I keep coming back to this

[Arngrim]

Not sure why, but at the moment ive put over 50 hours into this and i keep coming back just so i can replay it. Something about its combat or the way it works keeps brining me back.

[jimmyg1968]

So, what is the combat style like? Is it comparable to Dark Souls and far as game mechanics go?

[Arngrim]

Not even close. It's "simple" action. Left click to swing weapon or shoot spells etc. Right click to do a dodge roll. Different type of spells and melee weapons. Two handers, one handers and shield, arrows with both fire and poison arrows.

[jimmyg1968]

Ok, thanks. I think I'll make my way through the Gothic series before I purchase Arcania.

[(ノ°Д°)ノ︵]

Is it like dragon's dogma?

[Arngrim]

No, not really. The combat is as "simple" as Gothic 3, but i think its improved over that one. You can charge spells by holding down the mouse button for a bigger more damagin hit etc.

[ryels]

liar

[Arngrim]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย ryels1983:

liar

How so? Explain please. Else im gonna assume you're trolling.

[Nuku]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย jimmyg1968:

Ok, thanks. I think I'll make my way through the Gothic series before I purchase Arcania.

Gothc 1, 2 and 3 are true RPG's still, Arcania however is more like an action adventure, it's RPG elements are dumbeddown like for example Oblivion or Skyrim, this might attract more to the general gamers, but all in all this is not to be mistaken as a Gothic game, because it simply isn't (made by different developer, only uses some names from the Gothic franchise, other than that treat it like a standalone game)
I'm wondering why it still has "Gothic 4" in the title, they removed it in the store, just not here yet (name ownership is back to PB, the original devs)

[Steelfold]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Nuku:

Gothc 1, 2 and 3 are true RPG's still, Arcania however is more like an action adventure, it's RPG elements are dumbeddown like for example Oblivion or Skyrim, this might attract more to the general gamers, but all in all this is not to be mistaken as a Gothic game, because it simply isn't (made by different developer, only uses some names from the Gothic franchise, other than that treat it like a standalone game)
I'm wondering why it still has "Gothic 4" in the title, they removed it in the store, just not here yet (name ownership is back to PB, the original devs)

I assume you meant the D&D-rules are "dumbed down"? Well, that's exactly what happened, a lot of dead weight thrown overboard. And then, within the same breath mentioning Obilivion and Skyrim? Man, man..., let's not waste any more words on this, please...
Gothic 1&2 were close to unplayable, Gothic 3 was on the right track and Arcania is playable despite the fact it's not by the original devs etc., read the story.
What's this about nostalgia? I spent hours on end on Ultima, Kings quest and what not from 30 odd years ago but I find those flat out unplayable nowadays, like TES:Arena/Daggerfall, it couldn't get any better so I thought back then. Close to unplayable nowadays. You gotta move on and be honest, drop the nostalgia.
What bothers me is that we're really dumbed down by the load of console feces that is poured down on us. And the way in which deals are made with console manufacturers that want to crank up their sales. Think of Skyrim and GTAV, for crying out loud, pathetic... Publishers or the likes that ruin the scene by making decisions about things they know virtually nothing about. Where money is king, creativity, dare and spontaneity are slowly choked, think of Bioware that has made some of the finest games ever. Where money is king, souls are just disposable commodities.

[Risingson]

Ehm, just to add that Gothic 1 and 2 are not close to unplayable: they are actually the most fun and addictive RPGs I've played these years. They are greatly written, their rules are undestandable, the progression has logic and sense of achievements, the world is fantastically constructed (above it all in Gothic 1) and they always give you surprises and rewards. They have problems, of course, as a steep curve at the beginning, but they have nothing of the repetitive gameplay and endless grinding I found in Bethesda games (though I like them as well).

I wanted to know any opinion about this ArcaniA from one that isn't a BELIEVER of the Gothic franchise, but anyone that considers Gothic 1 as unplayable either hasn't played it or lies. Just that. It is as easy to say that Gothic 1 is unplayable as to say that Mozart did bad music.

[player of games]

I don't know why, but despite the simplicity of the combat in this game, it's still so fun. Probably because the animations are very smooth and there are no bugs whatsoever(not for me atleast, yet).

[Arngrim]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย ヽ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ﾉ:

I don't know why, but despite the simplicity of the combat in this game, it's still so fun. Probably because the animations are very smooth and there are no bugs whatsoever(not for me atleast, yet).

yeah i agree, it's far from perfect but its pretty solid gameplay wise, and even if its "simplistic" it's still a fun game.

[Franktast1c]

Great Combat system.