CRPGAddict

Click here and disable ads!

I loved the ability to invest money.

I guess he doesn't consider RPG a religion.

Bullshit. Half the people on the Codex haven't played an RPG older than Fallout.

What makes him "antiRPG"?
And is it serious enough that he will be investigated by the Committee on Un-RPG Activities?

He played and finished Wizardry 1.

It's good he's the way he is. He can be completely objective instead of giving a certain title or series over inflated scores because he's a fan etc.

Not sure what you talk about.

What kind of role-playing he enjoys?

Can you show example?

"Anti-RPG"
"Does more harm than good to old CRPGs"


Are RPGs like a fucking religion to you?

He's not a reviewer. He just blogs about the cRPGs he's playing chronologically. The ratings he gives at the end are merely a way to sum up his feelings about the games based on a number of categories he deems as important.

He has enjoyed the first two Might and Magic games so far and they are absolutely nothing like Ultima. I wouldn't group those two series together.

And? The first two Might and Magic games covered most of the elements of The Bard's Tale but also a hell of a lot more. In fact, I can't think of much that The Bard's Tale did that the early Might and Magic games didn't do. And Wizardry? You mean the first one? You do know that he doesn't give scores based on release date right?

Not sure if I'd go as far as that, but I can't help feeling something like that every time I read things like "I wanted to play this but thanks for letting me know it's a piece of shit so I don't have to play it and form my own opinion" in his comments.

Also this. Then again, I'm fairly sure he has explicitly written on multiple occasions that he in no way intends or tries to be objective, so I wouldn't hold it against him.

Anyway, I like reading about old games so I like reading his stuff most of the time. The comments section on the other hand can be scary depressing.

Of course he's biased. Who isn't?
And it's not like he's a professional reviewer.

The only score I can think of that was "controversial" was giving Dungeon Master and Pool of Radiance the same score in the category Graphics, Sound and Input.
As for the overall scores not being "correct", that is always the problem when the final score is based on sub-categories. I often ran into the same problem when reviewing Age of Wonders maps. In the end the only thing that really matters is how much you enjoy it, or the subjective "playability" score. So if you try your best to give an objective score in the sub-categories the overall score may end up lower or higher than a map/game deserves.

As for the CRPG Addict not enjoying all the CRPGs he's playing, that is hardly surprising when he's decided to play them all.

He's not a reviewer because he's not playing games with the intention of rating them at the end. He uses the ratings to summarise his feelings, to conclude a playthrough of a game with something more than just a video of the ending. It's funny how you attribute numerical scores with reviews though. So apparently Rock Paper Shotgun don't do game reviews because they refuse to give scores? Interesting!

Yeah. His huge following. There's an overwhelming number of alternatives out there of course...

Did you read the postings? He seemed to enjoy 2400 A.D. more than Legacy of the Ancients at least. I've already bitched at length in this thread about his giving up of Wizard's Crown, but given that he did give up on it, how do you expect him to give a more deserving score? And why would the score even matter over the fact that he gave up on the game in the first place? I'd prefer if he gave Wizard's Crown 0/100 if it meant he'd play through it all. Perhaps you only read his scores or something?

Its ONLY such type of blog where you can extensive playthoughs for most 1980-s games, with details, witty remarks and screenshots.

No offence to LP's on other sites, because i wouldnt want to read LP about Oubliette or some Moraff's revenge but several pages about them, so i understand what this games are - this i appreciate.
I probably would never play Wizard's crown or Rings of Zifin or etc, but i was interested - and he told me - his experience about them.

p.s. I dont read his pages about scores. Because not interested in numbers (i wouldnt play them myself probably, maybe only some of this games).

I only read his experience. Because i am curious if i miss some gems in past, but i cant play ALL games of old crpg as he do. Also even if i dont play some old crpg, at least i know experience about it.


About "random blog" i would be interested to learn about other blogs, since they are plenty of blogs on old CRPGs?
Except crpg revisited, there is none.

Which surprise me, so many fans of old games, but only one extencive blog with re-playing classic crpgs?

No. Publicly expressing his opinion on games would make him a reviewer, but he does that through every post he writes, even the ones that don't encompass numerical scores. You claimed that you wouldn't have a problem with him if he removed the numbers, so you're clearly attributing numbers to reviews.

Then why mention his huge following?

No. He seemed to like it better. This may not be the actual case, however. Have you actually read his blog? He's introduced a bullshit factor that allows him to add or subtract from scores. He's well aware that his scores aren't an accurate reflection of his over all opinions.

He plays games for six hours minimum. He then summarizes his thoughts and assigns numbers to categories. His objective isn't to finish every game. You can therefore treat any time over the six hour minimum as extra time spent on a game. I think you miss the purpose of his blog.

Maybe i didnt search well enough, but i found only one extencive blog with classic old CRPG experiences written.