So... what's the consensus on Gothic 2?

Click here and disable ads!

I actually had the urge to regurgitate while playing Klingon Honor Guard. :? The game was pure shit.

A Final Unity was definitely a decent game and I loved Elite Force. Elite Force 2 just didn't grab me like the first one did.

Incredibly buggy though. Once I did some quests in Shadow Over Riva in the wrong order and was unable to finish the game. The same happened to my friend in Star Trail.

Klingon Honor Guard seemed playable, if rather buggy, until I played Unreal. Then I realized it was essentially Unreal with Klingons and Andorians. Then I laughed.

I'm playing Gothic II right now. It's derivative and the storyline is linear, but the environment is fun to wander around in...the trees sway, monsters attack one another, the lightning is scary. It's long and some chapters allow for a bit of exploration and some neat sidequests. If you're into that sort of thing, you can even scrub floors, hoe fields and sweep, for pure immersion. Combat is fun, although magic is underdeveloped. It's a neat game, although it's not on my list of greats.

I don't see how people claim it's twitched based...sure you'll need to hit KBD keys in the right order.(or...well,it can be made better than how I play it since I don't use block....)
Twitch to me is how you'd play a FPS and in Gothic you lock on to a target with your mouse and then hit the appropriate key for block/swing left or right/do special move....(with "lock on" I mean,you hold down left mouse button and won't need to move mouse unless you want to focus on another enemy while the first is still alive....when he dies you'll automatically lock on to next if you're fighting more than one....)
This can be a bit annoying if the enemy you're locked onto moves out of range BTW...but releasing the mouse button and getting another isn't a lot of work.(it does annoy me though and is what I like least about the series....)

However I don't personally see Gothic/G2 as RPG's,to me they're action adventures with RPG elements.(i.e. char development)
As far as a living world goes I haven't seen anything that can compete,people move around,talk to eachother (of course only noncense,but makes it more living anyhow) monsters can't easily be outrun.(going up a cliff they might find another way around and jyst when you though you were safe.....)

I personally liked Gothics grimmer atmosphere better,being thrown into jail with the people being there and that...
The story is linear even though you won't notice how linear until you replay it.(and less obvious in G2 than it was in Gothic)

For me Gothic is in my top 5 (with FO and FO2) G2...top 10....yes it's linear and more an action/adventure than a RPG,but it still has something that appeals to _me_....

just a note to greyhawk: the woman DOES have the cash. it's a question of you choosing to be enough of a hardcase to get it. so you see, they do worry about choices.

My copy of Gothic 2 arrived a few days ago and I played it for a few hours. The story is a bit cliche. The plot (I'm in the 1st chapter) gives the PC a lot of freedom. The world is incredible graphic-wise and really well-designed. NPCs have good schedules.
Default combat interface is shit though imo. You have 4 moves to make, but you don't see your opponent too well because the game is TPP and the PC obstructs the view. So it's random. No hotkeys, although I found that you can turn them on in the *.ini file. And I switched to another combat interface and it's a bit more playable, but then - close to Morrowind.
The game is buggy. I get approx 1 crash each half an hour (the game is patched). I also managed to screw up 1 quest because I tried to do it in a non-standard way.
But I find the game to be FuN up to now. Will play more.

Tried zooming out a bit from PC....?
It makes it a lot easier to see the enemy in front of him.
Fights aren't random,they are however a lot about timing your moves....unfortunately for people who jump into G2 without having played Gothic it's not as clear...(since one you met early on in Gothic explained how to take care of scavengers and that basic rule goes for all enemies more or less....it's all about timing your punches....)]

Not managed to do that myself,however some more major quests that you'd happen to do ahead of time will be noted as solved if you first take quest (after you already done it) and then talk to that char again...
A crash/half an hour....sounds like you either have a big memory leak...or more likely have some prog. running in the background that makes it happen....(turn off things like HDD indexing,antivirus progs and such....G2 is very memory intensive,so freeing as much as possible is a good thing)

I don't have time for this during combat, but I'll try to zoom out before entering it. Too bad the manual doesn't mention such an option, only covering looking around without any zooming.

Thanks for advice, but my comp is configured well. I also have 768 MBs of RAM, so that should be enough. I suspect that it's either
1) the fact that I run the game on a GeForce 2 MX, which's a shame
2)or, more likely, that the Polish version is a bit behind on the patches.
THX for advice!

Yeah,the manual is where both Gothics are very far from shining....for Gothic they even forgot to tell you how to get out of transformation....(in one quest you had to transform to a meatbug and I just kept hitting buttons until I got out of it.....)
What I do is to zoom out as a normal thing,I use zoom in as the option for when you want to be closer to see edge of cliff or similar...or when the forest gets denced and I'm on a cliff I even use first person....(can't fight in first person though,only walk around in it)

NP,just some thoughts on what it could be....anything that's pretty consitent in time is usually due to something doing something....like indexing of HDD noticing a new file/file that's changed or such....
About #2,not sure if it was released in advance to the English version,but if it wasn't,you're more than likely running the same version I do,or rather did since I haven't played in a while....I ran it out of the box....
#1 might be it though....I do remember Gothic having problems (nothing major like crashes,just annoying graphical glitches) with my GF3,on my Radeon DDR it worked flawlessly,just like it did on my Radeon 8500LE and like G2 does now on my 9600Pro....
Hope you find some way to make it a bit more stable and glad to hear you like it so you don't feel like you wasted your cash at least.

Damn ! I wrote a lenghty review of Gothic II but my computer screwed it.

Bah !

Let's make it short:

Piranha Bytes released a great Expansion pack here in germany. It adds about 5 new classes, a new continent and modifies or adds NPCs and quests in the original areas. Combat and skill point systems have been tweaked to make power leveling a lot more difficult.

If you liked Gothic I and don't expect an indepth CRPG you will get a gread action-adventure with solid story and great atmosphere due to great world building and even better NPC schedules.

Antagonist

So it has the same interface (bahh) and it is now even harder this time.

These were the 2 things i did not like in the first gothic.

Depends on how you mean with interface....
One thing that has changed is when you go for a chest or want to pick something up,it only needs one button instead of two.
You still have an attack button and then hit fwd/back/sides to hit/block.
Also many had problems with reconfig of keys and getting mouse to work with Gothic,it has been changed....(I didn't have either problem myself...)
It's harder gameplaywise,yes...when you meet you first giant in G2 you're very likely to get whipped,in Gothic it wasn't that hard....

I didn't find Gothic hard at all. There was just a very finalistic combat system.. either you didn't damage the bad guys and they annihilated you, or it was the other way around.

I personally love Gothic II. I just don't get the complaints about pulling turnips or delivering a pan meaning it's a linear game.

The fuck? If it was linear you'd have to do them in that order. You can just fucking walk off without doing them. Sorta, you know, the definition of non-linear.

Anyways, the interface is changed somewhat, it's still a learning curve but once you get used to it it's not problematic in the least. Quit yer bitchin' about that.

The NPC reactions and scripted activities are the best you'll find in any game. Voice acting blows. But it's nice to see NPCs act like something other than walking loot containers. What's more sentient NPCs (orcs and humans) have a wider range of vision than in other similar games I've played. Which means the best friend of the NPC you are killing won't stand 4 feet away and play with his codpiece. Another nice thing is NPCs will fire on you if they have ranged weapons and then draw when you get in close. Instead of mindlessly walking towards you while they pick them off.

Linearity has to do with getting from a to b to c, the ability to stop to smell, or pick, or tromp on the roses inbetween going from point a to b to c does not make something non-linear.

How much more non-linear can you get when talking about quests you can either do or not do at your liesure or you can just kill the people and take their money?

My point isn't that the game is completely non-linear. I have yet to meet one of those. My point is, however, that it is inane to claim a 'pick turnips' and a 'delivery' quest make the game linear. Optional sidequests have about as much to do with a game being linear as they do with going to Mars.

It's a story driven game that is completely non-linear up until a point. Just because you are given an option to do something doesn't mean OMGWTF its sooooo linear!!!!~~!11.

Hm. Don't know if I agree with that, mainly because I can't think of many games that fit your concept of non-linearity. Maybe I'm just being retarded and missing out on some obvious choices, but could you maybe rattle off a few "non-linear" titles?

The only one I can think of that fits your description is something like The Sims, or any MMORPG. If that's non-linearity, count me a fan of linear games.

I count it as linear myself,especially about halfway through the game (same with Gothic) since then the story turns the same no matter what char you're playing/camp you joined and so on.
There are no 100% non-linear games so far AFAIK (including MMORPG's I've tried) since you always have a "next to do" thing....
The non-linearity wording to me means you're not forced into the same form of path toward the end goal independant of your char....and also being able to (most of the time) advance the story without having to go back to "NPC A" and tell him something....
I love Gothic and like G2 BTW,but even so I wouldn't call either of them non-linear.....(you can't for instance get into the prison colony when you want to in G2.....)

Anyone here tried "Summoner"?

judging from the screenshots, Gothic is pretty much the same. Even the character level up system seems the same. Oh well, I'm gonna check out Gothic pretty soon, so I'll see.

Summoner was linear as hell, You had zero choices, but still, the awesome music kept me hooked. And was the big reason behind not returning the game the next day.

Well, every quest means getting from point A to B. But if you can decide against point B and choose C which pop outs somewhere in between getting from A to B, it counts as non linear.

For example, the "free Tandi from Raiders" quest in FO 1 is a good example of a non linear quest. There are multiple ways to finish the it. And while doing so, you don't feel the ever present DM god telling you that killing them is the only way to solve things.
A good balance between freedom and linearity should be preserved though, many people complained that Arcanum was just too open ended. Oh well.

Summoner was a decent diversion, but yeah, it was definitely linear. Then again, almost all console games are about as linear as linear can be. The sequel sucked ass though. Even the music was bunk.

As far as non-linear goes, alot of the quests in the FO series were that way as well as Arcanum. Non-linear to me means you do not have to follow the same path to the ending even if that ending is the same everytime. Different endings help though. One of the best examples of this style for me is Daggerfall. Yes, to achieve the ending there were certain quests you HAD to do, but you didn't even have to achieve the ending. Just play your character how you wanted to and screw the plot.

There are non-linear games out there, but to some people, non-linear will mean different things. So, as you can see, it's subjective once again. I think my description above fits the general terminology used in the gaming industry though. I could be wrong, but oh well.

I wouldn't compare Gothic and Summoner...

Summoner was much more unpolished and lifeless, IMO. It was also far more typically console RPG. Did have some neat points to it, but the constantly respawning bad guys and the worthless automap drove me away. I loved the huge environments though, they just felt much more empty than those in gothic, and far less contiguous.

Precisely. BG2 is a good example of a VERY linear game with a truckload of sidequests that you can do in any order. Like you said, what you do between A and B doesn't make it non-linear or less-linear.

I think this is too eXXtreme.

Every RPG is A(starting location) B (ending sequence) does this make them linear?

Choice is the keyword here. You can choose different ways to finish quests, and choose how the quests end. Plus, you can always force non linearity. "What? Damn, Tandi is one ugly bitch. She's better of dead" *hits the combat button* There you go, a different outcome of the quest.

There were many unkillable main NPCs in the IE games, no matter what you threw against them, they wouldn't die. I spent most of my IWD2 gaming time trying to kill some cleric guy at one of the villages. No dice.

Arcanum, you can play it out any way you like, and in the end, you have a choice of finishing differently. I think that pretty much makes it non linear.
Of course, there were places which you *had* to visit in order to progress further in the game. But still you were given choices.
For example, cooperate with Bates and let him goad you. Or, kill him for the pathetic weenie that he is and find out from his diary. If that wasn't enough, just steal it.

We aren't talking about A-start and B-end, we are talking about A-start and Z-end, if they only way to progress is via a,b,c,d,e; then it's linear, if any combination will do then it;s not. Of course we don't count side-quests. Example A: Fallout - do whatever you want, go to Vault 15, explore the land, go to Junktown, it's up to you. Example B: KOTOR, point A - acquire the Sith armor in the apartments, point B - take the Beks' Accelerator quest and get the papers, point C - rescue Zaalbar, point D - have Mission to open the forcefield, point E - win the race, point F - talk to Canderous, point G - get the droid, point H - do the military base, etc. As you can clearly see it's extremely linear regardless of any choices, as you HAVE to do things in a very specific order.