that Dragon Age: Origins as the singular definition, just a high example, right down to the cliches.

[sub]*Either way, your opinions on why Rise of the Argonauts isn't an RPG actually creates a retroactive contradiction with one of your previous reviews. It's not important to the overall conversation, but it'd be nice if you can clear a few things up for me.[/sub]

I think my problem with Rise of the Argonauts is the hype that I mentioned in the review. Like I said, there's nothing wrong with what Action RPGs do, but rather how RotA tries to paint itself as something akin to Dragon Age

When I mentioned loot and moral choice, its becuase those are things that allow customization. The game neither lets me roleplay as my own Jason, nor as a set character. Jason lacks any depth or value as a character as to be able to role play in his shoes. At the same time the game tries to make a customizable Jason, one that reflects me. But without loot and stuff like that, I can't have my own Jason. He's talented in each weapon just as the other, there's only like 4 armors in total, and even if I go with an Ares-like Jason, it doesn't effect the way the story progresses or the way my character acts.

I think the review you're refering to is Cleril's Haven; and I see where you're coming from. Howerver Haven doesn't paint itself as a game like Dragon Age, unlike RotA. My biggest problem with the game is that it tries to please everyone. The game could have worked as an Action RPG with cutscenes, or as an RPG like Dragon Age with a fully customizable player character.

Sorry if I'm not making much sense, if in a Study hall writing this, if I'm being unclear just tell me about it and I'll rephrase.
 

Heart of Darkness

The final days of His Trolliness
Jul 1, 2009
9,745
0
0
Pimppeter2 said:
(>^O^)> ==> (>^x^)>
Kirby eats your posts!
Bah, your spoiler-ing of my posts prevents the quote message from appearing in my inbox. Bah.

I can see where you're coming from with this, too. Seems like whatever morality system was used in RotA was abandoned part-way through, and it's coding was never fully removed. Or maybe the developers ran out of time for it; I dunno. But yeah, from the way you describe it, it sounds like a pretty terrible RPG in those terms. Well, maybe not completely terrible, but meh. I need to review your review, and I'm not entirely on-board with doing that before my Art History class.

And that doesn't really explain why the contradiction arose in the first place, but at least you know what I'm talking about. I just find it weird that you praised that game for the same reason why you slam RotA, especially considering I thought Haven wanted to be a non-combat RPG with a moral choice system.

As for the please everyone comment, you're talking about RotA, correct? Took me a while to figure out you moved onto a new point.

ASIDE: Also, I'm not gonna post again until I post my Mother 3 review. I thought I'd have more time for this, but apparently not. Guess I know what I'm doing in my Digital Media class tonight...
 

Pimppeter2

New member
Dec 31, 2008
16,479
0
0
Heart of Darkness said:
I laughed so hard at the Kirby thing
Bah I've intertwined like 3 topics and am confusing the hell out of myself.

Anyways, thanks for taking the time. Can't wait to read your review.
 

Heart of Darkness

The final days of His Trolliness
Jul 1, 2009
9,745
0
0
Pimppeter2 said:
Heart of Darkness said:
I laughed so hard at the Kirby thing
Bah I've intertwined like 3 topics and am confusing the hell out of myself.

Anyways, thanks for taking the time. Can't wait to read your review.
Heh. Happens to all of us.

And again, no problem. My review's up now, so I'm no longer forcing myself to not post. Woo! Freedom!
 

LWS666

[Speech: 100]
Nov 5, 2009
1,030
0
0
do the DA:O DLC next plz. i want to know weather or not to spend my precious, precious money.
 

Pimppeter2

New member
Dec 31, 2008
16,479
0
0
LWS666 said:
do the DA:O DLC next plz. i want to know weather or not to spend my precious, precious money.
It'll be out later today. Promise.

joethekoeller said:
I said that? Wait I remember. I believe I called the image use excessive. Well that was just my personal philosphy on image use shining through, I don't really believe it to be any more valid than yours. And I'm not one to complain but you misspelled my name. No hard feelings it's a nightmare to the english-speaking demographic.
I'm going to be trying a format reboot soon with a different more proffessional approach on a new type of review series. Also, in my defense I was typing on my schools minilaptops, and they make me RAGGEEE. I always read it as "keller" don't know why, I think I may have confused it with 'killer' for a while. What does "koeller" stand for anyways? A last name, or some culture refrence I'm not getting?

Also, Review Wars scores gou up tonight!

Anyway, thanks for the comments guys.
 

Drake the Dragonheart

The All-American Dragon.
Aug 14, 2008
4,607
0
0
That was long, very long! Unfortunately I am currently crunched for time, so I will give this review the full attention it deserves when I have more time, and at such this post will be edited with a proper opinion.

Ok now that I have had the chance to actually read this, I thought it was very well detailed.
As for how to make future reviews better, Heart of Darkness pretty much said anything I might say and I really doubt I could say it any better than he did.

It is funny but the conversation between Pimppeter and Heart of Darkness concerning the Jason's supporting caste reminded me of an off-kilter game I had long ago for my Sega Saturn, Herc's Adventures, in which you played as either Jason, Hercules, or Atlanta.
Keep on Pimpin, the Dragon approves!
 

sms_117b

Keeper of Brannigan's Law
Oct 4, 2007
2,880
0
0
I wish your reviews were on the front page, means I'd know when they came around rather than being lucky in the recently posted feed.

Enjoyed reading through the whole comparison, as per usual. I look forward to reading whatever you release next.

PS. If the NCIS in your upcoming section is the TV show with Gibbs on TV, please do that next.
 

IanBrazen

New member
Oct 17, 2008
726
0
0
Great review as always pimp. could dragon age become your new elder scrolls?

I love dragon age in every single way...except for the combat, the combat to me is almost too simple and almost reminds me of turn baised combat without the turns.

RotA seemed really interesting at first, but it got mediocre reviews so I passed it up, I think Ill try it out though.
Pimppeter2 said:
I still argue Oblivion still has the best companions
When did I miss that companion?
I just got some damn Ork who wanted to be a knight.