Recent reviews by verum.amo

First, let me give a disclaimer...my play time shows 12.9 hours, but I've got thousands of hours in Dwarf Fortress, with my first playthroughs happening around the time that the game started featuring multiple z-levels. There might not even be another game I have played as much as this one.

So, why haven't I played the Steam version. This comes down to a change in the way the UI was handled that means that the Steam version requires the mouse for play, while the older 0.47 version allows me to play with keyboard only. I'm currently hoping that they are working towards making the game playable without ANY mouse inputs at all, and should they do so, I'll likely install this again.

So...why am I suggesting it?

Well, in the case that you're a new player who has no experience with the game, none of the problems I have with the Steam version will be problematic for you, except perhaps the odd poorly laid out UI elements or clunky interface elements (the irony here being that being mouse-based makes poor UI choices even more evidence since hotkeys memorization essentially nullified the clunky UI for veteran users).

In the case that you're a veteran of the game, you might have issues with the way the UI has been adapted in a similar vein as I do. Still, Toady deserves your support. This work of digital artistry and passion deserves financial recompense for the time you've already played it before the Steam release.

This game is absolutely not for everyone. A great number of people will never be able to connect with it, either because of the pacing, the complexity, the propensity for losing (its FUN!!), or even the graphics. A part of me still thinks that everyone should play it, in the same way that I feel on some level that, even if you don't like Classical music, every person should give Bach or Beethoven a listen. This game is a piece of modern history...and one of the fundamental inspirations behind Minecraft, and the various games that then were inspired by Minecraft like Terraria. Playing this game is like listening to the Beatles...you don't realise how much of its ideas are spread throughout the gaming world until you play it.

This game is an influential work of art, and thus, you should experience it, even if you won't like or play it in the long run. For my own part, I've still got 0.47 on my computer.

Negative Reviews are the Best Way to Determine Whether a Product is for You

**What follows are obviously, I would think, my opinions and experiences. They are, like all reviews, subjective. If you already have this game, and love it, why are you here reading negative reviews? Wouldn't you rather be playing the game that you love? This is a tool for people looking to make informed purchasing decisions. If you've already bought the product, this isn't for you.**


Firstly, in all reality, based on statistics, you'll probably like this game, but there's no merit in parroting back all the good things. The utility of a review is bound up in its analysis of flaws, so that people for whom those flaws would be deal-breakers can arm themselves with that information and avoid a purchase they will regret. So, for the sake of this review, I am assuming that you will find some of the following persuasive and compelling. Many of these points are not deal-breakers for me, and I will play the game more once I'm satisfied that point 5 has been handled.

1. The pacing of the early game set by the story's plot doesn't match with the pacing set by the gameplay. This is a similar problem to that which arose in Fallout 4. If it bothered you there, it'll probably bother you here. The story's motivation borders on emergency, but that emergency element isn't paid out in the actual design of the mechanics of the game. It's Shaun from Fallout 4 all over again...your kid is missing, but definitely spend as much time as you want doing Brotherhood of Steel radiant quests. I am told that later events remove the emergency element by some, while being told by others that the deus ex machina keeping the bad thing at bay is painted as lasting an indeterminate length, which means the bad thing could still happen at any time, so I don't really know who to trust. I haven't gotten that far myself.

2. The game has no consideration for whether you want sexuality in your gameplay. I'm hoping Larian realises that a subset of their player base has fully justified reasons for why they might not want to be hit on even once (traumatic past events for instance), and gives players an option to turn off romances, or, and I think this would be better, requires that players initiate romances and very clearly signposts this in dialogue so that people who are triggered by sexually aggressive advances can avoid it, and everyone else can initiate with the specific companion they are interested in and not have to be mean to the others to get them to leave you alone.

3. The characters feel shallow to me...all the voice acting can't rescue what comes across as very obvious player-centric behavior from all companions. The Owlcat Pathfinder games did a much better job of creating companions that had personalities that were independent of player actions. The fact that all of the companions, regardless of gender, want to get with you is a basic example, but the real essence is that the actual dynamics of companions with each other feel really shallow compared to their reactions to you. Given that this is apparent in the game from what would have been less than a day in each other's company, I find it very jarring. Rather than feeling like you're in a DND group with companions who all matter, it feels very clearly like you are the only character that really matters.

4. The Larian style of environmental play doesn't jive with the 5E ruleset, and it radically skews balance in very key ways. What I've played has been on Tactician, and I've yet to experience a fight I found particularly challenging. When there was a challenge, it wasn't because of the tactics required or the layout of the encounter, it was because of the RNG. The environmental style of play from the D:OS games fits very well in a system where you can take actions and know which actions will result in which affects. It allowed Larian to scale combat towards the VERY difficult on Tactician in D:OS, because tactics and intelligence would win the day. In 5E, however, your tactics are still only as effective as your die rolls.

5. It's still not fully stable. The last time I loaded up the game, it crashed on its way to the main menu, leaving my computer as slow as a snail. It took me like 10 minutes to be able to do a software reset, and that didn't fix it. A hard reset fixed it eventually, thankfully. Hotfix 2 didn't have any described fixes for crashes that seemed to address my situation, so I'm not really willing to play until I see more hotfixes. The game still has game crashing and system slapping bugs though, so beware.

6. There was a point here regarding whether BG3 really warrants inclusion in the franchise based off of a number of factors, but it was based off hearsay and limited play time, so I have removed it. If you'd like more context, there should be some in the comments.

Conclusion: There are six (five) reasons why you might really not like this game. If none of those are deal-breakers for you, you might very well like this game (though, there may be a thing you don't like that I didn't mention or that I didn't mind). Keep in mind that I could have written more than 6 positive things about the game, but again, that's not useful. You can have an ex with dozens of good qualities, but if they like to steal your blood while you sleep, that's probably the more relevant information you considered when deciding whether to stay with them.

Criticism is necessary for the health and growth of any media ecosystem. I'm going to allow comments, but I will ignore comments that attempt to argue with my 6 points. I am willing to engage with critiques of my method of review or my suitability to review the game, but the points themselves are subjective and, despite not applying to or being relevant to you, are not fundamentally and rationally arguable. These are problems that I have with the game, and I accept that you might not have them. That you don't share my experience is irrelevant to the information I'm sharing. What I encourage people to do is to add any deal-breakers they've experienced, to further flesh out the list for anyone who is smart enough to look at the negative reviews before buying something. To be extra clear, I will be deleting ad hominem attacks in the comments, as well as comments that add no opinions, and imperative comments which presume they have any control over my actions.

**To be clear...all of the following points are things which I have found problematic and have detracted from my enjoyment of the game. As such, they are fundamentally opinions. It may be that none of the following points are things which would bother you. Please don't come to the comments section to tell me that the things I have problems with are not actually problems. It's no more enjoyable to me, a human being who is trying to exist in what is essentially a frustrating and complex world, than it would be to you if someone told you that your problems are not real.**

Overall, this is a solid and engaging RPG dungeon crawler with some quasi-4X kingdom management tacked on. The combat is, like all RTwP (real-time with pause) RPGs, a bit hectic. There is, however, a very solid mod which turns it into turn-based combat and allows the player to make use of five-foot steps, and clarifies the distinctions between move actions, attacks, and swift actions. With this mod, the game is very close to being the best 3.5 SRD combat I've seen in a game to date (with Troika's ToEE being perhaps a bit more faithful, but also somewhat less flowing in its actual pacing and gameplay).

The companions in the game will entertain or annoy you depending on tastes, but they do a good job of bringing you into the story and the Pathfinder lore. This game is actually my first foray into Pathfinder other than the adventure card game, and it's definitely made me interested in seeing that Paizo is doing with Pathfinder 2.0.

For me, the best part of this game, as in most games based off of 3.5, is the build theory crafting. Despite my nearly 250 hours in the game as of writing this review, I've yet to get through Chapter 4, as I continue to reroll and build new parties. This is definitely a game where you will benefit from doing a bit of research before creating a character, and I'd recommend you not get too attached to your initial builds.

One downside of this game, and this is in no way the fault of Owlcat Games, is that it lacks a lot of the resources that are available with other 3.5 games. Good luck finding a complete map online, the wiki is missing a lot of information, and there's no character build resource out there like the outstanding nwn2db.com for Neverwinter Nights 2. This almost certainly is a result of the buggy state of the game at release which has led to lower exposure than the aforementioned game.

Lastly, the game is challenging, especially if you don't already have a good grasp of the mechanics of 3.5. That being said, there's a tremendous amount of customization in the difficulty setting, allowing you to make it a cakewalk or a grueling grind, or something in-between. I would definitely recommend checking it out if you like these kinds of games, and don't be afraid to pop by the Nexus if something's small you don't love about the game. There very well might be a mod to sort that for you.

80 Days is a surprisingly enjoyable spin on a few formulas. Despite not being fully committed to either a planning, economic, or narrative model, it manages to combine them all in a way that leaves you wanting to play a little bit longer. The frequency of choices the player is asked to make in the narrative interludes as you, Mr Figg's valet, interact with the various travelers, officials, captains and other people you meet along your voyage allows for what I imagine is a high degree of replayability.

The game is simple and easy to play, though some UI elements could be clearer, such as the fact that you can select dialogue options with the number keys, thereby reducing dependency upon the mouse. While the format does leave one wanting to get to the next town, the stopping points on the various routes make the game easy to stop and start if you're looking for a casual game to fit into the smaller moments in your day.

Lastly, the narrative is mostly self-contained. Other than the premise of traveling entirely around the world in 80 days, there is nothing the player really needs to hold in their memory between towns, and what information you have gained is helpfully shown when you select a target city in planning mode. All in all, an enjoyable game if you like what it's bringing to the table.

Well, despite being early access and in alpha, this game is in many ways more polished and complete than many games when they leave beta. As a Dwarf Fortress lover, this game is a no-brainer. While DF has the bigger world, the more compelling narrative engine, and candy, Rimworld holds its own by giving you a much smaller sandbox with a much greater amount of control, packaged with a far more intuitive UI.

And the cherry on top? This game is, considering the developer and the fan base, probably only going to get better and deeper. If you're not really into building/management games, or don't like games where one character's emotional state stands between a thriving colony and a slaughter-house, still get this game...just wait until it's on sale. If you are a fan of those types of games, then I recommend that you buy it at full price, because it's more than worth it, and the developer having more money will probably end up translating to quicker updates.