Community Codex GOTY 2015 - Results

[ArchAngel]

yes, very pleased with this

congrats to styg; to cause so much butthurt and so much pleasure for codexers is an amazing accomplishment

And at the last possible moment. AoD fanboys could see the finish line as the first in the race and got beat in the home stretch :D :D

 

[AwesomeButton]

Yet the Witcher 3 has rules and mechanics with more than a cosmetic effet.

I (play on hard and) find those rumors to be exagerrated. Do you kill an enemy with 3 strong swings or with 10 fast swings, get out of here.

Here is one, admittedly, very imperfect way to check if you are in an interactive movie: imagine you've just done a completionist playthrough of W3. Now, would you replay at least half of this content, just in order to test a new build? I know I wouldn't. Therefore - an interactive movie.

 

[Unkillable Cat]

sorry mate but what's done is done. the poll is complete, the results are in. it's been proven that UR is a better game than AoD, and that's a stone cold fact that you just can't challenge.

frankly all your carrying on is quite childish.

Except this is the RPG Codex. Remember the spectacle with the Pillars of Eternity review?

The Kodex Konsensus is exactly what you're told that it is, nothing more.

 

[valcik]

That's because AoD is objectively better than UR ..

I'm afraid that this shows up only after couple of playthroughs, so those folks repulsed early by graphics or camera wouldn't find. That intricate structure of inner scripting, providing different interaction and outcomes in terms of story with most of the NPCs, depending on your class/guild membership/stats/skills, this all remains hidden unless you've finished the game couple of times with different characters. That's very unique and valuable example of designer's and programmer's craftsmanship in terms of heavily interconnected logic layers rarely seen nowadays in any game. This makes for excellent replay value, I dare to say that UR is much more streamlined and linear in comparison. Both games are great, AoD just happens to be much deeper and complex in terms of scripting, story, and NPC interaction.

 

[Ismaul]

Yet the Witcher 3 has rules and mechanics with more than a cosmetic effet.

I (play on hard and) find those rumors to be exagerrated. Do you kill an enemy with 3 strong swings or with 10 fast swings, get out of here.

Here is one, admittedly, very imperfect way to check if you are in an interactive movie: imagine you've just done a completionist playthrough of W3. Now, would you replay at least half of this content, just in order to test a new build? I know I wouldn't. Therefore - an interactive movie.

That you didn't like a game enough to replay it is one thing, being an interactive movie is another. There are, in fact, multiple different builds you can try in the Witcher 3. Also, unlike in many other RPG, there are story choices which lead to different outcomes, justifying a replay. Builds aren't the only thing that make a game replayable or an RPG.

 

[AwesomeButton]

I find it telling that you didn't answer the question - would you replay it just to test a new build?

If you are defending the argument of W3's charcter development choices having some sort of strategic depth, please elaborate on that. Would be very interesting to watch

Also, unlike in many other RPG, there are story choices which lead to different outcomes, justifying a replay. Builds aren't the only thing that make a game replayable or an RPG.

Apparently you are not paying attention to what you are reading when you reply. I said explicitly "would you replay at least half of this content, just in order to test a new build?" No, I do not argue against W3's qualities as an interactive movie. I am talking about its values strictly as a game. You are replying to questions which no one has ever posed.

 

[Ismaul]

Yes, there are Melee builds, Alchemy builds, and Signs builds, and they play differently. That you find them lacking doesn't make them absent.

And I guess you're just too awesome to realize that character choices that have an impact the story are roleplaying choices, and therefore are part of what make an RPG an RPG.

 

[AwesomeButton]

They also make an interactive movie an interactive movie.

Whatever. I understand your point, and I don't agree with you. I think character development choices in W3 are too superficial to matter.

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

why would you ever say that? have I ever given you cause to Hate?

i'm butthurt that you deny me oldfag status

 

[felipepepe]

Another cut - the results without 1/5 votes (no no downvotting):

1. Age of Decadence 4,28
2. Underrail 4,21
3. The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4,17
4. Divinity: Original Sin - Enhanced Editon 3,88
5. Invisible, Inc. 3,87
6. Conquest of Elysium 4 3,81
7. Voidspire Tactics 3,70
8. Swords and Sorcery - Underworld - Definitive Edition 3,69
9. Dark Souls II: Scholar of the First Sin 3,65
10. Legend of Heroes: Trail in the Sky SC 3,63

Even so, PoE remains at #26. It's interesting, because what doomed it wasn't the 1 & 2 votes, was the overwhelming amount of 3s.

So I made some graphics to compare that:

We also see that while haters hated Undertale a lot, it would never make it into the Top 10 anyway, because few people really enjoyed it. Hard West is interesting because a lot of people liked it, but very few found it GREAT!

And damn, Sword Coast Legends bombed...

 

[Volrath]

Hard West was my goty, should have been higher on the list IMO.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Even so, PoE remains at #26. It's interesting, because what doomed it wasn't the 1 & 2 votes, was the overwhelming amount of 3s.

Just what my unsubstantiated guess was going to be! :D

In a broader sense, I'd say that what doomed it was that it was approached rationally by most people, contrary to what you'd think by looking at the forum wars and reviews wars.

AoD and Underrail are not without flaws but they gathered the emotional vote, whereas people voted for PoE without denying the good but without forgetting the bad. At least that's what I did.

Also PoE was at the disadvantage of being released prematurely by about one year, but that's not our problem.

So my conclusion is that the games that rise the most emotional response are the ones that will usually win a vote, and not necessarily the best exectued ones.

 

[Lurker King]

That's because AoD is objectively better than UR, i.e. Fallout 1 in sewers with MMO elements.

With the exception of perks, Underrail is only influenced by the worst parts of Fallout. FO is a classic, but it’s also a very mixed bag. You have mature themes and good writing, but you also have retarded jokes that doesn’t fit the setting, exploding heads, genocides, etc. Underrail has the silly things of Fallout, but none of its depth that makes it remarkable. You have the ability to kill everyone in one city, but almost zero dialogue checks. You have a post-apocalyptical setting, but that doesn’t have any depth, because it is presented in a childish way and with childish writing. Nobody will be quoting a sentence for the intro of Underrail, or remembering a twist in a quest or a memorable NPC ten years from now, because it’s all childish. The combat is much better than Fallout, but the game is also designed around grinding and backtracking in Diablo style. The list goes on and on. The fact that is obviously heavily influenced by MMOs other tendencies that have nothing to do with Fallout, results in a completely different game that is only faithful in the 2D looks. If the game is good, it is not because of Fallout influences, I can tell you that. Only a combatfag who hate role-playing would think that Underrail is a new Fallout.

 

[Wolfe]

Nice work, felipepepe, those graphs are really useful.

 

[Doktor Best]

Yet the Witcher 3 has rules and mechanics with more than a cosmetic effet.

I (play on hard and) find those rumors to be exagerrated. Do you kill an enemy with 3 strong swings or with 10 fast swings, get out of here.

Here is one, admittedly, very imperfect way to check if you are in an interactive movie: imagine you've just done a completionist playthrough of W3. Now, would you replay at least half of this content, just in order to test a new build? I know I wouldn't. Therefore - an interactive movie.

Same could be said about most storyfag rpgs. And no, i wouldnt replay it to test a new build, but i would and i will do it to play out other story decisions. Replayability comes through narrative choice and consequence.

I can see why people see this as a major gamedesign flaw though. If you deeply care about characterization and you cannot enjoy an rpg that does not have that, then witcher3 is mediocre at best for you. For me luckily, it isnt. I enjoy all three GOTY winners despite their obvious flaws, because i can relish them for what they excel at.

 

[Turjan]

Tire textures are how you can tell if a game is a good or bad RPG....

Don't forget that the tires have to be perfectly round.

 

[Tacgnol]

I love how balanced the Pillars of Eternity votes are in the graphs. Josh Sawyer would be proud.

 

[Desur]

It's because the data set is different, so the Bayesian average can differ.

Figured out that much but it still makes one question the methodology, don't it? I mean it's hard to talk about any objectivity whatsoever if removing or adding games affects the position of others. Especially since there's so many games for which hardly anyone had voted.

 

[Lurker King]

Same could be said about most storyfag rpgs. And no, i wouldnt replay it to test a new build, but i would and i will do it to play out other story decisions. Replayability comes through narrative choice and consequence.

I can see why people see this as a major gamedesign flaw though. If you deeply care about characterization and you cannot enjoy an rpg that does not have that, then witcher3 is mediocre at best for you. For me luckily, it isnt. I enjoy all three GOTY winners despite their obvious flaws, because i can relish them for what they excel at.

But I like the different builds in Underrail. That is where the game shines. The problem is that in the parts where it fails, end up compromising the rest. There is so much backtracking, trash mobs, gridding and linearity, that by the second playthrough I lost all the patience. In order for the different playthroughs to be fun, you need a fresh game world. You can achieve this by implementing either a deep reactivity or a procedurally generated open world. To make a linear game purely focused on combat was not a good idea.

 

[Riskbreaker]

Even so, PoE remains at #26. It's interesting, because what doomed it wasn't the 1 & 2 votes, was the overwhelming amount of 3s.

Fitting, as "3" was the most balanced of the available ratings.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Yet the Witcher 3 has rules and mechanics with more than a cosmetic effet.

I (play on hard and) find those rumors to be exagerrated. Do you kill an enemy with 3 strong swings or with 10 fast swings, get out of here.

Here is one, admittedly, very imperfect way to check if you are in an interactive movie: imagine you've just done a completionist playthrough of W3. Now, would you replay at least half of this content, just in order to test a new build? I know I wouldn't. Therefore - an interactive movie.

Same could be said about most storyfag rpgs. And no, i wouldnt replay it to test a new build, but i would and i will do it to play out other story decisions. Replayability comes through narrative choice and consequence.

I can see why people see this as a major gamedesign flaw though. If you deeply care about characterization and you cannot enjoy an rpg that does not have that, then witcher3 is mediocre at best for you. For me luckily, it isnt. I enjoy all three GOTY winners despite their obvious flaws, because i can relish them for what they excel at.

I never said I consider its not being an RPG a flaw. Just that for me it has no place in an RPG GOTY poll, and that's why I didn't vote for it. I actually enjoyed it. As an interactive movie where from time to time I have to click on monsters and they die.

 

[felipepepe]

It's because the data set is different, so the Bayesian average can differ.

Figured out that much but it still makes one question the methodology, don't it? I mean it's hard to talk about any objectivity whatsoever if removing or adding games affects the position of others. Especially since there's so many games for which hardly anyone had voted.

That's not what is changing the results. As I said from the start, the "n" of the Bayesian formula is the number of votes that the half most voted game has.

In the overall ranking you have 108 games, the #54 most voted game has 31 votes, so that's the "n" I use. In the Tacticool category we only have 20 games and the 10th most voted has 59 votes, so that's the "n" when calculating that category.

 

[Kz3r0]

That's because AoD is objectively better than UR, i.e. Fallout 1 in sewers with MMO elements.

With the exception of perks, Underrail is only influenced by the worst parts of Fallout. FO is a classic, but it’s also a very mixed bag. You have mature themes and good writing, but you also have retarded jokes that doesn’t fit the setting, exploding heads, genocides, etc. Underrail has the silly things of Fallout, but none of its depth that makes it remarkable. You have the ability to kill everyone in one city, but almost zero dialogue checks. You have a post-apocalyptical setting, but that doesn’t have any depth, because it is presented in a childish way and with childish writing. Nobody will be quoting a sentence for the intro of Underrail, or remembering a twist in a quest or a memorable NPC ten years from now, because it’s all childish. The combat is much better than Fallout, but the game is also designed around grinding and backtracking in Diablo style. The list goes on and on. The fact that is obviously heavily influenced by MMOs other tendencies that have nothing to do with Fallout, results in a completely different game that is only faithful in the 2D looks. If the game is good, it is not because of Fallout influences, I can tell you that. Only a combatfag who hate role-playing would think that Underrail is a new Fallout.

Basically this year vote is a showdown between mondblutians and CYOAfags, sound like the Codex alright.

 

[toro]

That's because AoD is objectively better than UR, i.e. Fallout 1 in sewers with MMO elements.

With the exception of perks, Underrail is only influenced by the worst parts of Fallout. FO is a classic, but it’s also a very mixed bag. You have mature themes and good writing, but you also have retarded jokes that doesn’t fit the setting, exploding heads, genocides, etc. Underrail has the silly things of Fallout, but none of its depth that makes it remarkable. You have the ability to kill everyone in one city, but almost zero dialogue checks. You have a post-apocalyptical setting, but that doesn’t have any depth, because it is presented in a childish way and with childish writing. Nobody will be quoting a sentence for the intro of Underrail, or remembering a twist in a quest or a memorable NPC ten years from now, because it’s all childish. The combat is much better than Fallout, but the game is also designed around grinding and backtracking in Diablo style. The list goes on and on. The fact that is obviously heavily influenced by MMOs other tendencies that have nothing to do with Fallout, results in a completely different game that is only faithful in the 2D looks. If the game is good, it is not because of Fallout influences, I can tell you that. Only a combatfag who hate role-playing would think that Underrail is a new Fallout.

Not sure if serious.

I can easily remember Tanner, Gorsky, Old Jonas, Rathound King, Jon the Beautiful, Al Fabet, Six, Eidein and others. Also most locations. Plus arena and the gauntlet.

Nobody claimed that Underrail is the new Fallout. They are different beasts. Skills checks alone don't make a great game. If it wasn't true then Excel would be the perfect rpg.

You are a retard.

 

[shadow9d9]

Being registered and being a newbie isn't related. I spent years lurking before registering. I still lurk more than post.