Anachronox

[Daemongar]

Is it necessary to have the excellent weapons for every party member before the final mission or it's not that hard?

You should only make sure that all your party members are resistant/immune to status effects.

I was trying to do everything in one run, and it was still impossible for me to upgrade one or two weapons. However, late in the game there are additional methods of taking out enemies other than the primary weapons, so a weak primary isn't a game-breaker.

 

[Sceptic]

And I had Stiletto with me in that sequence people talked about, I've yet to see PAL's and Rho's sequences.

I've not seen PAL's. Rho's is fun but completely unrelated to the plot. Stiletto's fills in a missing link with the dream sequences that allows you to fully understand the whole situation with her, Detta, Sly and Fatima.

 

[Bubbles]

I played PAL's part many many years ago; as far as I remember, it involves him saving a community of diseased hobos by sealing up an abandoned chemical plant spewing hazardous waste. Very Erin Brockovich.

 

[StaticSpine]

Okay, I made it to the final fight, couldn't do it from the first try (everyone except Pal killed their goddamn spheres, but Pal didn't = gameover)

I've got a pre-final battle autosave, but when I load it I can't engage the combat, my party just hangs out on the arena with the final boss. WTF? Anyone got this problem?

 

[StaticSpine]

Shit I could do that from the second try and it was pretty easy.

The ending says

Spoiler

that it was just the beginning...what a cliffhanger

my score for the game

 

[Baron Dupek]

WHAT, cliffhange.... the fu... I don't even.

And why that boss looks like some hobo or Dishonoured NPC?

 

[DraQ]

WHAT, cliffhange.... the fu... I don't even.

IIRC the game was planned to be about 2x as long, but they ran out of funding or something due to unrelated circumstances, so they wrapped up the half they had and released.

Better than scrapping everything.

 

[Baron Dupek]

But from my observation (based on people postsa and quick look on walkthrough) it's seems like game is still long, for modern standards? Like 40 and more hours? Because there is a lot of various locations, so...

 

[DraQ]

modern standards

It's still awesome, though.

 

[StaticSpine]

But from my observation (based on people postsa and quick look on walkthrough) it's seems like game is still long, for modern standards? Like 40 and more hours? Because there is a lot of various locations, so...

I was really lazy about backtracking and finding extra stuff and sidequests, the main storyline took me 22 hours.

Though if the game was x2 long I'd be too much IMO. But a well-polished sequel on the other hand will be nice.

 

[TheGreatOne]

Look, the game came out in 2001. Criticizing the graphics misses the point with this game

Other than that, the game looked impressive back then (doubly so because it used shitty and limited Q2 engine) and has aged unexpectedly well too.
In short: any complaint about Anox's graphics is a clear indication of complainer being a 'tard.

1999: Shenmue
2000: Jet Set Radio
2001: Silent Hill 2, Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3, Final Fantasy X
2002: Resident Evil Remake on Gamecube
Visually Anachronx cant even hold a candle to it's contemporary console games, let alone to what was cutting edge at the time. What it does in its cutscenes with the outdated engine is impressive, but to imply that it was visually impressive at the time is retarded. It does have couple of neat looking areas in it, but all in all the game is visually quite weak as there's tons of running around in boxy, gray/brown corridors. That's the thing about this game, it has funny dialogue, atmosphere, character and well directed cutscenes, but I dont think it's enough to justify all the boring combat and running around in bland looking, ugly environments. Old 3D graphics can look visually appealing and charming, as they do in games such as Thief, Unreal and Quake, so it's not an age thing, the level design in Anachronox just isn't very good (though there are some highlights, like the light fountain or what ever in the starting area)

Anachronox is what Final Fantasy would look like if it was done by Douglas Adams.

Apart from being essentially a PC-exclusive, western JRPG, this game is pure, crystallised awesome. Even the jpgish gameplay doesn't ruin it as it merely adds somewhat specific flavour to the game.

It's worth stating that even though it's often stated that this game is like a Western JRPG or that it's "the best JRPG ever", the gameplay is shit compared to all competent JRPGs. There was a huge missed opportunity in the movement system (they could've implemented alot of tactics using spells and items to create damage/immunity/boost zones etc), most of the time it's just mindless button smashing and even in the end game you're just using a couple of different spells. It wouldn't be so bad if the combat was quick, but it's so god damn slow and clunky because they had to go and make it "cinematic". And the encounter design is so insipid, you get the same pack of trash mobs over and over again and it's every fight the same deal. No wonder there are retards who claim that "turn based doesn't require strategy, you just apply the same tactic over and over again every fight hurrdurr" in the Numenera TB vs RTwP debate (not that it's very likely that those morons have played Anachronox, but this shit's a far cry from the interesting combat of good JRPGs like Nocturne, Devil Survivor, FF Tactics, Disgaea and Dark Souls)

Even the much maligned FF7 is a lot better when it comes to gameplay (encounter design, lot less slow and clunky, more depth) and party customization (the materia system is a lot better than the customizable beetle you get later in the game in Anachronox). Even if you're a complete storyfag, there are still JRPGs that are much better games than Anachronox. Games like Persona 4 and Tactics Ogre have good writing AND gameplay. Even SRPGs by NIS might qualify here as they're even more zany and humorous than Anachronox, though I guess being so Japanese and lul randum, the humor in those games doesn't appeal to many folks here.

 

[DraQ]

(..) What it does in its cutscenes with the outdated engine is impressive, but to imply that it was visually impressive at the time is retarded.

The crux of the problem.

I don't care about "the time it was released".
If the game is good it will be dated during majority of my playthroughs, because I will tend to replay it long after its release.
If the game is bad, playing it at any point is a waste of time, possibly unless you do it drunk and post screenshots on the codex.

A good game doesn't become bad just because some time has passed. This applies to looks as well. It either utilizes the means it uses to a good effect or it does not.
By the same logic does it matter when the game was released if it uses 1997/early 1998 tech and does so impressively. It's a good looking 1998 game even if it was released in 2001.
Anachronox is impressiv by the Q2 tech's standards, therefore it's impressive, period.

 

[TheGreatOne]

A good game doesn't become bad just because some time has passed.

Never claimed so

This applies to looks as well. It either utilizes the means it uses to a good effect or it does not.
By the same logic does it matter when the game was released if it uses 1997/early 1998 tech and does so impressively. It's a good looking 1998 game even if it was released in 2001.
Anachronox is impressiv by the Q2 tech's standards, therefore it's impressive, period.

Video games and tech in general aren't judged that way though. A VIC-20 or Atari 2600 demo made in 2012 is impressive because of what it does with the hardware. Anachronox isn't visually impressive for a game released in 2001, because other games released during the same time period looked much better. Had it been released in 1997, Anachronox would've been an impressive looking game. If the upcoming Thief game used the engine of the original games but improved upon them visually, no one would give a shit about how it "LOOKS SO GOOD FOR A DARK ENGINE GAME", instead they'd bitch about how ugly and pre-historic it looks compared to other PS4/Xbone/PC games (what ever's popular at the moment in the realm of FPS games). That would of course make the actual game much better, but it's visuals what we're talking about here, not gameplay.

 

[Sceptic]

If the upcoming Thief game used the engine of the original games but improved upon them visually, no one would give a shit about how it "LOOKS SO GOOD FOR A DARK ENGINE GAME", instead they'd bitch about how ugly and pre-historic it looks compared to other PS4/Xbone/PC games

I'm sure these are the gamers whose opinions we value oh so highly.

 

[Excidium]

It looks average

 

[TheGreatOne]

I'm sure these are the gamers whose opinions we value oh so highly.

Whether the you or the hivemind values their opinions or not is irrelevant, that wouldn't make the graphics any less outdated.

 

[Nael]

It looks average

So does your face.

 

[Snozgobler]

I watched the video of this not that long after it came out originally when I was at Uni. I never played the game, but what I hazily remember of the story seemed fun, and though I knew in advance that the story wasn't complete, I wasn't expecting the way it ended. Would have been nice to see a continuation of the story, but I'd have waited for a second movie (or read about it on a wiki) rather than play through a sequel anyway...

 

[DraQ]

A good game doesn't become bad just because some time has passed.

Never claimed so

This applies to looks as well. It either utilizes the means it uses to a good effect or it does not.
By the same logic does it matter when the game was released if it uses 1997/early 1998 tech and does so impressively. It's a good looking 1998 game even if it was released in 2001.
Anachronox is impressiv by the Q2 tech's standards, therefore it's impressive, period.

Video games and tech in general aren't judged that way though. A VIC-20 or Atari 2600 demo made in 2012 is impressive because of what it does with the hardware. Anachronox isn't visually impressive for a game released in 2001, because other games released during the same time period looked much better. Had it been released in 1997, Anachronox would've been an impressive looking game. If the upcoming Thief game used the engine of the original games but improved upon them visually, no one would give a shit about how it "LOOKS SO GOOD FOR A DARK ENGINE GAME", instead they'd bitch about how ugly and pre-historic it looks compared to other PS4/Xbone/PC games (what ever's popular at the moment in the realm of FPS games). That would of course make the actual game much better, but it's visuals what we're talking about here, not gameplay.

So the exact same, unchanged game can be both pretty AND ugly depending when it's being looked at and/or released?
HOW WORK?

Hardware limitations aren't the only limitations that exist - engine can be limiting too, so can be style or any sort of choice of tools.
Good graphics is one that 'ages' well - in other words it keeps looking good after you're no longer impressed by new gimmicks (if you are the kind of person that's impressed by gimmickry, if you aren't you can identify bad graphics from day 0).

 

[TheGreatOne]

So the exact same, unchanged game can be both pretty AND ugly depending when it's being looked at and/or released?
HOW WORK?

What's cutting edge in 1997 isn't impressive in 2001. Graphics become outdated over time but good art design doesn't have an expiration date. Anachronox had neither of those.

If you have two games running at the same engine, have the same poly count, texture resolution etc and one features lots of color, impressive architecture (The Sword level from Thief 1 for example is a master piece in this regard) while the other looks dark and grimy and is full of ugly, generic brown/metal corridors, the game with more color and imaginative environment design wins hands down. Many modern/recent games can look like shit because of ugly textures, uncanny valley NPCs, lack of color etc to the point that late 90s game are much more aesthetically pleasing despite the immense technological gap between the two. The artistic design with more limited resources&hardware vs bland design with superior budget&technology debate gets even more interesting if you take in consideration the great 3D disaster of the mid/late 90s (ie platformers, point&click adventure games, fighters, beat em ups and other genres moving away from 2D to 3D for the sake of "it's the latest techonology", resulting in games that were pisspoor both visually and gameplay wise compared to the earlier 2D games for a long time, and even still this to this day continue to be), but I digress, that has nothing to do with Anachronox

Point being: Anachronox looked average by the time it came out in 2001, it didn't "look impressive back then" as you put it. What that has to do with the actual quality of the game? Nothing.

 

[Duraframe300]

So, why has nobody pitched an Anarchronox sequel/spin-off yet?

I'm sure people would vote for it.

 

[circ]

Tempted to reinstall Anachronox another time. Has someone haxed the combat to move faster yet?

 

[ghostdog]

So, why has nobody pitched an Anarchronox sequel/spin-off yet?

I'm sure people would vote for it.

Probably because square-enix has the rights and the way the first game ended you'd need a direct sequel and of course Tom Hall himself because it's one of those games that are defined by their creator. Anachronox isn't great because of the mechanics, but because of how well it's written and the obvious love that has been been poured into it. I'd love to see something similar from Tom, but he's now making mobile crap, so...

 

[Duraframe300]

So, why has nobody pitched an Anarchronox sequel/spin-off yet?

I'm sure people would vote for it.

Probably because square-enix has the rights and the way the first game ended you'd need a direct sequel and of course Tom Hall himself because it's one of those games that are defined by their creator. Anachronox isn't great because of the mechanics, but because of how well it's written and the obvious love that has been been poured into it. I'd love to see something similar from Tom, but he's now making mobile crap, so...

The IP is currently freely available for making a crowdfunded project (If you get enough people to vote)

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

So, why has nobody pitched an Anarchronox sequel/spin-off yet?

I'm sure people would vote for it.

Probably because square-enix has the rights and the way the first game ended you'd need a direct sequel and of course Tom Hall himself because it's one of those games that are defined by their creator. Anachronox isn't great because of the mechanics, but because of how well it's written and the obvious love that has been been poured into it. I'd love to see something similar from Tom, but he's now making mobile crap, so...

The IP is currently freely available for making a crowdfunded project (If you get enough people to vote)

I doubt that even Codex has enough horses to pull this out.