I've never played any Gothic games before...

[NPC]

...so knowing that, a _lot_ of the posts here mean nothing to me. I somehow acquired this one (maybe in a bundle, I really don't remember). Anyway, this game is in my Steam Library somehow. I'm debating playing it.

My questions for you all: seriously, as a stand-alone title, how is this game? Too many people here are all "OMG IT AINT GOTHIC DONT BUY" but that means nothing to me, as I've never played any of the Gothic games anyway. Plus, I already own it, so I just want to know what the game is like.

Are there any others out there it compares to that I might have played? Have YOU played it for an extended amount of time? What are your non-hyperbole thoughts on it?

Thanks for your time.

[NPC]

Went ahead and stareted playing it. I'm actually really enjoying this game. I don't get all the bad reviews. They all seem like they care more about it not being Gothic 3 than anything of its own worth.

[Johnny Thunder]

I enjoyed it too. I also found the other Gothics unplayable.

[Tiny Trees]

I like it.

[Revelator]

i like it. vote 7

[Teim]

I had trouble with the previous Gothic games being incredibly buggy to the point where they were unplayable. Yeah I know there's patches to fix them but I shouldn't have to screw around for an hour just to be able to properly fight the first monster! Been playing this for a couple of hours and it's a lot of fun. Super casual, but the environments are great and the combat is nicely paced and most importantly: fun. Even most of the quests so far have been more interesting than "go to X and kill Y amount of Z" (although there are a few like that).

I can understand why fans of the previous games wouldn't like it, and it's a far from perfect game. The voice acting is prety bad and it's annoying how you get locked from exploring areas. Even still I think the reviewers were a bit harsh on this and I'd give it a 7.5 / 10.

[Jazz the Goose]

Just as an RPG... I dont really like it. Boring quests, not really open world, bad story. Its not horrible but its far from being nice. Other RPGs are better. But you can give it a try.

[nojairk748]

I've been looking at this as well, and my biggest question to people is this -- Is the story in Arcania: Gothic IV merely weak, or is it atrocious? I can deal with mediocre stories just fine if the game is fun (and not so large it's dizzying), but an atrocious story can be death of a game for me. Can someone confirm if the story is just mediocre at best, or if it's outright terrible? Thanks.

[tyrant1224]

Went ahead and got it. For $5, if I manage to get a few hours of enjoyment out of it then it is worth it.

[NPC]

So far it's still keeping me interested. People keep saying "not an open world" like it's a bad thing, and I don't get it. I'm totally fine without complete world openness.

[Tiny Trees]

Originally posted by nojairk748:

I've been looking at this as well, and my biggest question to people is this -- Is the story in Arcania: Gothic IV merely weak, or is it atrocious? I can deal with mediocre stories just fine if the game is fun (and not so large it's dizzying), but an atrocious story can be death of a game for me. Can someone confirm if the story is just mediocre at best, or if it's outright terrible? Thanks.

The story in Arcania is rock solid. I am riveted. It was very sad not long after the start, and I deeply thought I might not like the game at that point. I plodded on. Soon the sad part was behind me.

It's kind of based around quests at different areas. Silverlake is brilliant. That lake and that castle - fantastic. It all is really.

I have reached a point where I have come to a stop. Nothing bad about the game. Just that until now I can return to any part of the map, apart from the very starting place in the seaside town. If I go on from here I won't be able to return. I am wondering about using an intenet guide to go back and find all the collectibles. Either that or go on without them.

On refelection of the series though. I have played the Gothic 3 demo. Even from that I can see the difference in style between the two games. This it appears is what Gothic fans are not happy with. However, I just checked Gothic 3 on steam because it is on sale at the moment. It only has 63% Metacritic score. Personally from the demo I think I can see why. I think I prefer IV - Arcania. It's more fluid.

Really though the story, I can not for the life of me understand what people are complaining about. It's a great RPG. I took to it from its demo. I got keen with the game from the first item I equipped that regen health. Niether is it as short as I see some say - lots of playing time.

[nojairk748]

Originally posted by Tiny Trees:

Originally posted by nojairk748:

I've been looking at this as well, and my biggest question to people is this -- Is the story in Arcania: Gothic IV merely weak, or is it atrocious? I can deal with mediocre stories just fine if the game is fun (and not so large it's dizzying), but an atrocious story can be death of a game for me. Can someone confirm if the story is just mediocre at best, or if it's outright terrible? Thanks.

The story in Arcania is rock solid. I am riveted. It was very sad not long after the start, and I deeply thought I might not like the game at that point. I plodded on. Soon the sad part was behind me.

It's kind of based around quests at different areas. Silverlake is brilliant. That lake and that castle - fantastic. It all is really.

I have reached a point where I have come to a stop. Nothing bad about the game. Just that until now I can return to any part of the map, apart from the very starting place in the seaside town. If I go on from here I won't be able to return. I am wondering about using an intenet guide to go back and find all the collectibles. Either that or go on without them.

On refelection of the series though. I have played the Gothic 3 demo. Even from that I can see the difference in style between the two games. This it appears is what Gothic fans are not happy with. However, I just checked Gothic 3 on steam because it is on sale at the moment. It only has 63% Metacritic score. Personally from the demo I think I can see why. I think I prefer IV - Arcania. It's more fluid.

Really though the story, I can not for the life of me understand what people are complaining about. It's a great RPG. I took to it from its demo. I got keen with the game from the first item I equipped that regen health. Niether is it as short as I see some say - lots of playing time.

Okay - just purchased it. Hoping I enjoy it as much as you did. Probably will at least enjoy it somewhat. The fact that at least someone was very happy with it gives me enthusiasm.

As for Gothic 3, the main complaints actually from critics was that it was a near-broken game, containing random bugs such as quests (including main quests) simply not concluding, forcing a reload of a previous save or even a re-start over. From my understanding, Arcania generally works fine, and frankly I'd MUCH rather play a game that's complained about because "It's not like the rest of the series" over a game that's complained about because it's downright broken.

I own Gothic II but haven't played it, or any other Gothic, as of yet. I might play II after this one, in case it is indeed the superior title; I'd like to go into Arcania as an entry that I'm not attached to, rather than get myself attached to a predecessor and find myself also murmuring disagreements with it.