Ryan muller
Educated
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2021
- Messages
- 439
The last big pool for voting on codex's top crpgs was in 2019, it surprises me that from there to now we still didnt have a thread judging if the prestigious list is any good or not
So here it is, rate each of the Top 10 games and leave your shitty or monocled takes below.
As for me:
PS:T - 6/10: The writing is strong, characters are cool, party is very fleshed out, setting is rather unique and the conflict regarding TNO is quite fascinating, shame the combat is so bad and the system is so dumbed down compared to BG1/2 to the point you only have 4 classes to choose from when it comes to your PC. some quests are cool and related to TNO's memory loss and past, but the gameplay in most are quite simplistic and the narrative ends up being quite short, none have the puzzle solving quality of Fo's quests and the itemization doesnt help since most items are related to combat and almost none are for non-lethal gameplay or skill manipulation, while combat is quite rare and much worse than any other I.E game (mind you that most builds wont work in this game, try high AC dodger and fail miserably). its decent, althought DE made it a bit obsolete.
Fallout - 8/10: Cool setting, Well written main plot and decent quests. People hate combat, i always thought it was fun, minus the stupid party members ofc. exploration was always a big part of this title and finding out new locations full of lore and weird individuals was a really cool thing. the biggest pro here is probably how most places add at least a bit to the full picture of the setting and overall conflict. You see radscorpions being a problem in shady sands, ghouls being weak and begging you to let them have their water, people fighting themselves in boneyard,etc... just to reach at the end and see the master present a solution to end problems such as radiation sickness, human conflict and such.. it feels really well thought out, its also quite replayable as a bunch of different playstyles are supported.
Some skills are unbalanced, the reputation system doesnt work, combat-related itemization is rather weak and some locations feel rather lackluster in terms of content, but overall its a great game and quite easy, so its an ok introduction to older CRPGS.
BG2 - 7/10: They nerfed archers which is a very necessary thing compared to BG1 in which archers = win, i liked the plot althought irenicus is a pussy compared to Sarevok and i also enjoyed the more talkative party compared to the repetitive placeholder dialogue in the original. Encounter design was good and itemization is as good as in the OG, even tho unique weapons are more frequent (i liked the scarcity in 1), CnC was an improvement, theres move reactivity and its just overall a better game.
Arcanum - 5/10: Never got the hype with this one. Itemization is its biggest pro inside and outside of combat, setting was the second biggest pro, the main story is rather weak and forgettable. The villain has a really dull motivation, most of the plot points feel barely related to my character and i couldnt give a fuck to the whole Dwarf clan conflict, the game peaks rather early in Tarant with its huge reactivity and much like Fallout 2's new reno, the whole "live your life" vibe was great, questing offered opportunities for pretty much every character build and it was quite fun while it lasted. After it the game has a huge difficulty spike with BMM. Dungeons are also annoying since combat is bad and they are often quite long, the ruleset is quite bad and i hate that it gives you 1 point per level instead of making you feel like progression actually matters.
All in all, it had potential, but the story is weak, combat is shitty, builds are very broken by nature it has a bunch of dungeon crawling in a game that has shitty combat (the worst aside from Morrowind) and its so damn unpolished i cant understand its hype. it doesnt even have the more sparse plot structure of Fo1/2, its more of a branching path kind of game.
VTMB - 2/10 : shit is unplayable, combat is bad, quest design is ok, plot is quite mindless satire, the second half of the game is very dull and full of combat segments and i wasnt impressed with the characters. it would score higher if it had atleast decent itemization/economy or was more polished. as it is, its unplayable without fan patches so i have no idea what this is doing in a top 10.
Fallout 2 - 9/10: Aside from the story being weaker than in the OG and some locations feeling more Thematic rather than this one huge thing. This one did pretty much every other thing better. CnC is better, characterization is a huge thing even for non talking heads, Party members are more memorable, combat itemization is better (big guns are now worth a damn), skills are more balanced and overall its much cooler to roleplay at this game due to the high reactivity and bunch of freedom/options it presents. Quest design is better too Modoc/slags, The jet vaccine, Gecko powerplant and The reno families's questlines being standouts.
Fallout NV - 6/10: Main story is great, i like the CnC, itemization is the best the series ever had and its quite cool in a lot of areas. but the engine being shitty, the combat being trash and the ammount of unpolished mechanics bring it down considerably. all in all, i wouldnt replay more than my 2 playtroughts but it might be fun if you somehow manage to endure the garbage engine oh and the mostly hiking-based side quests.
Deus ex - 5/10: It tries a bunch of things, it doesnt excel in any of them, particularly, it has a skill system, but skills arent that important, it tries to be a fps/rpg but the gunplay is bad. it tries to be a conspiracy story, but instead of making me interested in the setting and its misteries by slowly revealing everything piece by piece as Age of decadence does, it throws its concept at your face in the very first scene, it tries to be a stealth-like game but the stealth mechanics are awful,etc... its not particularly good, i like its two reboots better
Gothic 2 - Never finished G2, therefore i dont have an opinion.
Morrowind - 2/10: Lol, almost unplayable, theres even anything aside from the loot that is good in this game?
So here it is, rate each of the Top 10 games and leave your shitty or monocled takes below.
As for me:
PS:T - 6/10: The writing is strong, characters are cool, party is very fleshed out, setting is rather unique and the conflict regarding TNO is quite fascinating, shame the combat is so bad and the system is so dumbed down compared to BG1/2 to the point you only have 4 classes to choose from when it comes to your PC. some quests are cool and related to TNO's memory loss and past, but the gameplay in most are quite simplistic and the narrative ends up being quite short, none have the puzzle solving quality of Fo's quests and the itemization doesnt help since most items are related to combat and almost none are for non-lethal gameplay or skill manipulation, while combat is quite rare and much worse than any other I.E game (mind you that most builds wont work in this game, try high AC dodger and fail miserably). its decent, althought DE made it a bit obsolete.
Fallout - 8/10: Cool setting, Well written main plot and decent quests. People hate combat, i always thought it was fun, minus the stupid party members ofc. exploration was always a big part of this title and finding out new locations full of lore and weird individuals was a really cool thing. the biggest pro here is probably how most places add at least a bit to the full picture of the setting and overall conflict. You see radscorpions being a problem in shady sands, ghouls being weak and begging you to let them have their water, people fighting themselves in boneyard,etc... just to reach at the end and see the master present a solution to end problems such as radiation sickness, human conflict and such.. it feels really well thought out, its also quite replayable as a bunch of different playstyles are supported.
Some skills are unbalanced, the reputation system doesnt work, combat-related itemization is rather weak and some locations feel rather lackluster in terms of content, but overall its a great game and quite easy, so its an ok introduction to older CRPGS.
BG2 - 7/10: They nerfed archers which is a very necessary thing compared to BG1 in which archers = win, i liked the plot althought irenicus is a pussy compared to Sarevok and i also enjoyed the more talkative party compared to the repetitive placeholder dialogue in the original. Encounter design was good and itemization is as good as in the OG, even tho unique weapons are more frequent (i liked the scarcity in 1), CnC was an improvement, theres move reactivity and its just overall a better game.
Arcanum - 5/10: Never got the hype with this one. Itemization is its biggest pro inside and outside of combat, setting was the second biggest pro, the main story is rather weak and forgettable. The villain has a really dull motivation, most of the plot points feel barely related to my character and i couldnt give a fuck to the whole Dwarf clan conflict, the game peaks rather early in Tarant with its huge reactivity and much like Fallout 2's new reno, the whole "live your life" vibe was great, questing offered opportunities for pretty much every character build and it was quite fun while it lasted. After it the game has a huge difficulty spike with BMM. Dungeons are also annoying since combat is bad and they are often quite long, the ruleset is quite bad and i hate that it gives you 1 point per level instead of making you feel like progression actually matters.
All in all, it had potential, but the story is weak, combat is shitty, builds are very broken by nature it has a bunch of dungeon crawling in a game that has shitty combat (the worst aside from Morrowind) and its so damn unpolished i cant understand its hype. it doesnt even have the more sparse plot structure of Fo1/2, its more of a branching path kind of game.
VTMB - 2/10 : shit is unplayable, combat is bad, quest design is ok, plot is quite mindless satire, the second half of the game is very dull and full of combat segments and i wasnt impressed with the characters. it would score higher if it had atleast decent itemization/economy or was more polished. as it is, its unplayable without fan patches so i have no idea what this is doing in a top 10.
Fallout 2 - 9/10: Aside from the story being weaker than in the OG and some locations feeling more Thematic rather than this one huge thing. This one did pretty much every other thing better. CnC is better, characterization is a huge thing even for non talking heads, Party members are more memorable, combat itemization is better (big guns are now worth a damn), skills are more balanced and overall its much cooler to roleplay at this game due to the high reactivity and bunch of freedom/options it presents. Quest design is better too Modoc/slags, The jet vaccine, Gecko powerplant and The reno families's questlines being standouts.
Fallout NV - 6/10: Main story is great, i like the CnC, itemization is the best the series ever had and its quite cool in a lot of areas. but the engine being shitty, the combat being trash and the ammount of unpolished mechanics bring it down considerably. all in all, i wouldnt replay more than my 2 playtroughts but it might be fun if you somehow manage to endure the garbage engine oh and the mostly hiking-based side quests.
Deus ex - 5/10: It tries a bunch of things, it doesnt excel in any of them, particularly, it has a skill system, but skills arent that important, it tries to be a fps/rpg but the gunplay is bad. it tries to be a conspiracy story, but instead of making me interested in the setting and its misteries by slowly revealing everything piece by piece as Age of decadence does, it throws its concept at your face in the very first scene, it tries to be a stealth-like game but the stealth mechanics are awful,etc... its not particularly good, i like its two reboots better
Gothic 2 - Never finished G2, therefore i dont have an opinion.
Morrowind - 2/10: Lol, almost unplayable, theres even anything aside from the loot that is good in this game?
