Two Worlds

[Vindekarr]

thank you maigrets for the reply. and jim for backing me up. this really does sound like it had the potential a good game, and I admit the potential really was there when I played it, it was just that the code was so utterly broken that none of that potential could ever be realised, I will probably dig the original out in a few weeks and test it with the patches, may just maybe it will be worth the wasted time and frustration of the posters of this forum? until then my opinion stands though, the console version I played was a bad game, it isnt ingorance or stupidity to think that a game is bad when it has a framerate slower than continental drift shoddy animation, and glitchy combat.especialy since the developers seemingly could do or did do nothing to repair them. no, ignorance would be like saying, I dont like it, it didnt have dual wielding and factional choice, I HATES IT! and immature stupidity would be saying, but it isnt like oblivion, thats bad, I hate this game, waaaa! those would also imply thinking a game to be a bad game simply because it isnt what they wanted it to be. my point is that when I played it on the machine I played it on, it was indeed a bad game on a core technical level, a rushed prebeta with more bugs than is acceptable.

[Vagrant0]

Please stop making posts which break down and tear apart everything which someone has said. Even when you might be right, it only ends up making the response needlessly long and gives the impression that you're just some jackass who wants to show off their superior organization skills. I might expect this in a debate thread, but here, it's just totally unnecessary. You're talking about not only a video game, but one which hasn't yet been released for christ's sake. Seriously...

[Maigrets]

Vagrant0,

I apologize for my part if it's been taken out of context. Except to say the subject is Two Worlds, a game that was released in 2007, not a future release. I made comparisons to it and other games of it's type, including future releases of all those games which I believe is valid.

 

Edited for clarity and not to be argumentative.

[JimboUK]

thank you maigrets for the reply. and jim for backing me up. this really does sound like it had the potential a good game, and I admit the potential really was there when I played it, it was just that the code was so utterly broken that none of that potential could ever be realised, I will probably dig the original out in a few weeks and test it with the patches, may just maybe it will be worth the wasted time and frustration of the posters of this forum? until then my opinion stands though, the console version I played was a bad game, it isnt ingorance or stupidity to think that a game is bad when it has a framerate slower than continental drift shoddy animation, and glitchy combat.especialy since the developers seemingly could do or did do nothing to repair them. no, ignorance would be like saying, I dont like it, it didnt have dual wielding and factional choice, I HATES IT! and immature stupidity would be saying, but it isnt like oblivion, thats bad, I hate this game, waaaa! those would also imply thinking a game to be a bad game simply because it isnt what they wanted it to be. my point is that when I played it on the machine I played it on, it was indeed a bad game on a core technical level, a rushed prebeta with more bugs than is acceptable.

 

I agree there certainly was potential there for a very good game and if they've fixed it then it'll be well worth trying again, I may be able to look on it with fresh eyes as it's been such a long time since I played it.

 

Edit: http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/108/1083753p1.html

[Maigrets]

I've been playing Two Worlds for three nights straight (6-7 hours each) with no crashes or other hitches and I'm now actually stronger than the local fauna and bandits. And with perseverance I can beat dungeon dwellers with my trusty summoned rock golem. He's slow but effective. :ohmy:

 

Out of curiosity I decided to check out some reviews and I can see why the XBox 360 version would have been so frustrating as the paragraph below shows. It's on page two of the review. It's hard to believe they are talking about the same game.

Full Gamespot review here which gave the PC version of the game 7.5 and is a good review considering it's the first RPG the devs have made, I think.

http://au.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/twoworlds/review.html

 

Visual and audio quality aren't quite fully realized. The game's artwork looks great due to gorgeous mountain ranges, grassy hills, detailed monster and character textures, and nicely varied city and village architecture, but frame-rate hitches and loading pauses frequently interrupt the action on the 360 version. Quick pauses during combat happen in virtually every scrap with more than a couple of opponents. This doesn't affect the overall playability of battles, but remains awfully annoying nevertheless. Section loads are also frequent, if brief. A little disc icon pops onto the screen every so often while you're wandering through the woods, during which the game pauses for a few seconds. This can be a little irritating, although it's certainly preferable to long loading times. However, sometimes the game pauses without flashing the disc icon, which means that the game has either additional, unadvertised loads or a few bugs. The PC version doesn't have any of these hitching issues. Much of the experience is seamless, with area loads being barely noticeable. Best of all, everything runs smoothly on even a mid-grade, single-core machine with a 6800-class video card. You need to dial the graphics back to 1024x768 to avoid choppy combat, although this is a small price to pay to get a game this big and attractive to run so well.

 

If I were into online gaming I'd give this game a try since they even say it works very well, but I'm not.

 

This is a screen shot of some bandits who I softened up with a ground flame spell, which I can't remember the name of at the moment. It doesn't show here because it's not very grassy, but where there's is brush or grass that fire will blacken everything inside it's diameter until you leave the area and come back later. At least I think it fades as I haven't been back to some areas. Nice detail anyway. When I get level 6 spells I look forward to seeing what they can do.

The starting spells aren't that effective I found, unless you hit and run, but when you get to level 2 spells they help a lot, especially summoned allies.

 

(Clickable thumbnails due to the image size).

 

http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n185/maigrets/th_Bandits.jpg

 

This is me dead after taking on a group of giant insects I should have left alone. Here you can see the blackened grass after the fire spell dissipated.

http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n185/maigrets/th_FlatOutDead.jpg

 

I never really liked 2 handed swords in most RPG's but I find myself favouring them here for their longer reach and power. Combining blades with archery and magic I'm an all rounder and so far it's working.

 

As jim_uk mentioned it is a hack and slash game as far as having lots of enemies, but it's based on Diablo rules which isn't a bad thing, although I've never played either Diablo games. The number and complexity of the quests though will keep me busy for some time.

 

Anyway, it's a fun and immersive huge game even though the dialogue translations are a bit hit and miss at times. The PC speaks which is often enough without being annoying and his voice is the best in the game as far as being expressive in the right places.

He doesn't like rain much or swimming in cold water, but enjoys exploring dungeons. He comments on the type of enemy and whether it will be an easy fight or not. I rarely hear the same lines spoken twice and some are funny in a sarcastic, dry humour kind of way.

 

OH...and there are dragons...lots of them and different kinds. I don't mean the wyverns that are fairly common around some areas, but the gigantic, flying fire breathing type. I've only seen the skeletons of dead dragons so far, but I know they are there since I have a quest to kill one... :blink: And I've seen screen shots.

[JimboUK]

Within five minutes of getting my first horse it got stuck in a rock. :biggrin:

[en4cer]

lol JIm stuck between a rock and a hard ummm horse ?

 

 

Anyways is this game even worth playing ? i have had it for years yet never tried it out .....

 

Tell you what i did find surprisingly good "Drakensang" man that game swept me off my feet.

 

Guys have a go you will love it.

 

There are also fair few mods for it which make it even more enjoyable to play

[BloodRaven666]

The worlds isn't a bad game at all. It has lots of potential and does some things excellent, like combat, which is insanely fun and addicting, pretty graphics, even though cheapish animations, excellent, simple, FUN game which can be challenging but not frustrating. A third person hack & slash game with all light and fun RPG elements, some of it even silly(like, dragging a sword to another same model to increase it's quality :P) but it was so goddamn fun, even the alchemy was fun. Everything about this game was fun.

 

Amazing environments and creature design as well, and every flaw was a possible potential. But money was a limitation.

 

A very fun game which could have been even better, not like Oblivion, but still very very good. They've got higher budget and time now, I have high hopes for the sequel.