Dungeon Lords Review 8/10

[NFLed]

http://www.rpgdot.com/index.php?hsaction=10053&ID=1138

It's interesting that this reviewer saw wheat where most others saw chaff. He points out missing music, lack of character customization (saying that you only see the back of your character's head with a helmet on anyway so no big deal), lack of a wide variety of environments, beautiful automap, annoying monster spawning, and a lot of good stuff for an 8/10 overall.

I agree with almost all of it (except the missing music which I don't care about). I'm baffled that the other reviews don't see it this way but I guess different people look for different things in a game.

[lparnell]

I think that big disappointment from everyone is the "could/should have been" problem. There are really bad things that people like, just think of the movie Plan 9 from Outer Space. That has to be one of the worst movies ever, but it kind of has a cult following.

Anyway, I do not have hardly any problems with the game (bugwise), but it just seems so close to being so much better. That is what is so frustrating. The missing spells, the abilities/functions in the game manual that are not implementated, and I could go on for a long time here. It is just so 'evil' that the game could have been 100 times better with the proper finishing touches. Things like adding 'clutter' to the game. I have finished the game, and usually with really detailed games I like to go back and see what I missed. Find the NPC that has an interesting story, find some secrets, etc. Well, this game is missing all of that as well.

If the game had been developed for three months more to fix the problems, add the documented functionality and add the clutter, then it would probably be one of the best games of the year. But alas, I am dreaming and wishing, so I should wish for something like the lottery numbers for the upcoming drawing.

While I think that with Expansion Packs and the SDK, this game could become really good, others, I think, have given up on the game.

[POQWAD]

I'm sure there have been other games released with several components of the OPTIONS MENU non-functional...

...but personally I don't know of any...

[phalzyr]

I'm sure there have been other games released with several components of the OPTIONS MENU non-functional...

...but personally I don't know of any...

Neither can I... And I wish they'd get their fixing priorities right... I could live without an atuomap or heck any of the fixes they have spent months on, but the quest/MP bugs are killing me....The more I play DL the lower a rating I'd give it...

[POQWAD]

Well, Phalz...you know since we only see the backside of our character...

...some butt cheek customization would have been most appreciated...

For that ***-n-ine oversight I'm gonna have to go back to my original 1/10 review of DL... :D

[Shock]

http://www.rpgdot.com/index.php?hsaction=10053&ID=1138

It's interesting that this reviewer saw wheat where most others saw chaff. He points out missing music, lack of character customization (saying that you only see the back of your character's head with a helmet on anyway so no big deal), lack of a wide variety of environments, beautiful automap, annoying monster spawning, and a lot of good stuff for an 8/10 overall.

I agree with almost all of it (except the missing music which I don't care about). I'm baffled that the other reviews don't see it this way but I guess different people look for different things in a game.

from rpgdot:

Ups
Great combat system
Great RPG system
Large gaming world
Picking locks is fun

Downs
Obviously released unfinished
Empty cities, taverns, shops
No Music
Only one type of world terrain
Monster Respawn

I guess picking locks in an unfinished but large, silent, empty "one type of terrain world" is great rpg fun as long as it's accompanied by plenty of fighting with constantly respawning monsters.

This guy who did the review is in the minority. He still likes the ghetto games.

[POQWAD]

The lockpicking/opening chests in DL is basically the same design as Bradley/Sir-Tech used in Crusaders of the Dark Savant back in the early 90's.

As far as that is concerned, there's not much new here...

[txa1265]

I personally enjoyed the experience but didn't see a 8/10 game anywhere along the way. But then neither did I see a 1/10 or even a 3/10 game. That is the thing with reviews and reviewers - there is an attempt at objectivity, but personal preference on ranking and scoring deficiencies always comes through.

One thing I've found, both empirically and statistically, is that the greater the spread of scores, the more likely a game is to be a love/hate game, or one of missed potential. This game has a wide spread around a mediocre mean. There is some serious emotion flowing in many of the reviews - let alone what happens here.

Mike

[malvado]

I agree with Mike.
The Automap and last patches makes the game more playable, still my score would only land on about 40% if I was in good mood, problem is I personally want RPG's to be involving and something personal.
This one aint.

[Brainsic]

Maybe 50-60%...but thats it.
Way too much wrong,still.
After playing a few similar console games,which shouldnt be close,and they were so much better,in almost every single way.
People are definately outspoken about it,there was a lot of hype to match,and they didnt come close.
A lot of us wanted it to be good,and it just wasnt.So many "could have beens"

[Waer]

I played the game to the end once out of the box. Now I'm playing a second time through with patch 1.3. The play was good to start with - the patch adds the automap, fixes some quest issues, adds some spells. It still leaves the game unfinished, but not in ways that effect how fun to play this game is.

I hear all those folks who are upset because the game is unfinished. It clearly is. But this is a fun playable game even with its faults.

OK, so I can't change my character's hair. I don't particularly care about that. What *do* I care about with regard to my character? How it plays.

For instance, you have 10 races/gender options to choose from. What you choose changes the way the game plays and how the character develops. You have 4 starting class choices. You have points to spend to customize your character's attributes and skill sets. These affect the play. The play is the thing.

OK, so some of the spells don't work yet. Most do, and a few were added with the new patch. Even with some spells AWOL, there is a lot of remaining magic to play with: there are 4 different kinds of magic. They may be called schools, but they are not like "schools" in other rpgs. The magic in each catagory is entirely different, they work differently, recharge or are created differently and play differently. Each magic school is unique - the spells are not duplicated between magic types. Mastering one kind is fun. But wait! there are 3 more (now what would you pay?). This diversity of magic systems makes for the most satisfying and complex magic play I have yet encountered in a CRPG. It also makes for great tactical spell-combat. Honestly, I would like to have the few promised-but-undelivered spells, but I don't miss them.

I read a review where someone said the dungeons did not get put in. Sorry, but wrong!! There are great big beautiful multilevel multi-themed dungeons, including one that takes days to get through. Much, maybe most, of the game is dungeon based, if you count towers, castles, sewers and mazes as "dungeons."

The chest trap puzzles are fun, and they scale with difficulty in an interesting way. It is possible to untrap a chest above your current skill level, but it is hard and requires concentration and dexterity.

The classes have three tiers. Where you might be a warrior to start and a warrior to finish in another game, in this one you get to be five classes by the end of the game. 2 base classes, 2 elite classes and one super-elite class. There are literally dozens of combinations. My new character, this second time, is pursuing a battlemage ninja style career. That means he is a heavily armored magic specialist that in melee combat fights hand to hand, martial arts style, and uses thrown weapons (shurikin). This second game plays a lot differently than it did my first time through. A new, previously unknown, area opened up, there are new quests, new skills, new combat choices. I love that! There are so many possible combinations - I'm already thinking about how I might develop a character to play through again after I finish this game.

The inventory is fixed now and you can hold and sell the excess equipment that you acquire. Speaking of equipment there is a ton of it - armor, swords, bows, shuriken, spears, knives, axes, rings, belts, necklaces, on and on with this or that variation or magic effect.

Most role-playing games when you get to a level you get some points to spend on skills or attributes. In this game, you earn points from winning each combat encounter and you can spend your points whenever you want. Immediately, if you like. It's like hundreds of mini-level-ups. Level ups are addictive and a big part of what keeps me playing: "Just one more level, honey, and then I will (fill in the blank)."

In addition to the combat related points you also get extra points when crossing to a new level. There are plenty of "regular" level-ups too. By the end of the game my character was level 46 and just as tough and powerful as you would expect.

What about skills? There are a lot of them. 30 or so are available to an individual player-character, which ones are available depend primarily on class choices. There are almost 50 overall in the game. Some open up when you win your way into an elite class. Some open up when you get to a certain point in other skills.

Combat is more than point and click, like Diablo II, but has some of the same addictive qualities. It has been much better implemented than in similar games, such as Morrowind (which I loved too). Think of a simplified version of a game like Street Fighter. As you climb in skill you can do special combos. Different combos are associated with different weapons. Or barehanded - the ninja-type classes open up a whole new set of fighting moves and animations. What combo you use and what weapon you choose are part of the strategy when fighting. Each melee weapon has a speed and a "reach." Choose a long pole weapon to kill giant spiders without being poisoned, for instance.

What else? The automap works after patching to version 1.3. I like it, it looks good, but it was fun using the poster-map too.

So. It's not done, the game should have baked a while longer. No furniture! Some of the fireplaces have no logs. I know these are important to some players, but they don't interfere with the gaming.

Most importantly, what could have killed the game for me: there are no bugs or problems that stopped me from finishing all my quests and the entire mainline story. I did encounter one mission bug, but I had read about it and knew the workaround before I got to it. This was fixed in the 1.3 patch, so you won't need to "read ahead" or even worry about it. As far as I can tell from the forums and my own experience in the single player game, there are no game ending or quest queering bugs. I have read that the multiplayer does still have some funky issues that can foul up certain quests.

Quite a few people have finished the game now - many are like me going back for more. One guy who posts regularly on the (active and helpful) Dreamscape forum is on his sixth time through. He wrote that he's found new things each time through. Others on the forum have validated this. Same thing with the Typhoon Games (they are the Asian distributor) forum.

If you love role-playing games, and your satisfaction is based on if the game is fun, with complex and addictive game-play, engaging combat and unparalleled character development choices, rather than quibbles about eye candy and frosting on top of your frosting (ok, they should not have promised it), then, chances are, you will have a great time.

One other interesting thing about this game. There are people who hate it and just love to hate it. So much that they post for months on the various forums about why they hate it. Over and over again. I don't really get that. If I hate it, I may take a few minutes to say so, but then I move on to something I like.

[phalzyr]

ummm ok not readin all your post sorry im not bored enough yet to read a long winded opinnion...thoug I read a bit and you say you read a review about dungeons not being included....The reviewer was talking about dungeons other than the main quest ones.

There was suppossed to be many "dungeons" out in the wilderness to explore that you could just bypass, IE optional dungeons. that is waht one usually means when referring to "dungeons" is the optional kind. Yes their is the tomb of souls but that isn't a dungeon that is the tomb of souls...Just wanted to clarify that for you, that is how I took that review myself though...

[Waer]

sorry im not bored enough yet to read a long winded opinnion...thoug I read a bit

Glaad you were borred enou to read a bittt. :)

[phalzyr]

:D I have to admit that is the only reason why I am frequenting this forum so much, Stuck someplace without access to gaming but have internet...And only two new games one have had 0 (1 if you count system not being good enough) problems with AND then DL....

[Visigoth]

I'm sure there have been other games released with several components of the OPTIONS MENU non-functional...

...but personally I don't know of any...

No kidding.

[DeathGuy]

http://www.rpgdot.com/index.php?hsaction=10053&ID=1138

...lack of character customization (saying that you only see the back of your character's head with a helmet on anyway so no big deal), ...

I doubt the reviewer investigated all aspects of this game (like most of the others). Didn't he realise you could rotate your character?

[smakdownklown]

I stopped playing the game after I have entered Fargrove. I realized the game was full of bugs, and seriously lacking. To me, it was not worth my valuable down-time to waste another minute playing it. In truth, I have found more entertainment here, on the forums, than DL could ever achieve. No game deserves to be rated if it is not complete....

[NaX]

After playing Gothic and Gothic 2 I have found very few RPG's I realy like. Does any one know of any games like them?

As for DL I played it for about 4 hours and I am realy glade I didnt rip the box or cut the plastic seal. With a little work walmart wont even know it was opened.

The game is great if ALL you want to do is hack and slash. I couldnt connect with any kind of story in my 4 hours and that was plenty of time for me to decide i wasted my money. The unfinnished apperance items of the creations screen was a huge bomb to me i realy like to make my own char.

If you can play this game all the way through and go back for more You need to get on ebay and try to find Gothic or Gothic 2


Show me a real RPG

[chamr]

After playing Gothic and Gothic 2 I have found very few RPG's I realy like. Does any one know of any games like them?



The unfinnished apperance items of the creations screen was a huge bomb to me i realy like to make my own char.

Um... don't Gothic and Gothic 2 offer absolutely no apperance options? Am I wrong here?

[txa1265]

Um... don't Gothic and Gothic 2 offer absolutely no apperance options? Am I wrong here?
But that wasn't anything that was promised or touted ...

Mike

[chamr]

But that wasn't anything that was promised or touted ...

Mike

True. But my interpretation of NaX's post was that not having appearance customization was a game-breaker for him/her. Not that the promise of appearance customization not being kept ruined it for him/her.

Thus my confusion. If you can enjoy a game like no other before or since that offers no appearance customization, how can you say that not having it in DL was a "huge bomb" for you? :confused:

[POQWAD]

That is a bit puzzling, Chamr. Except maybe in a multiplayer scenerio if more than one character looks the same I suppose it could get confusing.

And, heck, in Gothic 1 and 2 your character isn't even named...

[Visigoth]

Yeah, but in Gothic 1 and 2, the game was so D*** cool, I really didn't care much about "looks" of my character. I remember thinking how immersive it was just to sit in the encampment in the swamps, smoking a bowl in a hut. Its been a LONG time, not since Ultima VII that I was so immersed in a gameworld as I was in Gothic 1 and 2.


DL advertised customization on virtually every advert I saw....



BAAAAAD MOJO.

[POQWAD]

Visi...I should of added a bit to my earlier comment...it doesn't matter at all that the hero's name isn't revealed. Actually adds a bit of mystery to the whole affair.

G2 (I haven't gotten G1 yet) is the BEST game I've played in a long long time.

[Surtur]

RPGdot is a well known ad-*****. They will never give bad reviews to any game company that advertises with them, unless they are losing the account anyway. NEVER give any serious credence to any online or magazine reviews for any game, as they are all heavily modified by the editors (ad-slaves) at best, or simply puff pieces for advertisers at worst. I have yet to find a true, unbiased game reviewer outside of the occasional blog. RPGdot is simply one of the more blatant sellouts. They'll swear by Might and Magic X if they get paid enough (and it doesn't take much).

Your best bet for real game info is to visit HERE...the game forums. You'll get a very clear idea about a game if you check with the folks that paid hard-earned cash for it. Spend just an hour browsing through the game forums before you buy it. You could save yourself $50. Worth it to me! If I'd been halfway smart, I'd have done it with DL. Sadly, I wasn't even a quarterway smart when I grabbed it off the shelf. =P Even the mercenary Gamespy, Gamespot, etc. sites gave it three thumbs down. That's what I get for being in a rush.

Check a game's forums before you buy it, and NEVER buy it the first day of release. Let the rabid fanbois and suckers spend the money and find out later they've been anally violated (again). No reason for you to enjoy the same abuse if you can avoid it. :)

P.S. If anybody actually DOES know of an unbiased game reviewer, I'd love to hear about it. The closest I've found is Maximum PC, but they only rate a few games.

[txa1265]

RPGdot is simply one of the more blatant sellouts.Really? Do you have any proof? I look at the listing comparing their reviews to the mean review score for games and they come out about average - some higher, some lower. So where's the proof? One discrepency I see is scoring Gothic II much higher than average... in which they were *correct* - it *is* better than Halo and so many other deified games (I'd mention HL2, but I don't want a war ;) ) I have problems with places that 'get exclusives', as they seem to have a hard time maintaining objectivity.


P.S. If anybody actually DOES know of an unbiased game reviewer, I'd love to hear about it.Well, GamerDad isn't a big commercial site, but I know that none of my reviews have been touched, and I gave Dungeon Lords 60%. It is hard to give a mediocre to poor rating when you get some knowledge and dealings with the people involved, but that is the nature of business. In my industry (semiconductors), I frequently perform equipment evaluations, worth millions to the winner, plus access and well-noted listings ... someone has to win, someone has to lose - and I have friends at all of the places. The best thing is to be polite, professional, and direct.

Mike

[Bugman]

Really? Do you have any proof?


80% for this Game is proof enough :rolleyes:

Average Rating is around 55% for DL

[chamr]

80% for this Game is proof enough :rolleyes:

Average Rating is around 55% for DL

Yeah. I'm sure DC&HP are heaping loads of cash/ads on RPGdot. Seeing as how they're both big industry players with money to burn... :rolleyes:

[txa1265]

80% is perhaps proof that the reviewer mistook 'fun' with 'good' ... I had loads of fun, put in over 100 hours in 2 run throughs and some miserable attempts to get multiplayer going, but I never mistook the fun I had with a good game.

Look at the stats for the reviews.

Title: Dungeon Lords
Avg. Score: 55.57% (w/o StDev: 53.50%)
Based on: 22 reviews (of 26 total)
Outliers: 1
High score: 82.00%
Low score: 10.00%
Std. Deviation: 18.83

Basically, what it says is that the vast majority of scores should fall between 38 and 73%. So the 80% from RPGDot is no more an outlier than the 30% from 1UP and Gamespy.

Mike

[Surtur]

Really? Do you have any proof?


Um...yeah. 8 out of 10 for Dungeon Lords. WAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! *Gasp, wheeze, pant*

Need more?

Oh. Ok. Just take a good look at some of the reviews on RPGdot. Some will be accurate enough. Some will be...not. Then take a look at advertisers on the site. Just a bit of research, but you may find it interesting. Try the same with Gamespy, etc.

Note that they slobbered all over themselves with the review for Knights of the Old Republic II (as did most 'unbiased' reviewers) when the game was the worst Lucasarts release yet. It was a complete rehash of KOTR I, including all the wonderful, fatal bugs and glitches such as corruption of saved games, crash to desktops, and BSOD's. That wouldn't be damning in itself, but the storyline (a strong point in KOTR 1) was laughable. It was truly a mess that I didn't even bother to finish. The game's forums reflect this clearly as well. But all the reviews on all the game sites loudly trumpeted the game as being solid platinum and truly necessary to play in order to find fulfillment in life. Oddly enough, the review on Gamespy was actually fairly accurate, but the score given to the game was utterly unrealistic.

Sorry. I'm just not that gullible. But as long as folks are, these game review sites will continue to do well.

[txa1265]

The game's forums reflect this clearly as well.
Game forums are notorious for having a very high noise-to-signal ratio, for getting 1000-post threads because someone missed a Klingon symbol or something like that ... that is true here, it is true on Star Wars game forums I frequent, and it was certainly true on Obsidian's forums.

KotOR 2 - which I admit proudly to giving a 4.5/5 score - was a game with a great (great as is *much* better than HL2 or anything else), a decent middle, and an 'ok' end that reeked of being unfinished. The polish clearly wasn't there and there were other problems. Most reviewers spent the time to play the game, rather than knee-jerk reacting to forum hysterics

You see conspiracies where there are none. You assume good scores for games you don't like are sign that a site is 'on the take'. While there are obvious pockets of truth, largely you are wrong. Otherwise there would be a great disparity between sites with paid reviewers who get free games (like GameSpy, etc) and places with volunteer reviewers who buy their own games (like me). Heck, I decided I wasn't going to wait for the site owner to get me Dungeon Lords and I bought my own copy ... which ended up as the only way I could prove multi-player actually functioned!

My point in all of this is that while I could barely see Dungeon Lords as a 8/10 game if *everything* was fixed and implemented, others see it as 8/10 *as is*. But hey, I also just gave Postal 2: Apocalypse Weekend a 20% score when the average is 60%.

Mike

[Dhruin]

RPGdot is a well known ad-*****. They will never give bad reviews to any game company that advertises with them, unless they are losing the account anyway. NEVER give any serious credence to any online or magazine reviews for any game, as they are all heavily modified by the editors (ad-slaves) at best, or simply puff pieces for advertisers at worst. I have yet to find a true, unbiased game reviewer outside of the occasional blog. RPGdot is simply one of the more blatant sellouts. They'll swear by Might and Magic X if they get paid enough (and it doesn't take much).

Well, you're an ignorant jerk, aren't you? You are so incorrect it's absolutely hilarious. Normally I'd ignore this sort of unfounded trash but it has been one of those days so let's see where we go with this.

First, a few facts. RPGDot has always been run by unpaid volunteers. We have never been paid and we never will. We spend several hours of our own time every day and often our own money because we enjoy it and like to think we are providing a useful resource for the community.

Until 2004, the site was owned by Rendelius, who dug into his own pocket every month to pay the hosting fees. Advertising contributed a little but there was always a shortfall. Never once was I asked to change copy in any way.

At one point a regular reader complained that an ad had installed a directx component - perhaps some Spyware. I'm not sure if that was true but Rend decided to cancel all advertising and bear the costs himself because he didn't want to take the risk that advertisers might mistreat our readers. Yeah - we're such whores for the advertising bucks that Rend accepted the costs of hundreds of gigabytes bandwith on a commercial server farm at his expence.

As the site continued to grow there came a point that we needed another server and we may not have been able to afford it. Eventually, a deal was struck with Jolt: they host and provide the ads and we volunteers provide the content as we see fit. I have never, ever spoken to Jolt about the content of the site and they have never, ever spoken to me about ads. I have no idea what ads they are running and I don't care -- it has nothing to do with the content I write, as with the other editors.

In fact, when we started with Jolt they put up a stupid full-page Fable ad. You can read the complaints about it on our forum here:

http://www.rpgdot.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=156226&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=ads&start=0

And yet -- what's this?! Our Fable review was only 75%?

http://www.rpgdot.com/index.php?hsaction=10053&ID=1061

So, you are wrong in everything you have said. We have zero interest in the ad revenue. That's Jolt's thing and we don't care at all. Of course, you were really only interested in being a jerk rather than the truth, weren't you?

I think Garrett is wrong with his review of DL -- and I said so in the comments thread. Would I have publically commented if we were being paid off? It's simply his opinion - right or wrong. Full stop.

http://www.rpgdot.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=459996

[txa1265]

No gender insult intended Dhruin, but as I recently finished the Postal 2 expansion and replaying Postal 2, I can hear the Postal dude saying 'you go girl'!:)


First, a few facts.You assume those are of any interest to him.


RPGDot has always been run by unpaid volunteers. Which only proves that not only are you ad-hoes, but you are too stupid to be properly bought off! :D


In fact, when we started with Jolt they put up a stupid full-page Fable ad. You can read the complaints about it on our forum here:Yes, I remember both the ad (nuisance) and the firestorm ... confirming my thoughts about how hysterical and vitriolic things can get in forums. My thoughts were always - I pay nothing for this stuff, if I have a few Fable ads pop my way, I'll deal with the annoyance.


And yet -- what's this?! Our Fable review was only 75%?Once again confirming my thoughts from before ;)


I think Garrett is wrong with his review of DL -- and I said so in the comments thread. Would I have publically commented if we were being paid off? It's simply his opinion - right or wrong.I know I read many reviews I disagree with - from both positive and negative. As I mentioned, you find that reviews tend to distribute themselves normally around some mean, and there are always outliers high and low. Assuming that low outliers on a game you don't like 'get it' while high outliers are 'paid off' is statistically nonsense.

Mike

[chamr]

I was going to chime in here again, but seems Mike and Dhruin have dealt with the nonsense swiftly, efficiently and definitively. Well done, gents.

[Spect]

I take issue with any review site that reviews patched versions of a game. It does a disservice to the industry. If they had a "released score" and then a "patched" score, I would not mind as much.

It is perhaps that policy, of reviewing patched versions, that makes some people suspect foul play. (or higher scores for more ad volume, whatever.)

I'm not accusing any site of doing such. I'm just pointing out why some people might feel that way.

Personally, I would rather see all review sites hold developers and publishers more accountable for pre-mature releases. Gamers react to reviews on titles that they are on the fence with. Unless you're stoked about a release and pre-order it, or go buy it on release day, I'm sure most of you look to reivew sites for a clue. For example, I never would have tried Gothic 2 if it weren't for favorable scores from some sites.

None of this is meant to take away from peoples' opinions of this game. It's a debate that no one can win. Is the game good... is the game bad... it's all subjective. But one thing everyone seems to agree on is that DL shipped too soon. Missing content, etc. It doesn't matter if someone cares about the missing stuff, nor does it matter if it effects the game play or fun factor. What matters is that game companies can't be allowed to benefit from this practice. Good reviews benefit them. Therefore reviewers need to be more vigilant.

Giving 8/10 to a game like DL (as fun as it may or may not be) is irresponsible. Especially when the score is given for version 1.3

-Spect

[Shock]

I have to agree with the addition of a Released Score & a Patched Score. That would be an improved service to the community.

[Dhruin]

No offence taken. ;) The only offence was Surtur stating a total untruth as if it was established fact, especially when the people he was accusing are paid nothing. Anyway, as I have said multiple times, I completely disagree with the review myself.

As for not reviewing patched games...I don't agree personally. It seems logical to me that gamers who are readers of online sites are likely to look into the latest patches.

Speaking hypothetically -- if Dungeon Lords was patched to whatever you would individually perceive as perfect (more combos, character appearance, all spells working, different lands, dialogue trees, interesting wilderness encounters -- whatever it is would make the game "great" in your eyes), how does it benefit a player "on the fence" to be told the game is a 4/10 and the worst piece of drivel released in recent years? That's not the experience that a new player would have.

I would understand if the target market of the reader was an average consumer -- Joe Blow who might wander into EB and grab something random off the shelf and who doesn't know what a patch is. Online sites are generally geared to a readership that is informed - they read online game sites because they are enthusiasts.

So, it makes logical sense to me for online sites (and particularly specialist genre sites) to review the version available as they are playing/writing.

As for a responsibility...that gets complicated. Yes, reviewers have an important responsibility but I don't think that extends to teaching the industry a lesson. Reviews should be about the product at hand, not the industry as a whole. Should I mark down a great action-RPG because there are too many of them and the industry would benefit from less being made? Mark up an average turn-based cRPG because there should be more of them? I think that gets difficult.

[Shock]

Even with the 1.3 patch, Dungeon Lords is NOT an 8 out of 10.

[Dhruin]

And so? I already said I disagreed with our review.

[Shock]

You obviously don't disagree enough to write a disclaimer on the review or pull it altogether. Not everyone is going to magically find this thread and read what you have to say.

[Dhruin]

Well, you would "obviously" be wrong. It has nothing to do with whether I disagree enough -- it's simply the fact that we have editorial integrity. What the editor assigned to the article writes is what you see on the page. It's funny, people complain they can't trust reviews because they think they have been bought but then they want them changed or pulled because they disagree with it. That's the same thing -- no editorial integrity.

And they don't have to find this thread - they could simply read the comments for that article.

You are free to think it is a bad review but if you want reviews to be unbiased and untainted, you have to accept the result or you are doing exactly what Surtur accused us of, even if the motivation is different.

[Visigoth]

In truth, I have found more entertainment here, on the forums, than DL could ever achieve...

How true, how true.

[Shock]

You are free to think it is a bad review but if you want reviews to be unbiased and untainted, you have to accept the result or you are doing exactly what Surtur accused us of, even if the motivation is different.

Look at all the reviews. RPGdot is the only one giving it an 8/10 score...or anywhere near that. The only thing I accept is that your reviewer is a total "fanboi" moron and you are a bigger moron for disagreeing with him and then doing nothing about it as one of the managers of the site. Your "editorial integrity" in regard to Dungeon Lords went out the window when your reviewer posted a score 2-4 points higher than anyone else. duh :cool:

Go back to your site and save it before more of your idiot reviewers destroy it.

[Dhruin]

Wrong again. The highest score on the internet is 82% from ic games and there are other scores closer to ours, such as the 7/10 from GameZone. But hey - don't let accuracy to get in the way of your fun!

[chamr]

Look at all the reviews. RPGdot is the only one giving it an 8/10 score...or anywhere near that. The only thing I accept is that your reviewer is a total "fanboi" moron and you are a bigger moron for disagreeing with him and then doing nothing about it as one of the managers of the site. Your "editorial integrity" in regard to Dungeon Lords went out the window when your reviewer posted a score 2-4 points higher than anyone else. duh :cool:

Go back to your site and save it before more of your idiot reviewers destroy it.

Shock, don't be an a**. Did you not pay any attention to Mike's statistical analysis earlier on in this thread? Here it is. Try again...


***************************
80% is perhaps proof that the reviewer mistook 'fun' with 'good' ... I had loads of fun, put in over 100 hours in 2 run throughs and some miserable attempts to get multiplayer going, but I never mistook the fun I had with a good game.

Look at the stats for the reviews.

Title: Dungeon Lords
Avg. Score: 55.57% (w/o StDev: 53.50%)
Based on: 22 reviews (of 26 total)
Outliers: 1
High score: 82.00%
Low score: 10.00%
Std. Deviation: 18.83

Basically, what it says is that the vast majority of scores should fall between 38 and 73%. So the 80% from RPGDot is no more an outlier than the 30% from 1UP and Gamespy.

Mike

[Surtur]

You have ads on RPGdot. That means someone pays you for ads. That means someone can withdraw those ads if you irritate them. That means reviewers working for RPGdot have a financial incentive to slant reviews towards advertisers...or do you offer the ads on that site for free out of the goodness of your hearts?

And being that the forum is open to generally all, this could include employees or affiliates of any game company, including DC. RPGDot has offered some very misleading (if not utterly inaccurate) reviews in the past, and it seems they still do. That means either the reviewers are idiots that know very little about the games they review, or they are kissing up to advertisers. I gave the benefit of the doubt that they were adslaves instead of idiots. I suppose I could have been mistaken on that account. :) But for whichever reason, the credibility is simply not there. RPGdot is certainly not alone in this, but rating Dungeon Lords an 8 out of 10 (even after 1.3) speaks for itself.

ICG? Who cares? Same applies to them. Idiots or adslaves. Personal opinion simply cannot account for such an utterly off-target review. If a movie critic assures the public that Dungeons and Dragons The Movie was an outstanding epic adventure worthy of standing alongside the Star Wars saga or the Lord of The Rings, I don't think anyone would accept that the writer's 'personal opinion' was simply not the norm. I'm pretty sure most folks would consider his personal opinion to be strong evidence of a serious neurological disorder. But hey, I guess some folk will believe anything. No problem with that. By all means continue to flame me and defend RPGdot. Looks like you're convincing a host of folks that I'm very wrong. ;)

[Dhruin]

You have ads on RPGdot. That means someone pays you for ads. That means someone can withdraw those ads if you irritate them. That means reviewers working for RPGdot have a financial incentive to slant reviews towards advertisers...or do you offer the ads on that site for free out of the goodness of your hearts?

Nope. Wrong. Jolt runs the ads and presumably receives money from them. The volunteer RPGDot staff couldn't care less whether Jolt is happy with the revenue or not. We receive no information from Jolt on ad revenue, ad accounts, upcoming ads, outgoing ads. Zip. Nada. We provide Jolt with zero information on our upcoming content. Zippo. Nada. So, no financial incentive since we receive no money and know nothing about the ads our host might be running. Oh, the hosting itself is set in concrete through a contract so we don't care if Jolt is or isn't satisfied. We couldn't care less if advertisers pull the ads, so the content has nothing to do with that.

Anyway, since this is entertaining, we may as well continue.


RPGDot has offered some very misleading (if not utterly inaccurate) reviews in the past, and it seems they still do.

I'm sure if you dig through every review you'll find some that missed the mark. In hindsight I have written one review myself that I am not satisfied with. *shrug* I doubt you will find any site with a volume of work that is always perfect. Are some better than others? I have no doubt. As a volunteer site, we obviously don't have Tom Chick or Mark Asher writing for us.

So, let's have at it. Which reviews are so misleading? Your example so far is KotOR2 -- the "worst game LucasArts has ever released", you said. By your own standard, that would make you...well, you decide. As you say, "Personal opinion simply cannot account for such an utterly off-target review".

Gamerankings: User Rating - 85%, Review Average - 85.6%, RPGDot - 86%.
Hmmm...maybe the 481 user votes were bought...let's check Metacritic: 87% User Rating, 86% Review Average. 87?! Good lord, the users there got paid more. Umm...


By all means continue to flame me and defend RPGdot.

Flaming? No, I'm just telling the truth. As I have said several times, feel free to criticise the article in its own right all you like but if you make a claim that we are (to paraphrase) corrupt and deceitful, then I am going to respond. Someone of character would have accepted they were wrong but you decided to shift from corrupt to "idiot", so I decided to respond again.

[Shock]

86% for KOTOR2
80% for Dung Lords

If you don't see the big difference in these ratings at rpgdot after playing both games then you should take up another hobby.

KOTOR2 isn't a broken-assed game like Dungeon Lords, yet you are scoring them almost the same? ok..duh huh huh

http://photos1.blogger.com/img/200/1549/320/retard.jpg

[Dhruin]

Your reading comprehension is adequate to this discussion, isn't it Shock? I have already said I disagree with the review - we've already had that conversation.

As to the reviewer who obviously does think they can be equated, I point to Captain "some folks will believe anything" Surtur as my evidence that people have different opinions.

On the one hand he points to KotOR2 as evidence of RPGDot's consistently bad reviews: "was the worst Lucasarts release yet", he says. If it is the worst LucasArts game yet, worse than say...Force Commander, which is a shockingly bad game, then he presumably sees it as very similar to KotOR2.

But you obviously don't. Why don't you two sort out exactly where KotOR2 should go?

[Shock]

Why don't you two sort out exactly where KotOR2 should go?

Bend over and I'll show you.

Booya!

[Visigoth]

Who F---in cares!! DL is still an unfinished piece of bargain bin software!

[Dhruin]

Bend over and I'll show you.

Booya!

*Yawn* Ran out of ideas, huh?

[POQWAD]

DL is still an unfinished piece of bargain bin software!

Careful, Visi...

...you'll give bargain bins a bad name...

[Shock]

*Yawn* Ran out of ideas, huh?

*Yawn back at ya* Ran out of quality, non-biased reviewers, huh?

[txa1265]

*Yawn back at ya* Ran out of quality, non-biased reviewers, huh?

Aw c'mon, Shock, I know your condition makes you agressive and hostile, but I thought you were trying to be reasonable lately ...

Dhruin simply put forth evidence that RPGDot is not 'bought out'. Does this mean that every review makes sense? No. Or that as a whole they must form some cohesive continuum? No again. Nor is it the place of one editor to shout down another at a site, even if they disagree with the other person's review - they simply add their voice in the comments.

What we can all indicate is examples of reviews with scores either too high or too low, and then attach them to personal agendas either financial or otherwise.

My latest problem is more with print magazines, who use all of these 'world exclusives' to gain early access to a game, in order to sell copies, then the preview itself does nothing but gush ... regardless of what the eventual review looks like. Recently PC Gamer was re-gushing over Fable, touting the PC version, and throwing words like 'brilliant masterpiece' around ...

Mike

[Shock]

I happen to like Fable much better than this crap game. I had fun playing Fable and will buy the PC version for the extended content.

Also, some people diss Dungeon Siege but compared to other crap games like Restricted Area, it's a multiplayer treasure. I really do think some reviewers are either high or drunk when they do most of their reviews. In some cases, like the one in this thread giving DL an 8 score, it shows rather well.

[Shock]

Instead of the idea of giving a Release score and then a Patched score, maybe the reviewer should give a Cracked Out score and a Sober score...at least at rpgdot.

[mkreku]

I review games too, and when I review a game I take into account how much FUN a game is. What's there in Dungeon Lords is fun. It's sad that the game isn't finished, but it's playable all the way through to the end and you're bound to have fun while doing it. I wouldn't give it 80% in its current state, but saying it isn't comparable to other (more polished games) because it lacks content is going too far. Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines has a game stopping bug in the middle, Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic - The Sith Lords had a few game stoppers and a LOT of cut content too. Dungeon Lords isn't unique in any way and it sure as **** deserves more than 0 or 30%. I've seen a lot of bad, unambitious and boring games in my days and Dungeon Lords doesn't belong in that heap.