-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
Anime Criticize my CRPG Book
- Thread starter felipepepe
- Start date
With that reasoning you could as well question the inclusion of games like Ultima 9, FTL, Transistor, Amalur, Venetica,... Those didn't bring anything new to the table, weren't particularly good and/or they were flat out not rpgs at all.
The sheer amount of butthurt alone that was caused by F3 makes it worth a mention already.
Sykar
Arcane
FO 3 deserves every bit of trashing it gets considering how overhyped it is by press and fantards alike even to this day.
Last edited:
What if someone else will grab your book immediately and try to make money out of it (even on KS)? Do you have some way to prevent it or somehow counteract? Kickstarter would maybe delete such campaign if you would reach to them but then again one can easily hire one of the few thousand Felipe Pepes as a dummy.
DragoFireheart
all caps, rainbow colors, SOMETHING.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2007
- Messages
- 23,731
Not enough bloom.
It's so niche, I'm not really worried about this... The .pdf version is low-res, you can't make a decent book out of it. Besides, a KS campaign would be easy to detect and shut down - I have the original files, news posts, interviews and my name is all over this project.
Outside KS, I don't see it possible... not only it's freely available online, but trying to make a limited print run will make every copy costs A LOT. Regardless, it's all under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, so if anyone wanna print some copies for them & their friends or translate the book, be my guest.
Marten Broadcloak
Savant
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2015
- Messages
- 246
Really good to hear. I can't wait to own a hardcover copy.
Lurker King
Self-Ejected
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2015
- Messages
- 1,865,419
Well, you should. We live in a time in which crooks ask developers for free keys in order to make a buck. You can be sure that someone will try to take advantage of your work if it is not protected by copryright laws. If not for financial prejudice, at least to avoid get your name involved with undesired attention.
Well, maybe they shouldn't be considered cRPGs at all. I always thought it was hypicritical how some players criticize pure exploration games like Skyrm and still praise games like Ultima. These popamole games didn't appear out of thin air, they got their design ideas from way back.
interseting.. then sorry bro but seems like my CTRL F is not working properly
and FYI its not costly at all if you use company laser printer
especialy when most of the book have white backgroundadd some watermarks all over it just in case bro...
and after that... omg i just opened your book in Foxit pdf editor and im writing on as it was msword document.
after adding watermarks don't forget to do something in pdf creator which will make pages appear as PHOTO and not actual recognisable letter document .
btw i was paging throu your book trying to find something that i dont like and still notthing..
maybe you could add some non intrusive background on that section where you puted game covers but white will do as well
Great work i must say
Last edited:
Agreed, better err on the side of caution felipepepe , you can release watermark free version once your Kickstarter campaign is over.
Sratopotator
Savant
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2016
- Messages
- 149
Hi, long time lurker here.
The book isshit great but i urge you to read my worthless, subhuman, newfag ramblings.
As i see it, the biggest worth of such book is to make someone who reads it in 2024 PLAY some of these games. (if you dont agree with me here, you can safely ignore my post)
Your reviews are short, which is not bad per se, but your ability to stimulate
reader's mind enough to play the game relies only on writing quality\style.
I assume that the biggest factor in getting someone to play some of the old titles, is convincing them that the game is accessible enough in terms of control scheme, ui, difficulty, general gameplay "first touch" feel, overall streamlining etc (you know, the only thing that modern gaming spoiled us with, besides graphics). Or unique\fun enough to actually enjoy it despite inaccessibility.
Usually that's what keeping me from playing some older titles, and i certainly know people that have the same gripe (and i consider myself semi-hardcore gamer, it's much worse with my friends).
My point is: some of the reviews are not good enough at communicating this whole accessibility thing to "break the ice" (i didnt read them all, maybe half of pre-1996 ones).
I see that you already added some info about remakes, adaptations, mods and such so i assume that you want the reader to play the games.
You could rewrite some of the reviews but that's too much work obviously. You could add accessibility rating or learning curve lenght to each game (both these ideas are not ideal, they would probably make harder games appear as worse games). Maybe add a box with some immortal qualities punctuated - even that could make the reader play the game if the review is overly historical.
There are some ways to get that info to the player without making the reviews too technical, or losing that historical perspective (which is great!).
To illustrate my point: (quote from Eye of the Beholder review)
Whole review is heavy on "how i FELT about the game when playing it for the first time" which is interesting but i don't think the reader would want to play the game.
Now look at this: (quote from Dark Sun review)
That piece and some other stuff in the review finally makes me want to play Dark Sun! I've always wanted to play it but i didn't know if i could get into it due to technical stuff.
I know that i'm cherrypicking these quotes. What more could you say about Eye of the Beholder besides "it's like dungeon master, i had a lot of fun with it when it came out"?
Probably not THAT much. And Dark Sun is probably very unique(?) so the review sounds better because of it.
But in Eye of the Beholder case, it sounds like the author is saying that the game is just a piece of history, and not a game that can be played or enjoyed.
And more reviews are like that.
[Ouch, that was painful. Too much lurking too little posting. Sorry for my lack of coherence]
quick edit: Oh and i wanted to give you shit for the lack of Fallout 1 but now i see it the your work chart
The book is
As i see it, the biggest worth of such book is to make someone who reads it in 2024 PLAY some of these games. (if you dont agree with me here, you can safely ignore my post)
Your reviews are short, which is not bad per se, but your ability to stimulate
reader's mind enough to play the game relies only on writing quality\style. I assume that the biggest factor in getting someone to play some of the old titles, is convincing them that the game is accessible enough in terms of control scheme, ui, difficulty, general gameplay "first touch" feel, overall streamlining etc (you know, the only thing that modern gaming spoiled us with, besides graphics). Or unique\fun enough to actually enjoy it despite inaccessibility.
Usually that's what keeping me from playing some older titles, and i certainly know people that have the same gripe (and i consider myself semi-hardcore gamer, it's much worse with my friends).
My point is: some of the reviews are not good enough at communicating this whole accessibility thing to "break the ice" (i didnt read them all, maybe half of pre-1996 ones).
I see that you already added some info about remakes, adaptations, mods and such so i assume that you want the reader to play the games.
You could rewrite some of the reviews but that's too much work obviously. You could add accessibility rating or learning curve lenght to each game (both these ideas are not ideal, they would probably make harder games appear as worse games). Maybe add a box with some immortal qualities punctuated - even that could make the reader play the game if the review is overly historical.
There are some ways to get that info to the player without making the reviews too technical, or losing that historical perspective (which is great!).
To illustrate my point: (quote from Eye of the Beholder review)
Whole review is heavy on "how i FELT about the game when playing it for the first time" which is interesting but i don't think the reader would want to play the game.
Now look at this: (quote from Dark Sun review)
That piece and some other stuff in the review finally makes me want to play Dark Sun! I've always wanted to play it but i didn't know if i could get into it due to technical stuff.
I know that i'm cherrypicking these quotes. What more could you say about Eye of the Beholder besides "it's like dungeon master, i had a lot of fun with it when it came out"?
Probably not THAT much. And Dark Sun is probably very unique(?) so the review sounds better because of it.
But in Eye of the Beholder case, it sounds like the author is saying that the game is just a piece of history, and not a game that can be played or enjoyed.
And more reviews are like that.
[Ouch, that was painful. Too much lurking too little posting. Sorry for my lack of coherence]
quick edit: Oh and i wanted to give you shit for the lack of Fallout 1 but now i see it the your work chart
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2009
- Messages
- 9,880
I definitely agree on the whole physical book part, I want one for my coffee table.
There's a couple of games in white I might consider trying to review (assuming you'll have me again after the hatchet job I made of motb review), when are you expecting this stuff to get done anyway? I see that divos has a note of "wait for sequel", which seems a bit ambitious if you want to release your book in 2017.
I think myself probably competent enough to review either spellforce, human revolution or AoD, although for the first two I am somewhat hesitant because I'd have to play them again to refresh my memory.
Also, in the pdf you linked, the table is broken
. I spotted no other errors at a cursory glance, but for your sake I hope you aren't generating it manually.
There's a couple of games in white I might consider trying to review (assuming you'll have me again after the hatchet job I made of motb review), when are you expecting this stuff to get done anyway? I see that divos has a note of "wait for sequel", which seems a bit ambitious if you want to release your book in 2017.
I think myself probably competent enough to review either spellforce, human revolution or AoD, although for the first two I am somewhat hesitant because I'd have to play them again to refresh my memory.
Also, in the pdf you linked, the table is broken
Sigourn
uooh afficionado
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2016
- Messages
- 5,662
I have another criticism worth mentioning:
Why did you include titles like Final Fantasy? They weren't originally released on PC. They were ported decades later. And the ports are downright awful. Not to mention these games weren't designed as cRPGs in the first place, so they aren't any different than emulating RPGs on Windows. (In fact, emulating a game is far better than playing piece of shit ports)
Why did you include titles like Final Fantasy? They weren't originally released on PC. They were ported decades later. And the ports are downright awful. Not to mention these games weren't designed as cRPGs in the first place, so they aren't any different than emulating RPGs on Windows. (In fact, emulating a game is far better than playing piece of shit ports)
- Joined
- May 13, 2009
- Messages
- 27,237
As i see it, the biggest worth of such book is to make someone who reads it in 2024 PLAY some of these games. (if you dont agree with me here, you can safely ignore my post)
Your reviews are short, which is not bad per se, but your ability to stimulate
I assume that the biggest factor in getting someone to play some of the old titles, is convincing them that the game is accessible enough in terms of control scheme, ui, difficulty, general gameplay "first touch" feel, overall streamlining etc (you know, the only thing that modern gaming spoiled us with, besides graphics). Or unique\fun enough to actually enjoy it despite inaccessibility.
Usually that's what keeping me from playing some older titles, and i certainly know people that have the same gripe (and i consider myself semi-hardcore gamer, it's much worse with my friends).
My point is: some of the reviews are not good enough at communicating this whole accessibility thing to "break the ice" (i didnt read them all, maybe half of pre-1996 ones).
I see that you already added some info about remakes, adaptations, mods and such so i assume that you want the reader to play the games.
You could rewrite some of the reviews but that's too much work obviously. You could add accessibility rating or learning curve lenght to each game (both these ideas are not ideal, they would probably make harder games appear as worse games). Maybe add a box with some immortal qualities punctuated - even that could make the reader play the game if the review is overly historical.
There are some ways to get that info to the player without making the reviews too technical, or losing that historical perspective (which is great!).
To illustrate my point: (quote from Eye of the Beholder review)
Whole review is heavy on "how i FELT about the game when playing it for the first time" which is interesting but i don't think the reader would want to play the game.
Now look at this: (quote from Dark Sun review)
That piece and some other stuff in the review finally makes me want to play Dark Sun! I've always wanted to play it but i didn't know if i could get into it due to technical stuff.
I know that i'm cherrypicking these quotes. What more could you say about Eye of the Beholder besides "it's like dungeon master, i had a lot of fun with it when it came out"?
Probably not THAT much. And Dark Sun is probably very unique(?) so the review sounds better because of it.
But in Eye of the Beholder case, it sounds like the author is saying that the game is just a piece of history, and not a game that can be played or enjoyed.
And more reviews are like that.
I can't speak for felipepepe or what he actually wants from his book of reviews, but were I in his shoes I can safely say that in some cases I would prefer to get text about the feel of playing the game, rather than a recount of all the facts related to it. Eye of the Beholder is exactly one of those cases, because the similar phrase of "It's like Dungeon Master, only better, go buy it!" is precisely what a four-page review of the game from mid-1991 had to say, and little more. (The Eye of the Beholder 2-review 9 months later in the same magazine was a two-page spread which boiled down to "It's more of the same, go buy it!") So even "professional" reviewers seem to have trouble covering the game based on facts alone.
Another fact to keep in mind is that Eye of the Beholder was primarily about immersion, establishing a direct connection between the game world and the player without the game's interface getting too much in the way. This worked, as this is not only SSI's highest-selling RPG of all time, but also SSI's second-highest selling game of all time (behind Panzer General).
Finally there's the solid fact that Eye of the Beholder is a piece of (CRPG) history. A large one, in fact. It was the successor to Dungeon Master, which is also a large piece of CRPG history. The legacy of both these games is well-known to CRPG nutjobs like most of the Codex userbase. And since Dungeon Master is in the CRPG book (and the Eye of the Beholder review references Dungeon Master) it's safe to make the assumption that the two games play alike.
We could then go into the fact that we're just waving each other's opinions around here, and that it is impossible for us to determine what the readers are expecting from the book (or what they will take from it) or whether they'll want to try out a game based on detailed technical jargon, or half-assed attempts at conveying emotions about a video game, of all things...but I think the point's been made by now.
Jedi Master Radek
Arcane
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2013
- Messages
- 4,239
Fuck. Need to sent those two reviews I promised long ago
Remember when you started the project, you put a gif with vomiting a rainbow to show how you wanted the general tone to be
You will only seem like an asshole by putting watermarks on publicly crowdsourced project.
The problem I have with the book is that you seem too much focused on the printed version and that hurts the pdf version. 95-99% of the readers will read only a pdf version of the book, so cuttings things, trying to stay within the limit of 480 pages makes the experience weaker for most users. I think you should divide the book into part 1 and part 2. I know you want to keep the printed version cheaper, but I feel that 90% of people who would buy the single book for 30$, would buy two books for 60$. Most of them would actually be happy having more content to read and more games to consider playing.
It's working ok, the review is done but it's not on the 350-page preview.
FF VII and VIII were released on PC together (or very closely) to the original PS1 releases. FFVII in particular is 100% better-on-PC thanks to the shit ton of mods you can use:
Also, fantastic games like Dragon's Dogma and Dark Souls appeared first on consoles. Not gonna cut those.
As Radek said, it's a public crowdsourced project, adding watermarks or making the pages photos after 3 smooth years would be nothing but paranoia and a dick move.
Besides, even after I release the book, anyone could theoretically try steal it and I would have to do the exact same thing of proving it's mine, etc...
It's not jut about making a printed version, but making the book actually readable & enjoyable. Yeah, I could add important interviews, longer reviews for important games, more articles, MMOs, etc... but after a point that's just feature creep - and means more and more time until the project is finished.
I'm an editor, not only of the book, but I worked 10 years in video editing and the logic is very similar. Pacing and presentation are VERY important. Even if it's free, a 1000-page monolith packed with fluff isn't as attractive or marketable as a 480-page book. This is supposed to be prestigious coffee table book or bathroom reading, not to feel like reading an encyclopedia. The printed release is just a reality check for me - I can add as much content a I want, for free, but if this were a printed book on my hand, would it be that important?
My hopes are for a mid-2017 release, but I have very little control over that as I depend on reviewers reviewing. Your MotB review was great, any of those games you want to tackle would be great. The only thing is that Desu Ex: HR should briefly mention MD as well. Every single review of it was "more of the same", so I see no reason to give them separate reviews.
D:OS is similar but complicated, because I'll have a D:OS 1 review, but not an individual D:OS 2 one due to its release date (my cut point is 2015). So I'll probably have a D:OS 1 review that goes "also, D:OS2 was released in 2017 and it's bigger & better!"
Thanks for the input, I get your point.
But the truth is, most pre-90's games have shit UI and most modern gamers wouldn't touch them with a 10-foot pole, even if Churchil were to make speeches on how great they are. Precisely because of that, I think getting the emotion across is very important. You can look at the UI via screenshots, I need the text to tell stories like how MCA used to yank the floppy out when his party died in Wasteland 1.
I don't like to give ratings or even divide them in sub-genres because that funnels people. A game like Phantasie is much more accessible than Pool of Radiance, but PoR is a much better game. And I don't want to scare Dwarf Fortress, Mordor or X-COM players with a "
- ABANDON HOPE" accessibility rating.I'd much rather add a list "Best 80's RPGs for Begginers" and recommend Dungeon Master.
Nostaljaded
Savant
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2015
- Messages
- 361
Was not notified of my review being replaced by your own in the latest 201606 release.
My review is more shitty.
Is there any other review(s) published before but replaced without informing the original author(s)?
A simple courtesy to let them, who wrote on gratis, know.
My review is more shitty.
Is there any other review(s) published before but replaced without informing the original author(s)?
A simple courtesy to let them, who wrote on gratis, know.
Sigourn
uooh afficionado
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2016
- Messages
- 5,662
Oh, you are right, I completely forgot about that. I made the mistake of judging those as I'm judging the other remakes/re-releases (I'm playing FFIII right now and the art direction is a disaster, 2D mixed with 3D and terrible fonts).
zeitgeist
Magister
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 1,444
Pointless mishmash of borrowed, gifted, commissioned and paraphrased content of dubious quality that's neither encyclopedic enough nor narrative enough to be useful as a historian's resource.
With nothing but initials in the bylines, and considering the non-distinctive style of most reviews, there is little to provide a clear grip on a singular reviewer's history, affinities and level of expertise. This kills the possibility of what could have been a slightly more interesting angle for the project: a compilation of highly personal strolls through the memory lane, written directly by people who "were there, man".
In case of the reader wishing to actually play any of the older games mentioned in the book, your garden variety abandonware site (or one of the ingenious business operations reselling the cracked games from said sites), will not only provide almost as (or even more) informative reviews, but also a vastly superior trove of technical information.
Cursed with a terrible layout, it fails even as a coffee table book, as alternately rotated game titles prevent casual flipping through, ensuring that a physical copy would serve only as shelf candy (likely situated between an aging hipster's similarly unopened copy of Living in the End Times and a novelty Super Mario bookend).
Next time, if you want to call a book yours, do make an effort to write it yourself.
With nothing but initials in the bylines, and considering the non-distinctive style of most reviews, there is little to provide a clear grip on a singular reviewer's history, affinities and level of expertise. This kills the possibility of what could have been a slightly more interesting angle for the project: a compilation of highly personal strolls through the memory lane, written directly by people who "were there, man".
In case of the reader wishing to actually play any of the older games mentioned in the book, your garden variety abandonware site (or one of the ingenious business operations reselling the cracked games from said sites), will not only provide almost as (or even more) informative reviews, but also a vastly superior trove of technical information.
Cursed with a terrible layout, it fails even as a coffee table book, as alternately rotated game titles prevent casual flipping through, ensuring that a physical copy would serve only as shelf candy (likely situated between an aging hipster's similarly unopened copy of Living in the End Times and a novelty Super Mario bookend).
Next time, if you want to call a book yours, do make an effort to write it yourself.
.jpg)
Sorry, I just noticed I made a terrible mistake.
I needed a new / expanded Chinese Paladin review since I changed the layout of the fan-translated section, and I e-mailed you asking for a new version. You never replied, so I ended up doing it myself.
That's what I thought happened, but I realized now that I lost all my access and PMs at the Bear's Pit when they changed servers or whatever, so by mistake I ended up e-mailing the other guy who volunteered to write the CP review before you and never delivered. Sorry again for this. :/
For the next version I'm also changing the Mass Effect 2 review. I asked the original author to re-write it, but it just wasn't working... Regardless, I'll keep everyone who contributed at the credits page.
9/10, would feel butthurt again.
But this was never a historian resource - that's stuff like Jon Peterson's Playing at the World or The Digital Antiquarian. The purpose here is indeed much closer to a garden variety abandonware site, but bundled with dev quotes, mods, trivia, etc.
Of course, anything from the book you can find more indepth online, but the trick is that you need to know what to google - and then get past all the noise. Sure, you can search for "story-focused RPG", but how many "Play PS:T" and "Play Mass Effect" you'll have to scroll through before someone even mentions Siege of Avalon?
That's the main role of the book - "yo, there's a bunch of cool RPGs out there, some of them also have mods and stuffies, and their devs said some cool shit - here's a brief summary on that, google it if you want more info".
Also, Žižek is cool, fuck you.
eXalted
Arcane
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2014
- Messages
- 1,213
Read the book a week ago. Really liked it although towards the end the reviews started sounging unifrom.
And why no NWN review?
The OC is shit but it deserves it for the Aurora Toolkit only. There could be a whole page wth a list consisting of all the great fan modules that put to shame many commercial titles.
And why no NWN review?
The OC is shit but it deserves it for the Aurora Toolkit only. There could be a whole page wth a list consisting of all the great fan modules that put to shame many commercial titles.
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.