Review RPG Codex Review: Dungeon Rats

[Stakhanov]

Let's be clear about what I'm attacking, the claim that this game was falsely advertised. My argument to spell it out, is that if you can read up on every feature the game has and they're there, it cannot be falsely advertised (a logically knockdown argument, as it's a tautology basically). Every instance of VD arguing x (which is purely semantics between you and him, you use the terms differently) or use of dungeon crawler or whatever is rendered moot. It doesn't matter how many examples you find, because it logically cannot matter.

I'm not arguing you should retract it for my sake but for yours, as you should be ashamed of effectively implying the developer has criminally misrepresented their product. Not that shame has ever stopped you in regards to your writing up to now, but I believe the nature of a man can change.

If we go via "family resemblance", then we can just as well state that an RPG is a game where you play a role, ergo Halo.

Cool strawman bro.

The resemblance, hmm. I dunno, a party-based RPG with stats, a dungeon full of monsters, loot, etc. To my mind in any PnP or any CRPG context dungeon crawl suggests an RPG campaign focusing on killing and looting, and other stuff is incidental. I see it as more of a hybrid of squad-based tactical games and dungeon crawlers if I wanted to sperge out over definitions but I don't give a shit, you say potato, I say patahto, etc.

Do you really think exploration and traps and shit would make this a better game?

Wizardry fag gonna wizardry fag. Muh traps and maps in a tactical combat arena.

Not to mention that the SP distribution will work out better for a party than just one character regardless, even if you can't make each party member as individually skilled.

I mean that you will still get more SPs in total than if you just had one dude, regardless.

And if the Doom example is not to your liking, then how about any Might and Magic game?

This hurts me to speak ill of M&M, because Might and Magic 2 was my first RPG, but yes they would be better if their writing was worth a damn. I hold this to be true of any RPG, and find it weird anyone would think otherwise. We could compare it to say Wiz8 and its party banter and personality, for ex., which would you prefer? Having gone back to MM6 recently, I'd rather have some characters that were more than stats and derp as fuck animated portraits, but whatever floats your boat.

 

[Darth Roxor]

The resemblance, hmm. I dunno, a party-based RPG with stats, a dungeon full of monsters, loot, etc.

Sounds like Tower of Doom to me.

Wizardry fag gonna wizardry fag. Muh traps and maps in a tactical combat arena.

b-but muh family resemblance

This hurts me to speak ill of M&M, because Might and Magic 2 was my first RPG, but yes they would be better if their writing was worth a damn. I hold this to be true of any RPG, and find it weird anyone would think otherwise. We could compare it to say Wiz8 and its party banter and personality, for ex., which would you prefer? Having gone back to MM6 recently, I'd rather have some characters that were more than stats and derp as fuck animated portraits, but whatever floats your boat.

Naturally I would prefer to have the Wiz8-style banter, but that feature is ultimately a D-grade luxury addition at best, and I would have to be stupid to put its lack as an argument against M&M or whatever else with a similar focus. It's the same reason why I wouldn't bash Age of Decadence for skipping a party in lieu of a single character, or Alpha Protocol for not having turn-based combat.

 

[felipepepe]

You know Roxor is being edgy when he says Tower of Doom instead of the much superior Shadow over Mystara.

 

[Grunker]

Does it matter whether the game was falsely advertised or not? The point is that the game is what it is. If you're good with that, you're good with that, if you're not, you're not, and no matter which or the two camps you're in, Roxor's review adequately describes what you can expect.

I expected something akin to what felipe was expecting, and thus the review corrected my expectations. Since I'm probably among biggest encounter-faggots on the Codex (Blackguards being my favourite RPG of the last decade), my only concern is the criticism of encounter design. And the fact that I'm not much of a fan of the character system, but that part I knew already. Don't really give a rats ass that the game doesn't have exploration or whatever.

 

[Goral]

I was (blindly) expecting something more like Gorky 17, with some exploration, light puzzle solving and drama, but Roxor makes it sounds like it's really just a long sequence of fights...

I expected something akin to what felipe was expecting, and thus the review corrected my expectations.

lol
And one would expect that Fallouts 3 and 4 (being advertised as RPGs, same for Dragon Age or Diablo) would have RPG elements in it, now that is misrepresentation. The term "dungeon crawler" is broad enough that DR fits in it and most importantly you just need to read the synopsis on GOG or Steam to know what to expect:

Features include:

• Tactical combat system, including standard attacks, aimed attacks targeting specific body parts, and per-weapon special attacks such as Whirlwind and Impale.
  
• Detailed crafting and alchemy systems: forge your own weapons, brew potions and poisons, experiment with Liquid Fire and Black Powder.
  
• 8 weapon types: Daggers, Swords, Axes, Hammers, Spears, Bows, Crossbows, and Throwing Weapons, each with its own advantages and disadvantages.
  
• Fully customizable main character, as well as 10 possible companions, not all of them human (maximum party size is 4).
  
• 50 challenging fights and 4 different endings

Notable changes from The Age of Decadence:

• Party-based - the most frequently requested feature.
  
• Flanking and other strategic bonuses. Positioning matters a lot.
  
• Manual placement of your characters before a fight.
  
• Charisma determines the number and quality of your party members.
  
• Skill points are split between the party members: more people means fewer skills points per person and slower level ups.
  
• New weapons, armor, and creatures.
  
• 3 difficulty levels: Nice Guy, Tough Bastard, Murderous Psychopath

No mention about puzzles, traps or exploration opportunities only "50 challenging fights" (and there are 53 in all BTW). If you act like a sucker and buy a product only because it says "dungeon crawler" and won't bother with reading past the title then what can I say...

Personally I recommend this game to those who loved Desperados/Commandos series. http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198091764097/recommended/531930/

 

[ᚱᚨᚷᛖᚠᚢᛈ]

Review doesnt elaborate enough on the gear/crafting, which is imo a big aspect of the game if you roll with a party. Managing leather, iron, steel, crafting and recrafting helmets and shit, and finding new schematics on freshly slain corpses is rewarding.

I dont think its fair to harp on the game about the solo mode shortcomings too much. Its a tacked on feature. Like nowadays everyone puts the roguelike ironman permadeath tick on their shit gayms that are not fun to play like a roguelike. So is solomode only there as an autist feature.

 

[Klarion]

what's the replayability factor? Is it good the 2nd and 3rd time you play it?

 

[ᚱᚨᚷᛖᚠᚢᛈ]

Whats replayability? There is not new content to see. One run as 4 man team, one run solo if you wanna be a cool dude.

 

[Goral]

what's the replayability factor? Is it good the 2nd and 3rd time you play it?

It depends who you ask but most Codexers who played Dungeon Rats finished at least solo and team playthroughs. If you liked combat in AoD or games like Desperados you'll definitely play it at least 3 times (with a team, solo and ironman). And the game offers many builds and many options to choose from, e.g. you can play without using alchemy and crafting (which is a challenge) or using only the hobo team (worst companions you can find which are available at the start) throughout the whole game or create a weak but intelligent and charismatic fighter for example.

 

[Harold]

We are truly at the end of the Kali Yuga, men, since the age-old "What is an RPG?" has been replaced with the newer, fresher "What is a dungeon crawler?". See you all in a few days on page 108, once Infinitron inevitably moves posts in the new thread that shall adress this profound philosophical inquiry.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Does it matter whether the game was falsely advertised or not? The point is that the game is what it is. If you're good with that, you're good with that, if you're not, you're not, and no matter which or the two camps you're in, Roxor's review adequately describes what you can expect.

I expected something akin to what felipe was expecting, and thus the review corrected my expectations. Since I'm probably among biggest encounter-faggots on the Codex (Blackguards being my favourite RPG of the last decade), my only concern is the criticism of encounter design. And the fact that I'm not much of a fan of the character system, but that part I knew already. Don't really give a rats ass that the game doesn't have exploration or whatever.

There is exploration (i.e. it's not like Blackguards where you click on the next battlefield on the travel map) but it's not Wizardry, obviously. I can't speak for the encounter design but overall the reaction on the Codex has been fairly favorable.

 

[Darth Roxor]

Review doesnt elaborate enough on the gear/crafting, which is imo a big aspect of the game if you roll with a party. Managing leather, iron, steel, crafting and recrafting helmets and shit, and finding new schematics on freshly slain corpses is rewarding.

"Managing"? Except meteor, there is plenty of all materials to go around.

 

[Mozg]

what's the replayability factor? Is it good the 2nd and 3rd time you play it?

I replayed AoD enough to see most paths and playstyles and even did dumb obsessive shit like sperging until I won the pointless fight at the pass. I could only play DR once (a Cha 4 two-man-team game), no interest in a replay for the foreseeable future.

 

[agris]

Grunker

The majority of the fights are against humans, and there's some really good encounters in that majority. Like Roxor mentioned in his review, the humans are the best oppononents because of how they can be kitted out (gear and ability wise). If you went into the game expecting "$9 of good encounters", your expectations would be highly exceeded.

Unless you live in a country where $9 isn't the cost of lunch next to your work.

 

[agris]

Review doesnt elaborate enough on the gear/crafting, which is imo a big aspect of the game if you roll with a party. Managing leather, iron, steel, crafting and recrafting helmets and shit, and finding new schematics on freshly slain corpses is rewarding.

"Managing"? Except meteor, there is plenty of all materials to go around.

As the review said, you get schematics by slaying enemies with better gear than you. Iron is briefly scarce, as is steel and blue steel (mithiril from AoD?) is only usable near the end and there isn't much of it until the very very end. There's also not much hardened leather for the first ~1/2 of the game. This means you want to think about your crafting skill before you decompose those leather/steel etc items, to make sure you get enough.

Hope that helps. FWIW, I dislike crafting in most games and enjoyed it here. Probably because the game played like crafting was actually part of the itemization design, not tacked on.

 

[ᚱᚨᚷᛖᚠᚢᛈ]

Review doesnt elaborate enough on the gear/crafting, which is imo a big aspect of the game if you roll with a party. Managing leather, iron, steel, crafting and recrafting helmets and shit, and finding new schematics on freshly slain corpses is rewarding.

"Managing"? Except meteor, there is plenty of all materials to go around.

You are saying this now but when you first craft an ant armor, you might wish you had another 2 or 3. But repairs are also a thing. And recrafting as well.
Leather and even heavy leather is rare enough early on so 4 heavy leather helmets might bring you to zero. The first iron might go to armor or weapons. Which is better and why.
Steel as well. Same for blue and sky metal.

I am not saying that the "economy" does not become post-scarcity at a point. But that it exists.

There is also no mention of +1AP from 10 crafting which changes what the best armor in the game is and how many Dex points you might want/need.

 

[Darth Roxor]

You are saying this now but when you first craft an ant armor, you might wish you had another 2 or 3. But repairs are also a thing. And recrafting as well.
Leather and even heavy leather is rare enough early on so 4 heavy leather helmets might bring you to zero. The first iron might go to armor or weapons. Which is better and why.
Steel as well. Same for blue and sky metal.

I can agree with heavy leather because that one really is slightly limited (although IMO not to the point that it's crippling, especially since you should be ditching those leather helmets right after Reinard and mass-crafting Murmillos) and sky metal (as I did note above). But the others, not a chance. Leather is available around every corner. By the time you get to the first iron forge, you should already be swimming in iron ingots taken from excavated ore and salvaged enemy stuff. The same is true for steel. Blue steel is IMO "limited" only for one fight, which is the Emprah. After the Emprah you should have enough blue steel to do whatever you want, and then you get even more of it once you kill the two suckers at the praefectus.

There is also no mention of +1AP from 10 crafting which changes what the best armor in the game is and how many Dex points you might want/need.

This was already a thing in AoD.

 

[Elhoim]

By the time you get to the first iron forge, you should already be swimming in iron ingots taken from excavated ore and salvaged enemy stuff.

The only "salvaged enemy stuff" is Barca's sword, the rest is all bronze. In any case, we reduced the amount of ore in the lower levels for the next update. But it was definitely not enough to be considered "swimming in", like enough for 4 suits of armor and weapons.

Fun fact: I learned the meaning of the word hyperbole thanks to the Codex discussions some years ago.

 

[Darth Roxor]

By the time you get to the first iron forge, you should already be swimming in iron ingots taken from excavated ore and salvaged enemy stuff.

The only "salvaged enemy stuff" is Barca's sword, the rest is all bronze. In any case, we reduced the amount of ore in the lower levels for the next update. But it was definitely not enough to be considered "swimming in", like enough for 4 suits of armor and weapons.

Fun fact: I learned the meaning of the word hyperbole thanks to the Codex discussions some years ago.

P. sure all the dudes at Reinard are equipped with iron stuff, perhaps I'm mistaken. But all I know/remember is that when playing with a party, I could immediately get full iron stuff for all my dudes right after getting to the forge behind ol' psycho Ray.

 

[Goral]

P. sure all the dudes at Reinard are equipped with iron stuff

First iron forge is where Hieron is, just beyond Barca.

 

[Darth Roxor]

I thought that was a bronze forge. Was that changed at some point?

 

[Goral]

I thought it was always like that but I'm not sure. Elhoim

 

[Eyestabber]

So it's like low budget Blackguards 1?

Since I'm finishing my 2nd playtrough of Blackguards and I finished DR like 4 times or so, I think I'm in a good position to answer that. If by "low budget" you mean "muh production values", then sure. BG is fully voiced, has pretty graphix etc. But when simply comparing both "combat games", I would say DR is superior in some ways, inferior in others. For example, the character development in BG seems to be deeper, but...not really. BG is plagued by a plethora of trap choices and the actually viable skills/spells/weapons are actually not that many. OTOH, I can't really think of a "trap" choice of weapon is DR. Every weapon has something going on for it and some players will swear that X weapon is better than Y, while others will say "LOLOLOL, Y IS OBVIOUSLY BETTER U SCRUB!". On top of that, weapons in DR actually play out differently from each other, whereas BG weapons are mostly same-ish. Swords are bad axes/maces, two handed swords and two handed bashing are p. much the same, spears are different (but subpar because no Hammer Blow) and xbows are simply bad bows. And as someone already said, and Roxor hinted on his review, archer-mage is pretty much the "optimal" MC. Anything different is subpar and god help you if you decide you want to be a mage. So from a metagame perspective, I would say DR did a better job in giving the player more freedom to play his MC however he wishes. DR/AoD are a great lesson in how the whole "asymmetrical balance" thing should be done.

What BG does better is its encounter design that keeps providing new and interesting challenges that prevent the player from going "auto pilot" on fights. In terms of encounter variety and how interesting these encounters are, I would say BG wins easily. Sometimes it's a straight up fight, others you have to avoid traps and some times you can use the enviroment to your advantage. This is not without flaw, ofc, as I'm pretty sure some fights in BG were not balanced around Hard difficulty (since Hard seems to be simple damage bloat, XP nerf and HP bloat). I'll elaborate on that in the BG thread. I would also say that BG wins on the "story" front, for what is worth. It should also be noted that BG is a much longer game, and it is pretty long without resorting to filler (well, except at the very end. Fuck the Eternal Valley caves with filler fights against spiders).

All in all, I think both games draw their strengths from their way-above-average encounter designs, with BG being a more "great things mixed with shitty things" type of game while DR feels more "pretty good all around".

what's the replayability factor? Is it good the 2nd and 3rd time you play it?

Although there are 4 endings, 2 of them CHA locked, replayability in DR mostly boils down to "do you want to try a different build?". I find experimenting with different builds and comparing the results to be a lot of fun, so I consider the game to have decent replayability value. OTOH, it does NOT have AoD levels of replayability, simply because there are no real "forks in the road" for you to choose.

 

[Goral]

While checking for some more Dungeon Rats news I stumbled upon RPG Watch thread. I advise you to avoid it, these retards can't even read and think that Infinitron wrote the review... :facepalm:

Edit:

First off, I loathed your company efforts with AoD. It was a horrible game. I completed the game a number of times and still found it's system lacking in a number of ways.

DR was nothing more than a bad combat simulator with a flimsy storyline holding it together. The NPCs choices were laughable.

Lastly, your forum username [Elhoim - dop. Góral], both on this site, and on rpgcodex.com is borderline blasphemous. I say borderline because you have cutely swapped the position of the 'h' and the 'o' in what is the word 'elohim' - the Hebrew meaning for a name of God, the Almighty.

 

[zool]

Personally I recommend this game to those who loved Desperados/Commandos series. http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198091764097/recommended/531930/

If you liked combat in AoD or games like Desperados you'll definitely play it at least 3 times (with a team, solo and ironman).

I... really have a hard time understanding how you can compare DR to Desperados / Commandos, those are completely different types of games. If it's just because all of those games require to "use your brain", that's a little bit short...

Comparing it to Jagged Alliance? Maaaaaybe because of the tactical combat part but that's still pretty far-fetched.