World of Gothic – Review
written by: Don-Esteban
translation: BlackLizard

Arcania – Any questions?

A cave full of goblins. What a surprise!

In the end a lot of questions remain unanswered. Why did Spellbound build such a big, connected world, which is loaded in one go, only to cut it into little-little pieces, separated from each other by rocky hillsides full of invisible walls, which are not even interconnected by overlapping quests? Concerning the game-principle, a simple level structure like in shooters or Bioware-RPG’s or The Witcher would have worked just as well. In particular, since at every changeover to another region a render-movie is shown, during which the new area could have been loaded in the background. A lot of hard work was put into the streamed world, which has not been used for the gameplay at all.
Why are there animations for forging, cooking, sleeping etc., if all of these actions have zero influence on nothing? Is there truly a player out there who buys the game in order to watch his game character perform useless animations? Who puts his character into a bed simply to watch him lying there for an hour? Here as well, the developers have done lots of work for naught, instead of connecting it to useful gameplay features.

The character development is so undemanding and random, you could even handle it if it was written in a foreign language.

Why was a landscape created which invites to be explored, when you are not allowed to stray from the path as soon as you enter the mountain areas? Why were beautiful, opulent looking places like Stewark, Silverlake castle and many others created only to barely use them, because the player will move on to never return after a few quests, since there is nothing left to do there? A shame for all the work.

Why do, on the other side of the coin, caves and dungeons look so generic, although they make up a large part of the game world and you will spend a lot of time inside? Ultimately, there are but three types: A) rock caves, B) walled dungeons, C) mine tunnels. In all three of them the respective graphics repeat themselves over and over again.

Why is the player deprived of Setarrif, which is supposed to be the main adversary of the army of Rhobar III? That’s as if you could not have entered the new camp in Gothic. As if a guard had stood there and said: “We may be the apparently big main antagonist of the story, but you won’t get in here. The way to the next quest continues over there, by the way.”

What’s with the outro? Why are there people shown who haven’t appeared throughout the whole game? What’s the connection of the narrated happenings to the game-action? Events, which might be covered in future games/add-ons should be told then, and not here right now. At the end of Diablo II for example you aren’t told the beginning of Diablo III, either. Anyhow, what kind of ending is this: Immediately after the final battle – the enemy is defeated and just about to go to its knees–the outro follows and that’s it. No pat on the back, no “Well done”, no concluding talk with anyone.

Conclusion

Arcania lags behind the standard of the genre in several disciplines. You have to ask yourself why that is so. Was Spellbound, as a beginner when it comes to RPG‘s, not able to recognize the recent developments and long established components in the RPG-sector, pick them up and implement them? Hardly, because Spellbound consists of capable people. Or is it due to financial reasons, which did not leave any resources for the implementation of things like diversified quests, a comfortable inventory, believable NPC‘s, background information spread over the game world, a demanding combat system, or a clear and comprehensible story? Was Arcania truly supposed to turn out the way it was released? What have Spellbound and JoWood been doing for three and a half years? Polishing the graphics, only to discover shortly before the release date on Wikipedia, that an RPG also needs those NPC‘s and so-called quests, of which a few were then hurriedly implemented? Apparently, trimming down was the main slogan for everything. Teachers? Get rid of ‘em! Crafting only in certain locations? To the waste dump with it! Guilds and subsequent limitations? Out-of-date! Free decisions during the gameplay? Doesn’t fit to the extremely linear story we want to tell. Different combat skills? Useless crap. Gothic background? Is just bothering. Variety of quests? Only confuses the player. Lots of NPC's with background stories? Nothing but distracting. Open world? Way too complicated!

Arcania does not really hurt, at least not most of the time, but it doesn’t raise enthusiasm either. It is not even “solid” – an attribute often ascribed to games which lack innovation. It is superficial, for most parts random, and the good basic approaches it contains were never used. At no point in time the player has to make a real decision. An impossibility for a RPG. The story, as well as the level design, are plain linear. Design and content do not complement each other. The world looks beautiful, but it does not draw the player in, because there are no characters you can share the thrill with. Because in the world, in spite of the storyline you are following, there isn’t really something happening. A lot of time was invested in polishing the graphics and the designs, and this side of the game can with no doubt be called a success – but wasn’t there enough time left for the contents in the end?

What are you supposed to think of a RPG, where you can deactivate the roleplay-activities with a switch.

The suspicion arises that JoWood has neither the competence nor the capital to compete with international RPG-productions. On the other hand, there were always some RPG-jewels in the past, which stemmed from previously unknown debutants – sometimes without a big budget. What did Piranha Bytes do before Gothic? What has CD Project Red been doing before The Witcher? Apparently, a lot depends on people with visions, as often in the creative sector. Here, there was no enthralling vision. Arcania is not only not Gothic; it is not even a real roleplay, either. In the end, it is just unambitious, and leaves a large number of standard gameplay-mechanics and feedback opportunities of the gameworld on the sideline. If this was a conscious decision, or due to a lack of time, money or ideas, only the developers know. You can describe Arcania as a game for beginners. Those who do not have had much experience with computer roleplay games, will get an impression how RPG’s are generally designed, without being overburdened by complexity. Fans of the former Gothic games however, are better served at Piranha Bytes because they probably can’t take pleasure in the significantly altered gameplay. Experienced roleplayers won’t be satisfied by Arcania either, because the much easier game-mechanics have erased every trace of a challenge. But at least you can travel through Arcania bug-free. A very positive novelty for the Gothic series.

You certainly do not have to give this title a rating of under 50% (this should be reserved for incompetencies like Forsaken Gods, which Arcania clearly does not belong to), but more than 70% can hardly be defended. In the end, it is a rather bug-free and – with a high-end processor – optically beautiful, but otherwise very average, because trivial game.

<< back

next >>