Risen Review

By Dan Whitehead Published 2 October, 2009

And fallen.

Version tested: Xbox 360

Playing Risen is a lot like being a Dickensian waif, frostbitten nose pressed up against the window of some well-to-do household on Christmas Eve, empty belly growling as you gaze at the lavish feast laid out within - so tempting, but forever out of reach. It's just that where Risen is concerned the feast is a deep and rewarding RPG, and the window is made of horrible graphics, opaque design and clumsy combat.

The latest effort from German developer Piranha Bytes, it finds you washed ashore on the mysterious volcanic island of Faranga, beginning your adventure with just rags on your back and a stick in your hand. The land is blighted by mysterious ruins that have erupted from the Earth, spewing monsters like cut-price Oblivion Gates. This leads to a social schism between idealistic bandits living in the swamp and the religious fervour of the Inquisition. Both are plundering the ruins for gold and artefacts, as well as warring with each other, and you can work for either faction, if you're able to win their favour. It's about as generic as RPG world-building gets, and you're stymied from the start by a game engine that feels half-finished, making these initial forays into Risen's gloomy medieval world an exercise in frustration and disappointment.

Playable only in third-person perspective, movement is jerky and imprecise while the camera's twitchy lurching responses lead to motion sickness as you whirl around trying to work out which way to go in environments that too often lack distinguishing features. Combat is basic and graceless, a simple matter of bashing the A button to attack the giant sea vultures, gnomes and wolves that populate the area. The game employs a vague lock-on system that automatically kicks in when an enemy is up close and directly in front of you, but it apparently can't be arsed keeping tabs on an enemy should they suddenly feint around to flank you, which is, of course, precisely when a lock-on is most necessary.

'Risen' Screenshot 1

RPG life ain't nothin' but witches and hoes.

This leads to immediate frustration as you grapple with your first few battles, and while experience dulls the pain over time it never stops being an annoyance. Fighting more than one enemy at a time is particularly aggravating, as they swarm from all sides, knocking lumps off your health bar while you flail and spin, wrestling with sluggish dodges, ineffectual parries and slippery viewpoints to line up a successful strike. The infrastructure seemingly goes out of its way to be as unintuitive and impenetrable as possible, too. A variety of busy, imposing menus are assigned to the d-pad. There's absolutely nothing to tell you what each menu button is for, or even how to perform basic functions like equipping items or assigning them to face-button shortcuts.

Anyone with a little RPG experience will work it out, of course, but that doesn't excuse the crude way the game throws you into a hostile world and then makes your support system so persistently unhelpful. You can always play with the manual to hand but that simply shouldn't be necessary in this day and age. Even the option to view the control layout would go some way to demystifying some of the stranger button allocations, but there's literally nothing in-game to illuminate the often arcane jumble of elements that are familiar yet needlessly elusive.

'Risen' Screenshot 2

The game never looks this good in reality.

For example, pressing right calls up an overlay showing what clothing, weapons and items you have currently equipped. You can highlight each item, but can you change them from this screen? Apparently not. Instead you have to press up to access the sprawling inventory in a different overlay and choose your equipment from there, before going back to the first menu to see the effect of your changes. It should be as simple and streamlined as possible, especially since the game doesn't pause while you're in the menus, but Risen seems determined to make basic housekeeping tasks long-winded, confusing and utterly unnecessary.

The map is similarly obtuse, making simple navigation a needless chore. Maps must be found or earned, but only appear as static images. You can't highlight areas of interest to see what they are, and there are no waypoints or fast travel. Even more irritating, the vital function of finding a quest objective is buried under a sequence of menu navigations that must be performed every time you check the map. So you open the map and, since there's no single active quest, navigate across the various quest factions in the left-hand window and then down through an ever-expanding list to the quest you want to locate. You then have to use the right-hand window to scroll over to the quest map, which simply shows your location as an arrow, and the quest-giver and objective as coloured dots. If you want to check that you're still on course if a battle turns you around, you need to do this all over again. It's a maddening, ponderous chore that bleeds the life out of simple exploration, the lifeblood of any RPG.

Another genre cornerstone that gets short shrift is levelling. Rather than assigning your own priorities after each level attained, experience is instead converted into "learning points", which can be cashed in with characters that teach you new abilities or increase your attributes in a certain field. These characters also demand payment in gold, even if you're recruited into their army and training you is their job. With limited opportunities to swell the coffers in the early stages, this mercenary attitude leaves you spinning your wheels as you grind away to become strong enough to begin the adventure proper. It feels too much like a really dull MMO with no other players, looting chests to scrape together enough trinkets to trade for enough gold to earn Strength +1, and it does little to encourage continued play.

With so many quirks and flaws in the RPG basics, it doesn't help that the game looks absolutely terrible. Character models look like they've wandered in from an MS-DOS game and their constant inexplicable arm-waving during dialogue undermines the decent voice work and naturalistic script, giving proceedings a distracting Thunderbirds atmosphere. The environments also fail to inspire, maintaining the low-tech aesthetic with ugly textures, repetitive detail and a draw distance that fills in the horizon with jagged diagonal chunks. The frame-rate ping-pongs up and down, movement is hampered by snags and glitches and reloading a previous save can take up to 30 seconds, even if you're still in the same area. With such consistently mediocre performance it comes as no surprise that when installed on the Xbox 360 hard drive the whole game takes up a meagre 2.5Gb of space. Hardly the sort of footprint you'd expect for a massive open-ended RPG in the HD era.

'Risen' Screenshot 3

Quick! Use the Iron Greaves of Breath Freshening!

Many of these features - and their attendant criticisms - will be familiar to anyone who followed Piranha Bytes' fine but flawed Gothic series, which now resides with another developer. Indeed, so many elements - from the narrative use of mages and monasteries right down to the way you cook animal meat in your frying pan - are blatantly lifted from those past glories. So much so that it's difficult not to see Risen as the developer trying to reboot its golden goose under a different name. Sadly, rather than improving, Risen suggests that the formula is deteriorating, as minor niggles from previous games are now far more prominent and problematic. The move to consoles must surely play a part as well, since so many of the issues with unintuitive controls suggest a development team unused to the world beyond keyboard and mouse.

It's something of a tragedy, since there's clearly a really good RPG buried under all this technical mediocrity. The gameworld may feel like a patchwork of other RPG settings, but it flows seamlessly and once you've picked up enough equipment and skills to make the control problems more manageable the urge to explore becomes much stronger. With dozens of varied skills to master, hundreds of quests and a potentially rich system of magic, potions and scrolls, there's no shortage of depth for players with the fortitude to battle past the wonky exterior. I begrudgingly began to enjoy myself after about 20 hours of play, but not so much that the thought of the hours ahead didn't feel like a sentence.

It ultimately comes down to effort versus reward, and Risen requires a lot of effort on your part. Not just the usual time investment needed to get the most out of serious role-playing but a conscious decision to put up with the crude interfaces, to tolerate the stodgy combat and to generally make the best of a game that is fundamentally unappealing in too many core areas. Even for players who put in that level of effort, the reward is only worthwhile when considered in isolation. If this were the only console RPG available the numerous flaws might be worth suffering, but when compared to the ambition and polish that other games have brought to the genre in recent years Risen demands far too much and offers too little in return.

4 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Dan.

About Dan Whitehead

Dan has been writing for Eurogamer since 2006 and specialises in RPGs, shooters and games for children. His bestest game ever is Julian Gollop's Chaos.

Read more articles from Dan by visiting the Dan Whitehead archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (236) Latest comment 8 months ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • DUFFMAN5 #1 2 years ago

    Oh my god you scored it 4! you did the same with Two Worlds (I think) oh well I like it.You are wrong re the no pause, although the game world does on around you, you don't interact with it ie if you are being attacked you can open the menu and you will not be attacked during that time, once you close the menu the game continues. I totally agree with a lot of the other points you make. The map and various menus are pants. I thought the same, re the fact you have to go into the map screen all the time, cycle across to quest map, once you close and go back in, once again you have to go through the whole thing again, and again. It is a pain.
    For me much like TW before it, the game while flawed just works on some level for me.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 08:09

  • MrWonderstuff #2 2 years ago

    Ouch. That 360 version really isn't worth the effort. PC may fair better in the controls department...one assumes this is Gothic 3.5? I had noticed the graphics hadn't improved since G3 and its a shame to hear that things havent improved. Hey ho...I'll download the demo and see what all the fuss is about.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 08:08

  • PearOfAnguish #3 2 years ago

    Yeah...really don't agree with this score. I'm playing the apparently inferior 360 version and loving it. Definitely one to try, don't dismiss it on the basis of this review. It is certainly nothing like the travesty that was Two Worlds.

    Fighting more than one enemy at a time is particularly aggravating, as they swarm from all sides, knocking lumps off your health bar while you flail and spin, wrestling with sluggish dodges, ineffectual parries and slippery viewpoints to line up a successful strike. The infrastructure seemingly goes out of its way to be as unintuitive and impenetrable as possible, too. A variety of busy, imposing menus are assigned to the d-pad. There's absolutely nothing to tell you what each menu button is for, or even how to perform basic functions like equipping items or assigning them to face-button shortcuts.

    While I don't disagree that the game could have done with a tutorial, you only need to read the manual for a second to figure this stuff out. Hold down right trigger to lock on to an enemy, and when fighting in groups they will not attack you all at once. I was confused by this at first as well. Assigning items to the shortcuts is easy too, you just hold down left trigger and press a face button.
    Edited by 4 at 02/10/09 @ 08:49

  • loopholezero #4 2 years ago

    disappointing review, mr whitehead, but let's take things one by one here.
    first, there should have been separate reviews for the xbox and pc versions, since they're NOT the same.
    most other problems with the review stem from here, but some seem to point out that you haven't really understood some things about the game, therefore you didn't play it as it was meant to be played.

    "movement is jerky and imprecise while the camera's twitchy lurching responses lead to motion sickness" - not on pc

    "combat is basic and graceless, a simple matter of bashing the A button" - wrong, if you just mash the attack button, you die. you need to dodge, parry and generally time your actions quite well if you don't want to get killed before managing to get even a couple of hits in your enemy. upgrading the various weapon skills unlocks a lot more combat moves, allows you to perform combos, etc. i really can't imagine how anyone could get through the game by just mashing attack, perhaps on easy.

    "There's absolutely nothing to tell you what each menu button is for, or even how to perform basic functions like equipping items" - again, i don't know about the xbox version, but on the pc you CLICK an object and there you go, as if by magic, it suddenly equipped.

    "Instead you have to press up to access the sprawling inventory in a different overlay...etc" - not on the pc. you press I to open the inventory, C to view the character screen, and you equip/use items with a simple click.

    "there are no waypoints or fast travel." - there is fast travel, in form of teleport stones..

    "Even more irritating, the vital function of finding a quest objective is buried under a sequence of menu navigations that must be performed every time you check the map." - no, you press L and a map of the local area is displayed and you and your objectives are all displayed. the map is even live, in the sense that you can move around while having it on screen and it shows all you need to know for you to be able to set a bee-line towards your desired objective. you have a quest journal and clicking on each quest will show its respective objectives on the map.

    about leveling, i found it rewarding. after finding a trainer and spending some learning points and gold, there is a difference. you are actually STRONGER (if you spend points in strength, that is), etc. enemies that you had to run from before now become beatable, etc.

    "game looks absolutely terrible" - the character models have little detail, yes. everything else looks gorgeous (can't speak for the xbox version, of course). the game also runs great, with everything maxed, on my 8800gt + a 2.3ghz dualcore.

    "distance that fills in the horizon with jagged diagonal chunks" - the draw distance is customizable and there are NO "jagged diagonal chunks".

    "reloading a previous save can take up to 30 seconds" - it's 10 seconds on the pc.

    this was a poor effort on your part, mr whitehead and shame on eurogamer for being scroungy enough not to allow for 2 different reviews, one for each platform, especially in such a case, where the versions they seem to be nothing alike. very disappointing and, a bit shameful to review the worst version and give the game the same score for both platforms, without caring for the fact that most of the problems you mention don't have anything to do with the pc version.

    as far as i'm concerned, this is one of the most addictive rpgs i've played in a long while. pc users, try the demo, if rpgs interest you in the slightest. you can find links here: http://ww w.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/10/...

  • Spekingur #5 2 years ago

    Does Dan even like RPGs? Has Oblivion (and Fallout) completely buggered up how people want RPGs to behave (easy mode: on)?
    I don't see any mention of how this game runs on a PC.
    And I also would like to point out that the read seems to remind somewhat of Witcher ;P

  • beastmaster #6 2 years ago

    Review - not on PC

    I am sure there's a massive difference, but 2 seperate reviews for same game? Don't think that'll happen. As a 360 owner I found this review very informative but will also check out other reviews as well.

  • JayG #7 2 years ago

    Great game on the pc, easily the best RPG since Fallout 3. Fighting multiple enemies is easy enough, just use right mouse button to block and attack when u get the chance. Doesn't hand hold, but like most rpg's sometime's it's best to use your surroundings when thing's get too tough, or simply run away and come back when u got some more level's under your belt. I'd totally agree with the 8 rating.

  • mandella #8 2 years ago

    So, let me get this straight. You are reviewing the game for both platforms in one review and bascially you complain mostly about graphics, controls and combat, all of which are far behind the PC version. So, maybe, next time make two reviews! One for PC, one for console version. Seriously, such reviews like this one are more fitting to some blog than site Eurogamer.
    Not only this review says nothing about controls/graphics of the clearly superior PC version, but it also says almost nothing about the game itself. It's all constant ranting about technical issues.
    Simply put: bad review preceeded by lame approach to reviewing multiplatform games.
    Lately you are giving me more and more reasons to look for another favorite gaming site :(

  • MrWonderstuff #9 2 years ago

    This game was written for the PC first and foremost with clearly little thought for the 360 version (easy money?). Would have been nice to have a little segment in the review for the PC version.

  • mkreku #10 2 years ago

    I'm getting this game today! Woohoo! Despite Mr. Whitehead's review, this is my most anticipated game this year :)

  • HermitArcader #11 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 09:17:39 22-12-2011

  • lutstoomas #12 2 years ago

    This game is a lot of fun (on the PC) and this review is very unprofessional.

  • Erebu #13 2 years ago

    Got a 7/X360 and a 8/PC from your German sister-site.
    Seriously if you don't like the genre don't review it.

  • wayne040576 #14 2 years ago

    Ah Shite. I only ordred this from Amazon on Wednesday coming off the back of a great experience with Demon's souls. It has already shipped too. I saw some 80% reviews on metacritic and thought it would be worth a look. Hopefully this is one of the more harsh EG reviews.

    And I got the bloody 360 version as well. Why did I do that?
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 09:10

  • matrim83 #15 2 years ago

    I agree with most people in the comments, this is one of the poorest reviews I have read here. And I have been here awhile.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 08:59

  • ChaK #16 2 years ago

    I agree with every single point, but 4 is too low. It's a 6 for me, I dont' like this game, but I know it's good for RPG whores :p

  • Delavander #17 2 years ago

    4/10 for the best pc game ive played so far in this year? --> lol
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 09:01

  • DUFFMAN5 #18 2 years ago

    As someone who loves the game and has been playing it fairly non stop since last Saturday I think a 6 (360) would have been fair. It does have faults (many games do) but it is a lot of fun and ticks a lot of the right rpg boxes for me.

  • mingster #19 2 years ago

    The picture caption 'aint nothin but witches and hoes' is probably the funniest thing i've read on here in ages.
    Whoever came up with that deserves an extra jaffa cake. Genius.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 09:02

  • AccidentProne #20 2 years ago

    Well that review has certainly put me off buying the 360 version at least. Seems like a game that definitely needs a separate review though, most of the criticisms seem to be levelled at playing the game on a console. Shame, as I was really in the market for a decent console rpg right now. I may still check it out on pc, I assume there's a demo available?

  • madmax17 #21 2 years ago

    Bad score, bad eurogamer, BAD!

    Game is a gem, on the pc, if you are a Gothic fan it's 10/10 easily, why review it on a console it's a pc game.

  • UncleLou #22 2 years ago

    Wow. Seems extremely harsh (and downright wrong in places), from the couple of hours I've played it. But then many of the complaints (controls, terrible graphics) don't apply to the PC version.
    Edited by 3 at 02/10/09 @ 09:08

  • kangarootoo #23 2 years ago

    Balls!!!

    I was going to buy this today (360 version). Maybe a rental instead? Doesn't sound like a full rpice sale for me anymore, and I was so looking forward to it. I think I might go and cry in the toilets. :(


    Update. The toilets were too far to walk to at this time in the morning, so I stayed and read the comment thread. Now I'm not sure what to do. You lot are renown for dismissing faults and complaining about reviews, just because you like some obscure aspect of a game. But I am starting to wonder whether the old school Gothic RPG loving fogey in me would actually feel the same way if I played this.

    Looks like a rental now, but I'm not feeling so dismayed as I was 2 mins ago.

  • peak_performance #24 2 years ago

    Ja, would def be good if reviews state explicitely what system is used, as in "reviewed on Xbox 360." Different reviews for clearly different systems is ofc the most wanted solution but I can understand that it's not possible every time.

    Edit: Too bad that console gamers got shafted on this since PC gamers seem to have much fun with it, I'll be getting it after I've upgraded my computer. The review was good on that part.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 09:08

  • Maykael #25 2 years ago

    Why'd you only review the console version for fuck's sake?!?! Or why did you not say anything about the PC version that looks better and controls better, things that really ease your way to that great RPG that really is this game. I'm not some PB fanboy bashing you around. I actually fucking hate the Gothic series for some reason (I think interface related)..., but I could get over my problems with this crazy game and it has really warmed up to me. It has a nice story. You do have some impact in the world (Those guys in the camp that really start working and keep on working after you tell them too,for example) and while the RPG system is quite obtuse at first, anyone with a bit of experience will get their head around it quite fast.

    PS: This does remind me of the The Witcher, who scored low for the same superficial reason. I repeat this comes from a guy that does believe interface and pacing are very important. I hate games with difficulty spike, but both the Witcher and Risen do compensate for these problems. Both are solid RPGs and they shouldn't be dragged down for their old-school mannerisms. Sometimes old-school is not a bad thing at all.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 09:15

  • loopholezero #26 2 years ago

    @kangaroo: it's better than the gothics, at least as far as i got. and you can find some demo links here: http://ww w.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/10/... go see for yourself!

  • seasidebaz #27 2 years ago

    Wow, I thought I'd walked into a Darkfall re-review judging by the comments here...

  • Javier·de·Ass #28 2 years ago

    Dan Whitehead are you fucking high?

  • Shigawire #29 2 years ago

    I'm happy that Eurogamer.net only gave a 4. Simply because the console port of the game is in a horrible state and instead of pushing the console release back they simply threw it on the market. It has to be noted here that the screens used inside the test are from the PC version as the console port simply looks ugly and for the last few months it hardly was possible to even get screens and videos from the console port. Obviously the publisher knew of the reduced marketing ability of the port. In its current state the console port looks with its low res textures, low details overall, weak character models, low viewing distance etc. more like an xbox 1 game than a 360 game and on top of that you have clumsy control scheme & camera plus a tiny font size for HD TV, which is barely readable, and missing features like adjustable gamma which makes the game in some areas to dark to play. Underneath it may be still a game worth playing, but only if one can live with its technical failures. Because of this downside in the console version the publisher obviously wants to put out a patch to address at least a few of these issues. This really sounds like damage control to me and I wonder how big this patch must be if they want to exchange all those low res textures. If you have a half decent PC than get the game for the PC, the console version is not worth the money so far.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 09:14

  • NonShinyGoose #30 2 years ago

    There's a slightly more positive review over at GamesAsylum - [link url=http://www.gamesas ylum.com/?p=2810
    ]http://www.gamesas ylum.com/?p=2810
    [/link]

  • XAleX360 #31 2 years ago

    Poor review. It's labeled as Xbox 360/PC but it never talks a single bit about the PC version, which as I'm told and many people in the comments are writing IS very good actually.

    I guess Eurogamer has to shoot some crazy article like this, sometimes.

  • mkreku #32 2 years ago

    Some gaming sites has a small "second opinion" box next to the main review, with a mini review from one of their other reviewers. Maybe Eurogamer should implement that too? This seems like a game that divides people into love/hate groups.

  • JayG #33 2 years ago

    The Xbox conversion might be below par, but the review states it's for pc and xbox. PC tends to get shafted a lot on ports, and that is rarely mentioned in reviews. If the PC version of FIFA 2010 was the main review, that would probably be a 4 or so. Then very few people play fifa on computers, so the version tends to be a afterthought anyway. GTA 4 was a total disaster. Been honest the pc version is obviously influenced a lot by the xbox one, an issue that occur's in a awful lot of pc games these days. Divine Divinity 2 removed the ability to move items, something that was a vital part of the first one. It is a pity that u don't get many PC games that make use of the platform strength's any more, and instead we get bastardised versions that run on both platforms while ignoring the strengths of both.

  • Hunam #34 2 years ago

    Telling a reviewer he is playing a game wrong is counter-productive, if he can't figure it out what chance does joe public?

    Does seem like there is a gulf between the PC and 360 versions though so it is a shame to see them reviewed as one on the lesser format.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 09:35

  • kangarootoo #35 2 years ago

    @loopholezero

    Nice one, cheers. I think my work PC might be up to the job of running it so at least I can get a taster.

  • Darren #36 2 years ago

    I downloaded the PC demo last night and briefly tried it this morning. It seems OK but as Dan Whitehead said very generic for an RPG. I got killed by an oversized vulture as the game failed to explain what keys I needed to use to access my inventory and equip a weapon. Fortunately it has auto-saved so it was easy to retry and, in fact, killing the vulture was actually piss-easy after all... just hammer the left mouse button until dead and occasionally press the right one to parry.

    Graphically the opening section was quite atmospheric with the rain and thunder/lightning but despite the game defaulting to maximum settings on my system with 16X AF at 1920x1200 it ran at 30-40 fps but never felt totally smooth. Feels like it could do with some serious optimisation really. There's no in-game v-sync option, a depressingly common oversight in many PC games these days, but it can be forced via the graphics driver control panel so it's not that big of a deal. Doesn't excuse why such a basic option isn't included as a standard setting though. Anti-aliasing is also not supported, which might OK for the consoles but is unforgivable on the PC.

    I'm going to play a little more of the demo across the weekend but, in all honesty, I didn't see anything there in my inital playthrough that made me want to buy it. Seems very ordinary. Oh and it didn't seem to be anywhere near as bad as the awful Two Worlds.

  • hoof #37 2 years ago

    As soon as I saw his name at the top, I knew it would be a poor review, his always read like somebody who doesn't really like or understand games being forced to play them.

  • Dizzy #38 2 years ago

    Now I am confused. A lot of EGers seems to like the game a lot based on the forum thread (360 and PC version). This review seems to tell us that the game is a total loss. Hmmm... gonna try that demo first but TBH I do not play games like this on my PC, I like to sit in the couch for these late night explore RPGs.

  • DUFFMAN5 #39 2 years ago

    @SJH
    Which one of you is marking me down for pointing that out?


    I like that. I'm going to + you right there, just becasue that made me laugh. It was not me btw.

  • systems #40 2 years ago

    So is this the review for the console version (worse graphics and interface) or the PC version?

    I'm having it regardless. I loved Gothic 1/2/3, and was even a little fond of Two Worlds.

    Edit - oh, you reviewed the 360 version. Great.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 09:43

  • Darren #41 2 years ago

    To anyone who has the PC retail version... is this supposed to support the Xbox 360 controller as I tried it this morning and it didn't work (I did turn the controller on after the game had loaded so it's possible it may not have detected it at that stage). I know the Game for Windows branding doesn't mean controller support but in most cases it does. Anyone know? With it being third-person I wondered if it might play better with the controller than the mouse and keyboard. I'd like to be able to try it out at least.

  • Shigawire #42 2 years ago

    A few screenshots of the console version just for the showing the difference to the PC Version:

    edit: didn't work this way

    [link url=http://www.gamepro.de/_misc/galleries/deta il.cfm?pk=55598&fk=1231777##
    ]http://ww w.gamepro.de/_misc/galleries/de...[/link]

    Edited by 2 at 02/10/09 @ 09:51

  • MrWonderstuff #43 2 years ago

    Your links don't work.

  • systems #44 2 years ago

    The links work fine if you take the newline characters off the end of the links

  • Darren #45 2 years ago

    Those links don't work for me, Shigawire.

  • semtex03 #46 2 years ago

    Is the bloke on the box art the same person that advertises Greggs?

  • Darren #47 2 years ago

    Thanks, system... got to see the pics at last.

    So the 360 version appears to have some AA and the PC version doesn't support it at all. Nice!

  • jimboton #48 2 years ago

    I can't believe you've actually gone and reviewed the vastly inferior 360 version,while actually displaying the pc version and screenshots all over the page.

    Instead of paying all that mind to the map you could have tried to do some actual exploring by yourself. Not every game is meant to take you by the hand, give you gps, radar, and breadcrumbs, and that is a good thing.

    It seems the only things a game needs to score big in EG these days are great graphics and retard proof accessibility.

    "It's something of a tragedy, since there's clearly a really good RPG buried under all this technical mediocrity" Tragedy indeed. These days you are only fit to review really mediocre games with great technology.
    Edited by 2 at 02/10/09 @ 09:58

  • systems #49 2 years ago

    Those shots look very Vaseline-smeared to me. Glad I ordered the PC version now.

  • jimboton #50 2 years ago

    @squarejawhero
    Indeed, i picked the wrong url, sorry :p

  • northside #51 2 years ago

    This hasn't dampened my enthusiasm for this game as I loved the Gothic series, including the mess that was Gothic 3. In any case, ever since Oblivion convinced everyone that they're a fan of this genre I tend not to trust mainstream reviews of western RPG's.

  • Baranga #52 2 years ago

    For the first time I agree with the Internet trend of saying Eurogamer's reviews are crap. FFS. It's like I'm reading about a completely different game than the Risen I play!

  • Shigawire #53 2 years ago

    Anyone who liked the Gothic series probably will like this game too as long it is played on the PC.

  • loopholezero #54 2 years ago

    @darren: about playing with a controller, try xinput emu: [link url=http://www.tocaedit.com/IB/index.php?automo dule=downloads&showfile=34
    ]http://ww w.tocaedit.com/IB/index.php?aut...[/link]
    or xpadder: [link url=http://xpadder.com/
    ]http://xpadder.com/
    [/link]

    dunno about xinput, but i've seen elsewhere xpadder has been confirmed to work.

  • DaemonSpawn #55 2 years ago

    Oops. I've just bought it for my 360. Hope it's not THAT bad.

  • Darren #56 2 years ago

    Thanks loopholezero. I'll stick with mouse and keyboard for the demo then; I just wanted to know if the 360 controller was supported natively that's all. It would have been nice to try it as it frees me up from having to sit at a desk to play the demo that's all. No big deal. :)

  • BaggyAnt #57 2 years ago

    Bollocks to it - I am still buying it, I loved Sacred 2 and EG hated that as well so I think it's worth a gamble

  • spekkeh #58 2 years ago

    RPG life ain't nothin' but witches and hoes.

    I loled so hard at this, well played.

  • justsomeone #59 2 years ago

    dear eurogamer.

    please review PC games on the PC first. if you must, then tell us how the console version is broken (mostly because of not having a mouse), or how the console version is actually fine (clever mechanics overcome lack of mouse), and you're done.

    thanks.

  • Tiger_Walts #60 2 years ago

    Gah, I didn't know that R-trigger locked on. Review code didn't ship with a manual and if it ever popped up on screen I missed it.

    You can change items on the character overlay screen. You need to highlight the thing you want to change and then use the r-stick to move down to the box with the items. Took me a bit of fiddling to work that out.

  • mkreku #61 2 years ago

    This comments thread makes me happy :) It's so good to see that the people who have already played this thinks it's good because the Gothic series is my favourite game series of all time. Even if it got a 4, I am positive I will enjoy it immensely. Can't wait to get home from work and try it!

  • fredrikpj #62 2 years ago

    This game is completely awesome, much better than Gothic 3 :)
    And also, the game actually is as beatiful as on the screenshots, if you're on a pc.

    I'd give this a 8.5/10

    EDIT: The xbox 360 version is vastly inferior, the graphics in that version is a complete joke, basically you're getting low graphics settings in the pc version. So if you have the possability to get the pc version I'd recommend getting that one.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 10:34

  • KayAU #63 2 years ago

    I managed to get hold of the PC version from a local games shop on Wednesday, and can confirm that, for that version at least, 4/10 is a ridiculously unfair score. So far, Risen is looking a lot like another Gothic, with the main differences being that the setting is new (yet similar), and that many things actually seem to have been improved. The overall production quality seems higher than earlier Piranha Bytes releases, some aspects of the gameplay seem to have been improved (e.g. combat AI), and some new ones have been introduced (which I will not spoil).

    Yeah, so this isn't Oblivion. You are not guided every step of the way. You can get killed, and you may have to actually think in order to solve problems. You are thrown head first into a rich, living game world, and then you will have to learn how to succeed in it. But guess what, some of us actually like some excitement and challenge in our games.

    Based on my experiences so far, Id give the PC version of Risen is a 9/10.

  • AbyssUK #64 2 years ago

    A great pc game with a shocking XBox port... thats one for the books. We PC gamers have been putting up with shite xbox ports for ages now

  • darkmorgado #65 2 years ago

    Didn't PC Zone just award this 85%? And they usually hate foreign RPGs.
    I agree with the other comments on here... the review came across as incredibly lazy. If you are reviewing a hardcore RPG like this, ALWAYS review it on the PC FIRST and then make comment about other versions. These games are designed and built to be played on PC.

  • Abscido #66 2 years ago

    Give Dan a break guys. He reviewed the 360 version and gave that version what (according to reports) it deserved. If a developer releases multi-platofrm on the same day, with one port far inferior despite masquerading as the same game, then they run the risk of this happening.

  • Hantheman #67 2 years ago

    Hmm hadn't heard much of this game, might check it out now after you guys have all defended it with such vigour!

    Never played the Gothic games mind.

    Is Dan gonn be reviewed Dragon Age lol

  • Miniu #68 2 years ago

    Abscido then Fifa 10 reviews should be based on PC version ..

  • fredrikpj #69 2 years ago

    @Abscido: Problem is Dan putting 4/10 on both pc and 360 versions, which will turn pc users away from a really great game. Yes, the xbox 360 version is broken, Im sure even the developers of the pc version hates it as well, but guessing their publisher wanted to make money and pushed it out the door.

    I think it's only fair that Eurogamer actually check out the pc version as well and give it a seperate review, as there's obviously a massive difference between the different versions.

  • jaxon58 #70 2 years ago

    I hope this review doesn't put people off buying the PC version, the devs deserve the sales. A definite purchase for me after playing the demo.

  • Obit #71 2 years ago

    Playing this on 360, and while the graphics are quite bad, the controls are excellent after you get used to them.
    Wonder if the reviewer even played more than the first couple of hours in the game, since appearently he doesn't even know about teleport stones, which you get one of at the start of chapter 2, so pretty hard to miss.
    Disappointing.

  • sneetch #72 2 years ago

    Normally I'm the first to defend the reviewer's right to having an opinion if he thought the 360 version was 4/10 then fair enough.

    However, by the sounds of this, Dan screwed the PC version when he reviewed the 360 version and then ascribed the review to both PC and 360.

    Personally, I suspect I'll be picking this up.

  • chudders #73 2 years ago

    This is like Dorkfail all over again.

  • Old_Books #74 2 years ago

    So, is the 360 version a total loss then? The impression I'm getting from the comments here is that it's clearly inferior to the PC version but that the review is a pile of wank anyway from someone who is not interested in the genre.

  • darkmorgado #75 2 years ago

    This is like Dorkfail all over again

    Except Dorkfail actually is an ugly, broken heap of crap with an unintuitive interface. This looks like pure gold (and I hated Gothic) and will be picking it up on lunch today. I've been looking forward to it for ages, and since finally finishing every single quest and exploring every nook in fallout 3, I need something else to eat my life for a while.

  • darkmorgado #76 2 years ago

    Actually, I have just remembered that I never got around to finishing Witcher, which has to be one of the best RPGs in recent memory.

  • Abscido #77 2 years ago

    @Miniu and Fred

    Not sure I agree with the Fifa analogy - though it's a good point - mainly because, like it or not, consoles are the primary market right now, even for a CRPG like this. You have to cater to your primary demographic. The people who will likely enjoy Risen the most? PC gamers. The people who will read this review to be informed? Probably 80% 360 gamers.

    Sounds like Risen really needs a separate PC review, but that's not Dan's fault ... how was he to know? It's the fault of the developers and publishers for shovelling out a shoddy port, if that's the case. There should never be a discrepancy in score of - say - three marks between ports of the same game, no matter what its 'native system' is.

  • LewisResolution #78 2 years ago

    I'd say Dan's pretty much right about everything he says. It's a clumsily presented, sluggishly paced and often rather broken title, and I'd say the console version's problems aren't really what bring the game down. They're there, sure, and are annoyances, but it's more broken in a fundamental game design sense.

    The thing is, though, that Risen is definitely going to be adored by a lot of people. There's that niche, Gothic-loving audience who are going to lap this up, and that's great - the game's kind of for them. But as a relatively high-profile multiformat release, it's not just aimed at them any more, which is why there's a problem. As such, I think it's fair to assume fans of the developer are going to find something to love as it uses pretty much the same formula, while newcomers will be less impressed by the way it sits unfavourably next to a number of more polished genre examples.

    I sixed it over at resolution-magazine .co.uk, but it wasn't an easy one to review. I really loved parts of it - the hostile atmosphere, the sense of a world in chaos, and some elements of the fighting in particular. But while I often found myself totally absorbed, equally frequently I found myself bored, struggling to work out where I needed to go and what I needed to do, thanks to an abominable map and quest system (again, on the 360 at least) and a distinct lack of nice, helpful people to guide you on your way.

    A really curious and interesting game, but ultimately not one I enjoyed a lot.

  • andywilkie35 #79 2 years ago

    I've got a £20 voucher at HMV, might use it on this, still think it sounds ok

  • Monkey_Puncher #80 2 years ago

    Why are all these nerds getting so worked up about a review and taking the criticism so personally?

    If you like the game, great for you, the reviews not there to change your opinion...

  • matrim83 #81 2 years ago

    This is like Dorkfail all over again.

    Except that it isnt. The dorkfail fiasco happened because their entire forum populace descended here to protest the score. Its hard to take them seriously when you know they are only here for that one game and that one score.

    But when your own faithful readers are telling you that you fucked up the review, its quite a different scene. Look around the comments. Most of the people slagging the review are NOT new guys who have just registered to express their displeasure. They dont have a vested interest like the Dorkfail community. In fact it is EG's own community thats taking up the pitchforks.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 11:58

  • Haloboy #82 2 years ago

    Dan Whitehead sure does suck today. The PC demo of Risen made me want to buy the game at least. Job done.

  • Miniu #83 2 years ago

    Abscido well hes not just some random internet user in comments section. When you are reviewing multiplatform title in one review for all platforms then at least you should check if there are some differences dont you agree ? For readers who can choose on with platform they want to play it may be very important .

  • LewisResolution #84 2 years ago

    PC review code, as far as I know, only shipped to PC-exclusive publications. I know we weren't given a choice in the matter. The 360 code just came through.

    In all the documentation with it, in all the pre-release talk and press releases and other stuff, there was never at any point any mention of differences between the two games. Obviously a high-end PC is going to make the game look prettier than the 360 version, but that's kind of a given. The other stuff, on a simultaneous multi-format release when no information about the differences has been specified, is material you have to assume has been optimised for all formats, because without playing the game you just don't know, and you have to give the benefit of the doubt.

    In this case, sure, it definitely seems like the 360 version suffers from a number of problems that the PC version doesn't. But that's information that's only really emerged today, since the general public have been able to get their hands on the game - or, at least, since yesterday when the demo came out. Review code was distributed almost a month ago, and most reviews will have been tied up and ready to go long before anyone really knew of these differences.

    Reviewing all formats by default is logistically and financially stupid. To know whether there will be key differences between versions, in a situation where none have been specified by the only people in the know - ie. the people who made it and are distributing it - is an impossible task. Eurogamer, Dan and anyone else in the exact same position is at absolutely no fault here. Make your beef with those who optimised the game poorly, if anyone at all.

    -- A quick edit, though: I honestly don't think that the 360 version's failings really affect the quality of the game too much. The interface issues, sure, are a big problem. But Risen's the sort of game that's conceptually going to be quite divisive. It feels like it's aimed at a particular niche, yet it's a high-profile, multi-format release that's going to be played by a huge range of people. I think a lot of people will really like Risen, but most won't. It's too slow, too unhelpful in its presentation, and too alienating in its harshness to be effortlessly enjoyable by a majority.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 12:17

  • Nephirion #85 2 years ago

    Eurogamer scoring as inconsistent and random at its finest
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 12:20

  • Abscido #86 2 years ago

    Miniu - Did you clamour for a PC review of Fallout 3? Oblivion? Sacred 2? Would you clamour for a review of Tales of Monkey Island on Wii, on top of the PC version? What about Left 4 Dead? No one was bleating for a PC review of that. Will you want reviews of both versions of Dragon Age? Do you know why the latter case won't be so important? Because Bioware do their job properly and make both versions acceptable.

    Anyeay, I think the game was merely listed as being available for both systems, just as the publisher would want it to be. I don't think Dan makes a single reference to the PC version otherwise? It would be very, very different had he mentioned - even casually - the PC version as being in line with this version. (In saying that, he probably should have admitted to not having seen the PC version, if only to have pre-empted a situation like this.)

    Do I think a reviewer is obliged to check all versions of a multi-platform game? No. Simply because, in this day and age, it is unacceptable to have such differing versions of the same game. And it is the same game right? Unlike your example Fifa, which is the same brand, but a different game for its various platforms.


    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 12:22

  • JahB #87 2 years ago

    this thread is ridiculous. it's a 360 review and has nothing to do with the pc version...

    just imagine this the other way round - the game gets an 8 on PC, which might then lead to a lot of 360 owners thinking "hey, that's a good game" and then picking up an absolute turd.

  • loopholezero #88 2 years ago

    @abscido: if the versions are different enough, then yes, different reviews are warranted.

  • autogunner #89 2 years ago

    I agree with the reviewers comments, for a 360 game shoddy controls and overcomplicated UI hamper the experience far more than on a PC.

  • sneetch #90 2 years ago

    @Abscido @JahB

    If you click on the "PC" link in the bar to the left you go to the PC section, on the front page of the PC section is a link to this review which, granted, takes you back to the Xbox section but it's supposed to be the review for both PC and Xbox versions.

    If it wasn't then they shouldn't tag it with the PC icon or have it in the PC section.

  • fredrikpj #91 2 years ago

    @People saying it's a nische title, obviously you're right, and it should then be reviewed accordingly by people liking that genre.
    The same could be said for Demon's Souls, which also is an awesome game, but most people will find it too hard.

  • peak_performance #92 2 years ago

    @JahB, yeah, especially if Eurogamer wasn't sent a PC review copy that makes it impossible for them to tell how good it is. They have to review the material they are given and not assume that it's fixed in the PC version.

    So as a review, I think this is extremely well written and explains exactly what the problem is with the game - at least in the 360 version. But like I said, reviews should point out which version they are reviewing for clarity.

    I'm holding my thumbs for a PC review later on.

  • Abscido #93 2 years ago

    @loopholezero

    But, as LewisResolution pointed out, how are EG supposed to know there's a difference if 360 code is the only code received? As I said, it's not acceptable to release a multi-platform game under the pretences of versions being identical if that's not the case.

    However, before I get too carried away, I should clarify that I'm assuming - based on these comments and Dan's review - that the 360 version is shoddy, but I haven't yet played either version myself. Maybe there isn't such a big difference and it's just a harsh review, I don't know.

  • UncleLou #94 2 years ago

    this thread is ridiculous. it's a 360 review and has nothing to do with the pc version...

    Then they should remove the "PC" logo at the top. And on the frontpage picture. And don't let the review appear in the PC section. Which it does.

    Although I doubt it's just the system. The Gothic games never were received well by the English/US press.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 12:38

  • jimboton #95 2 years ago

    @LewisResolution

    "The thing is, though, that Risen is definitely going to be adored by a lot of people. There's that niche, Gothic-loving audience who are going to lap this up, and that's great - the game's kind of for them. But as a relatively high-profile multiformat release, it's not just aimed at them any more, which is why there's a problem."

    releasing a game without proper handholding, which makes you think and let's you die for the Games for Windows brand.. and even a console version! how dare they!! normal people could buy the game if we don't do something about it! You are right sir they deserve punishment.

  • fredrikpj #96 2 years ago

    Anyways, hopefully people see comments in here, then head over to deep silvers website to download the demo and discover how great it is :)

  • karstux #97 2 years ago

    The review reads as if Mr. Whitehead needed to work off a huge load of frustration and used a scathing review as a means of relief. Not fair at all, and unprofessional to boot. How can you go on and on about interface issues for two pages while scarcely mentioning the bloody game contents at all? What about the story, characters, gameworld?

    Finally, adorning the passage about "ugly graphics" with gorgeous screenshots from the PC - that's just lazy. Can't you take your own screenshots?

    This calls for a re-review, by a different reviewer. Preferably one who "gets" RPGs.

  • LewisResolution #98 2 years ago

    @jimboton -- Except that isn't what I said at all, is it? This is all very interesting, actually: who do you review for? In this case, I think reviewing for the majority is absolutely the right thing to do. The niche who seem to love this... well, they kinda knew they were going to love it anyway. Most had it pre-ordered, I'd imagine. It's a big release for that crowd. Reviews are primarily consumer guides. You're saying, in a thousand words or whatever, whether or not you think people should buy the game. Evidently, Dan thought most shouldn't.

    Now, Dan obviously felt more strongly about how much the interface issues and general clunkiness affected the game. I kind of overlooked that a bit, as I'm usually oddly forgiving of presenational issues. Rather, the way the game's designed was a problem for me. I've already been told I'm a "console tard" and an "Oblivion fanboy" for saying this, charmingly. But single-player, narrative-driven games aren't the place for such petty elitism. The game's released on the 360, to a huge audience of people who aren't going to get on with the game. Plenty will, and that's great, so this sort of review probably isn't for those people.

    Actually, though, I do think Risen could have maintained that appeal without being so unhelpful. I absolutely love the gritty unfriendliness of it, which again, people seem to be completely ignoring. What I don't like is how much grinding it makes you do before it gets to the point, and how vague the game is in even instructing you how to play it. It means it's often very difficult to establish whether you're making moves on with the main story, or whether you're ploughing away at minor quests that never amount to anything. Which is fine if you've all the time in the world to explore, and love doing that, but less so if all you're wanting to do is make progress in the game.

  • jimboton #99 2 years ago

    "It's too slow, too unhelpful in its presentation, and too alienating in its harshness to be effortlessly enjoyable by a majority. "

    You reviewers are getting so good at finding pleasing and dignified ways to say 'I'm dumb and lazy: entertain me!'. 'Gentle challenge' is another fave of mine.

  • gjgjg #100 2 years ago

    in its defence the PC version plays and looks (no exaggeration) 200% better. Xbox port is a serious downgrade done by sony spies or something

  • Lord_Gremlin #101 2 years ago

    I'm downloading demo for PC now, and if it runs OK on my 2,3Ghz dual-core 2 gigs of RAM and Radeon 3450 512 mb - I'll probably buy it. This review makes me feel strange. I haven't read anything substantiation - only complaints about controls - yes, x360 controls suck in Gothic game, sure - and several things that were present in Gothic 3.

  • Haloboy #102 2 years ago

    @ insane_cobra

    I don't think he is.

    I think regardless of any of this if those who have picked it up are enjoying it enough to come on here and rightly defend it, then fine by me. The Gothic series was often severely misunderstood by many a reviewer back in the day and I don't see why a game many are touting as 'the real Gothic 3' should be any different.

  • LewisResolution #103 2 years ago

    @insanecobra

    I do the odd bits and bobs for EG, but as a freelancer, I answer to NOBODY! MUAHAHA!
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 13:31

  • Machiavellian #104 2 years ago

    Personally I put the blame on where it belongs and that's the developer and publisher. You produce a weak port and you deserve to get slammed. All the assumptions that EU should have reviewed the PC version first is silly fanboy talk. Evidently its not up to EU but the publisher what version they get. You send a review site a poor version of your game and expect them to know that the PC version is better is complete idiocy. Even more silly is the assumption that reviewers should know the game is a nich game and thus grade it so. The game should be graded on it's merits not weather a select few will love the game.

  • kangarootoo #105 2 years ago

    There are two completely seperate issues here, which are getting squashed together into one big round ball of argumentative nonsense.

    1. EG reviewed the 360 code, but filed the review as 360/PC. It would appear some of the many complaints cited in the review are 360 only, which raises question as to whether calling the review multiplatform was a wise thing to do.

    2. Some players are saying the game should be reviewed by someone into the genre, suggesting that some of the issues raised pr "par for the course".


    My thoughts.

    It does appear that the 360 version is worse than the PC version in several ways, so filing the review as cross platform was a mistake. One that can hopefully be fixed.


    On the subject of reviewing the game "for the audience", I think this argument only holds so much water. It is true that asking someone who hates driving games to review a driving game may skew the figures, but that isn't what happened here. Many of the faults mentioned are faults, plain and simple. There is a difference between stuff "the audience likes" and "stuff the audience has gotten used to putting up with".

    Bad controls are bad controls. Hardcore RPG players don't LIKE bad controls, they may have just gotten used to putting up with them. However, the purpose of the review is to compare the game to its peers. IF the game compares badly to its peers, then the review should say so.

    At the end of the day there is no accounting for taste. Read the words, make up your own minds. If the real issue is that the review score for the poor 360 port is getting applied to the PC version too, THAT is where the fix should be applied. Talk of ignoring glaring faults because that is what German RPGs are like is to throw the whole concept of a comparative review down a ravine.


    P.s. one issue I did take exception to in the review, was the reviewers insistence on making multiple reference to problems with knowing what to do. Really, there was only one problem. I.e. the game required you to read the manual. If you refuse to read the manual, it is narrow minded to then complain about each confusion in isolation, as the source of the problem is known and self inflicted.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 14:27

  • UncleLou #106 2 years ago

    Even more silly is the assumption that reviewers should know the game is a nich game and thus grade it so. The game should be graded on it's merits not weather a select few will love the game.

    Debatable. What do you do with, say, flight sims? You do have to take the target audience into account.

    Although I don't think it's a niche game at all. It's an action RPG. It really isn't all that different from Oblivion, or Fable, or Fallout 3.

  • LewisResolution #107 2 years ago

    @kangarootoo Review code wasn't a boxed copy, and as such, no manual.

  • Shigawire #108 2 years ago

    @kangarootoo

    You are right to some extent with your first point, but this point may very well be to blame on the publisher of the game. Especially when the publisher was/is trying to sell both versions as identical, though this now turns out to be not true. Indication therefor clearly is that one hardly could find images or screenshots from the console port weeks or months ago.

  • JayG #109 2 years ago

    Another issue is that while this might be the xbox version review, other site's have given the xbox version a lot better ratings. 4 out of 10 is usually as low as reviews go on this site, and tends to apply to totally shite shovelware. The acusation that anyone who disputes this rating is a fan boy, when to be honest i was expecting a 7 (good for fans of the genre) and it ain't exactly the same as those who come out in mass protest at a HALO 8, is a bit rich as most reviews so far released tended to go from good to great. Quite a selection of them here http://www.rpgwatch.com/, and while i know most big sites still have to put up their thoughts, 4 is a bit ridiculous.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 14:46

  • seasidebaz #110 2 years ago

    It's an action RPG. It really isn't all that different from Oblivion, or Fable, or Fallout 3.

    Apparently it is, though. A whole 6/10 different.

  • Machiavellian #111 2 years ago

    Debatable. What do you do with, say, flight sims? You do have to take the target audience into accoun

    I guess I could have stated the nich part better. Yes, you would want someone who is experience with flight sims to review flight sims. The same would be the case for action RPGs or RPGs in general. What I mean by a nich audience is the people who only like a particular style of RPGs which makes them a nich of the genre and thus not to be catered for.

    It seems their sister site, Eurogamer.de, got hold of both versions. Now, if it was really a publisher screw up, then be it, but at this point it doesn't seem very likely. And given everything that has been said here, I find Eurogamer's cheekiness in the Risen demo news item really hard to stomach.

    So one sites ability to get both copies means the other sites get the same thing. I am certain that's not how it works since I have witness this myself. As anyone knows, Germany is higly PC centric so sending the PC version to the German site would be the best move. Sending both versions to the German site probably was the flaw instead of the norm. I have looked around the net and the majority of the reviews on different sites are either PC or 360 but not both.

    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 15:04

  • sneetch #112 2 years ago

    @kangarootoo
    It does appear that the 360 version is worse than the PC version in several ways, so filing the review as cross platform was a mistake. One that can hopefully be fixed.

    Thank you, kanga, for once again cutting through to the nub of the matter. That is the issue: if there are significant differences between the two versions then those should be taken into account in a separate review and this review should be marked as being for the 360 version only.

    It basically just seems wrong to me to lump the PC version in with the (more) flawed Xbox version when a lot of the technical flaws bringing the review down would be fixed in the Windows version. A lot of the larger issues with the technical side of the game seem to be with the UI in general, the control layout specifically and of course issues with the engine such as draw distance and texture and model quality, these would be "fixed" or at the very least significantly different on PC.

    Let's not be sidetracked by arguments about whether or not the game deserves its score. EG got PC and 360 copies of the game (as Eurogamer.de's separate reviews for prove) so they could have reviewed both but they chose to review the worst version and attribute it to both.

  • sneetch #113 2 years ago

    @LewisResolution
    @kangarootoo Review code wasn't a boxed copy, and as such, no manual.

    Are you sure about that? It seems ridiculous to not send "proper" copies and you were, apparently, wrong about them only shipping PC code to PC-exclusive publications (the German EG site reviewed both versions). Surely they at least mail you a PDF of the manual.

  • UncleLou #114 2 years ago

    "It's an action RPG. It really isn't all that different from Oblivion, or Fable, or Fallout 3. "

    Apparently it is, though. A whole 6/10 different.

    My point is not where you are. I was talking about the game mechanics, not the score, so my argument is that it shouldn't have been reviewed as a "niche" title anyway.

  • seasidebaz #115 2 years ago

    @UncleLou:

    I know, don't worry ;)

  • sneetch #116 2 years ago

    @Machiavellian
    So one sites ability to get both copies means the other sites get the same thing. I am certain that's not how it works since I have witness this myself. As anyone knows, Germany is higly PC centric so sending the PC version to the German site would be the best move. Sending versions to the German site probably was the flaw instead of the norm.

    You're assuming that there's an administrative difference between the different Eurogamer sub-sites there. Anyone know if there is or if Eurogamer (as a collective) gets the copies?

  • kangarootoo #117 2 years ago

    @LewisResolution

    Well if there was no manual, that should have been either fixed or factored into the review. My point is that you can blame the game for not explaining itself in-game by all means, but you can only blame it once.

    If more than once the review refers to problems that could be solved by the presence of a manual (something the purchasing player will be supplied with), it is failing as a review in that small regard surely? If a manual is needed to review the full product fully, and one is not supplied, the review cannot be conducted with absolute effectiveness. I am not saying the review should be abandoned, but the lack and neccessity of a manual should be mentioned.

  • LewisResolution #118 2 years ago

    @sneetch

    Can only speak for myself, but mine was a white-label disk in a box marked 'PROMOTIONAL COPY', with no further documentation.

    RE: the German site getting both versions, different territories are handled by different PR firms. When I said people got 360 versions by default, I'm talking about those who got the code through the firm dealing with UK specialist press.

  • FortysixterUK #119 2 years ago

    Oh what a surprise EG reviews another big rpg negatively.....could've guessed that.

  • Balboa #120 2 years ago

    @sneetch Jeff Gerstmann said recently (in a Bombcast, I think), that reviewers typically just get software; no manuals or other retail-package stuff.

    I don't think the lack of a manual invalidates the review, personally. In fact, I hate having to look up stuff in manuals, because it usually means the game isn't doing a good enough job at informing you.

  • sneetch #121 2 years ago

    @LewisResolution

    Ah, thanks, I sit corrected.

    Fair enough then, in that case it seems that they (publishers, developers and whichever PR firm was in charge) shot themselves in their collective foot there: sloppy stuff, a simple PDF version of the manual on the disc wouldn't have been hard to sort out (along with an indicator in the cover letter or request to plixreviewplix that tells you where the manual is).
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 15:35

  • kangarootoo #122 2 years ago

    "In fact, I hate having to look up stuff in manuals, because it usually means the game isn't doing a good enough job at informing you."

    Me too. Labouring the point makes it seem like I think this is a big deal, and it isn't really. It was just a minor niggle for me in the review. The whole 360/PC thing is more important (although that probably isn't as important as all thew angst in this thread would suggest either).

  • loopholezero #123 2 years ago

    some good news for those that already got it for the 360, it seems a patch has been announced :)

    http://tinyurl.com/ycqsktc
    "they will deliver a patch for the XBox 360 conversion within 4 weeks after release, to eliminate graphics issues."

  • darc #124 2 years ago

    "idealistic bandits living in the swamp"

    Whaa?

  • Arronax99 #125 2 years ago

    Eurogamer should review the pc version as a separate review, this just isn't fair. I have no idea how the xbox360 version is, but the pc version is, without a doubt, the best game I have played for several years. I would give it a 10/10.

    Love the fact that the game doesn't hold your hand too much, and that the combat-system actually requires timing and skill, instead of just button-mashing, also love the fact that the map doesn't show too much. You have to go and explore yourself. It is also challenging, finally a game that isn't too easy! Graphics on the pc are good enough, and very far from horrible.

    Some of the complaints the reviewer had was a bit silly, like that you have to read the manual (in this day and age). I didn't know games were for people who can't sit and read a manual for 10 minutes before playing. But maybe he is right about that the xbox360 version is bad in many ways, I haven't tried it , so I don't know. But this review would be comparable to reviewing the pc-version of Resident evil 4, and mark it as a review of both the pc and gamecube versions. It's ok to review a game for several platforms at once, but only if they are fairly similar in quality. Please do something about this.

  • Waldo #126 2 years ago

    I give Piranha Bytes fanboys a 2/10.

  • systems #127 2 years ago

    You can get the PDF manual from the Steam website.
    http://cd n.steampowered.com/Manuals/4030...

  • BathiBoi #128 2 years ago

    xbox360
    [link url=http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/risen
    ]    http://ww w.metacritic.com/games/platform...[/link]

    pc
    [link url=ht tp://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/risen
    ]http://ww w.metacritic.com/games/platform...[/link]

    the review on eurogamer.de covers with the opinions from metacritic.

    so it can't be as bad as mr whithead said.
    but what i try to tell u?! i dont even want buy the game.

    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 16:19

  • darc #129 2 years ago

    Well, I'm bummed that they cheesed the 360 version so badly. As much as I miss my mouse and QWERTY, I've grown weary of coming home from a day behind a desk at a PC just to play a game at a different one. I'd much rather be on my couch looking at a nice TV. And I'm totally sick of fretting over power supplies and graphics cards and drivers and coooling solutions and holy god I just wanted to play a video game!

    But it looks like I'll be getting back into PC gaming, like it or not. I LOVED Gothic 3 and its nice to see the Gothic fans coming out of the woodwork in these comments. I'll want to play Risen for sure, and I'll want it to look its best.

  • Arronax99 #130 2 years ago

    I hope you'r not referring to me Waldo. I hated the disaster that Gothic 3 was, and the only game from Piranha I actually liked before Risen, was Gothic 2. And this game is almost like Gothic 2, but improved in almost every way.

  • davisorle #131 2 years ago

    ITs funny to read the reactions from the owners of the game on the 360 to the reviewer. I swear i was laughing badly with comebacks like " Dan Whitehead are you fucking high" etc... lol Just for this reason im too tempted to check the game when I wasnt so far. It made my day gamewise. how fucking weird is this ^^.

    And too obvious though when it got so much better score on Metacritics thats the only scores that MIGHT be according to mine and I tend to find valid for me, specially compared to Eurogamer's... But also knowing it scored a 8/10 and even a 7/10 on the 360 on the German version of the site is pointing out that the game was for Dan like swallowing a fishbone at a restaurant. Just wouldn't go through for him. Happens to all of us but shouldn't to a reviewer if he is so wrong about the score of this.

    EDIT: For the record I didnt like Gothic 3 either compaired to the second Gothic :S
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 16:21

  • PearOfAnguish #132 2 years ago

    Can only speak for myself, but mine was a white-label disk in a box marked 'PROMOTIONAL COPY', with no further documentation.

    I won a promo copy, and Deep Silver emailed me a PDF manual. So the lack of a manual isn't an excuse.

  • BathiBoi #133 2 years ago

    why doesn't the author answer here?

  • mkreku #134 2 years ago

    OK, I got this game about an hour ago. Been playing for about that long too. I think it's excellent so far! Hugely atmospheric, beautiful setting, difficult as hell and quite ugly characters and animations (especially the jump.. what is that?!). But it's very slick, no bugs so far and it runs extremely well on my 4870 with everything on max. Also, the voice acting has been very good, the quests (mostly tutorial-like ones) have been helpful and the game feels very balanced (doling out better equipment as you go along).

    I think I'm going to like this, but then.. I loved the Gothic series too. No score yet though :p

  • JayG #135 2 years ago

    Pirana Bite's fanboys? Gothic 3 was pants, and I'd be perfectly happy with a 7 or so for this. Just a shame to see a decent game lose sales because of a inability to read a manual, or at least fumbling around and seeing that u can lock on to a target.

  • Darren #136 2 years ago

    @kangarootoo - I believe a good game these days should be perfectly playable WITHOUT referring to a manual and the review touches on that. With the advent of digital distribution for games there should be less need for a printed manual or even a PDF document IMO, everything you need to know should be included in the actual game. The game should have both a tutorial section and on-screen control mappings to negate the need to even look at a manual. The PC version certainly has the latter in the demo I tried as the controls are customisable.

    Incidentally, why don't developers include the a readable game manual as an in-game option from the main or pause menus so it is always at hand?
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 16:39

  • kangarootoo #137 2 years ago

    @Darren

    I agree. Having to refer to the manual is a minus point in my book too. My issue is that the review makes several references to problems that would have been avoided if the revier had read the manual, when really only one reference (bad thing number 3, "You have to read the manual";) is justified.


    I say again, its not a huge deal, but in the context of this review it seems like the score may have driven down by several niggles (no lock on, no fast travel, to name but two) that resulted not from their absence but from the reviewer's inability to find them.

    Now it might be the game's fault that he couldn't find the features, but that isn't the same as them not being there. Yes a good game should include tutorials and so on, but the risk here is that instead of being viewed with slight disdain (for requiring that you read the manual) the game is in fact viewed with greater disdain for apparently failing to include other more important features.

  • hannibaldave #138 2 years ago

    Dan Whitehead ate my hamster

  • Cider-X #139 2 years ago

    Great and fair review.
    All the butthurt PC snobs and German Piranha Bytes fanboys commenting here makes me laugh, keep it up.

  • kangarootoo #140 2 years ago

    @Cider-x

    http://fo tosa.ru/stock_photo/Comstock_JI...

  • MindFukr69 #141 2 years ago

    I'm sorry Eurogamer and Dan Whitehead. My respect for this site just dropped a bit. How about playing the game for a few hours and then doing the review. I had to register just to comment on this. 4/10 really? This game easily deserves 7 or 8. I'd give it about 8.5 (only 12 hours playtime though). And I'm a fan of Elder Scrolls series and other RPGs and never played any Gothic games. I'm playing the PC version and I'm having hard time believing that Xbox 360 port could be so much worse.

    Reviewer, take your head out of your ass and admit that you made a hasty review that you had no real interest in. I'm sure your highlight was coming up with the clever "Risen - and fallen" line.

  • Bazfrag #142 2 years ago

    Pc vs 360:

    http://ww w.videogameszone.de/aid,696485/...

    Shoddiest port I've seen for a while.
    Edited by 2 at 02/10/09 @ 17:48

  • garfunkel09 #143 2 years ago

    Holy fuck! Hey Eurogamer, how about real RPG-players to do your reviews instead of a intellectuelly challenged console-"players"? Also, write "REVIEWED ON XBOX, PC-VERSION IS BETTER IN EVERY WAY" next to the title, so people won't be fooled.

    The graphics are nice - nothing jaw dropping but they do their business well. If you are gonna slag on GFX that badly, better do the review on a proper PC. Or at least mention that there is a significant difference between quality. Risen is easily as pretty as F3 or Fable2 and according to videos, pretty much on par with Dragon Age.

    Play more of the game than just chapter one. There are teleportaion runes (fast travel), combat gets much more challenging with combos and special attacks which you have to use since enemies cannot be just bashed to death anymore. Also, ever heard of turning your character if an enemy is flanking you? Yeah, incredible brain power required.

    What animation glitches? Is this something only on Xbox, cause I haven't noticed that NPC's are waving their arms while conversing. The player character jump is little funny but not too bad. Also, voice actors are mostly spot on.

    Seriously, it's not perfect but after some stupidly high scores for mediocre or crap games (seriously, 10/10 for Fallout3), giving Risen 4/10 is such an incredible double-standard that it begs the question if your site has editors at all. Well, such is the status of gaming "journalism" nowadays. AAA-titles from the big developers are immune to criticism, while solid games from smaller companies get no love.

  • LilithsCurves #144 2 years ago

    Yes, the review does not show the quality of the PC version of the game and the reviewer does not have a spot in his heart for PC - RPGs but i guess there is no one on EG who is really into PC gaming, especially RPGs and other really hardcore stuff. And as an Console RPG, especially this 360 port, it is not very good. What i mean is, if a traditional PC RPG gamer has to honestly review Final Fantasy X for example, then he would very likely also give it a 4 due to it's "broken" mechanics and tedious, not logical combat flashes. First the reviewer is not into PC RPGs and secondly he reviewed a fucked up port.

  • uzivatel #145 2 years ago

    Really disappointing. Maybe I was expecting too much from Risen especially after Alpha Protocol got delayed.

  • davisorle #146 2 years ago

    @LilithsCurves
    Truth be told is that most console gamers dont apreciate the same ammount and wide range of RPGs that have been coming out over the years for a long time now on the PC. If you think about it they werent gamers till they got a proper game on their console so go figure. A lot, unfortunately, arent even aware of what it takes to be gamer to an extend. They had to get into it with a GT on their PSone and ever since is a common story :p

  • kangarootoo #147 2 years ago

    @Bazfrag

    Christ, those screen comparisons are damning :(

  • Haloboy #148 2 years ago

    @ garfunkel09

    Prior to this being released Oblivion easily had the worst animated third person jump in a game ever.

    Two hours till this unlocks on steam. £31 a bit out of my price range though.

    And yeah those screen grabs pretty much say it all.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 17:41

  • Bazfrag #149 2 years ago

    @kanga.

    They didn't even try! :(

  • kangarootoo #150 2 years ago

    @Bazfrag

    Actually, some of the later ones look a little better. They still all look kind of smoother and glowy, lacking the nice sandy details of the PC version. But at least they look ok. Some of the earlier ones have awful ground texturing.

    I will just have to rent it and see.

  • Bazfrag #151 2 years ago

    Jeez people, don't neg him (kanga) just cuz he has an opinion. At least he is prepared to play it himself before making judgments.

    *edited to eradicate the nonsense!
    Edited by 3 at 02/10/09 @ 18:13

  • George-Roper #152 2 years ago

    Fucks sakes, it's really quite simple. Eurogamer made a mistake by reviewing the 360 version and assuming that the same findings would apply to the PC version.

    I don't give a toss how difficult it is for EG to review separate platforms for multiplatform games. I do expect to be told what the differences are, in terms of control and usability though. In this case, it appears that fundamental issues with the console versions simply do not apply to the PC version and if they're at the root of the negative review, it's a crying shame to be applying those faults where they're not evident.

    If they review on the 360, the review should be only for the 360 or make it very clear that the same review results may not apply to other versions, which will invariably only be against the PC. Christ, it can't be that difficult to sit down with the 360 and PC versions and do just a fucking quick comparison, can it? I mean, if the issues are so apparent, it should have been like day and night almost straight away.

  • dryden555 #153 2 years ago

    What an oddly irresponsible review Eurogamer. What has happened to this website in the last 3 years? Dont quit your day jobs.

    All your review does here is blather on and on about how the game should be "easier" and look prettier. Yikes.

  • UncleLou #154 2 years ago

    Prior to this being released Oblivion easily had the worst animated third person jump in a game ever.

    Whoa, driver, cool down the horses - the animations in Risen aren't exactly great, but they never plump the incredible depths of Oblivion and fallout 3. :p

  • Sharzam #155 2 years ago

    If most the issues are with the UI and controls, then surely on PC it would be possible to mod it and sort those problems. Also graphics they mentioned were poor but would cranking up AA , and other sparkles on a modern graphics card go some way to help this ?

    If on the other hand the graphics issues are poor art direction then well, no amount sparkles will help.

  • DuX1112 #156 2 years ago

    One question:
    Why can't we RATE reviews...?

  • uzivatel #157 2 years ago

    @DuX1112: Because fanboys would rate down any review...

  • DuX1112 #158 2 years ago

    @ uzivatel:

    I don't think that's a viable excuse, fanboys or not...

    P.S. Are you from the Balkans? :)

  • Siberian_Khatru #159 2 years ago

    This reminds me of EG review of Syberia's PS2 port. Why would you choose the worst possible way to play the game? Such a shame, Risen is like the first real uncompromised RPG in years. Loving the last paragraph that makes it sound like there are tons of great old-school RPG's on consoles.

  • Swaain #160 2 years ago

    I think that the fact that eurogamer accepted to review *just* the 360 version of the game was shoddy workmanship. I mean - doesn't everyone know that when games like this come out, the PC version is the one to go for? Not only because of the superior specs and the keyboard / mouse interface, but also because these rpgs are in fact taylored to a small niche crowd, which are predominantly playing on PC - the guys (and girls) who played the Gothic games, the Witcher etc. This is just not a "console type" game, and it should not be reviewed as such.

    Not only that - the PC was clearly the lead platform during development. Apparently, as was pointed out several days ago already on other forums (neogaf), the 360 version was a quick-rush port to lure in the console crowd. As far as I know, it was even outsourced to another codeshop (don't quote me on that, though).

    In any case, just applying the findings of the 360 review to the PC version was very unprofessional ; you should know by know that your readership is made up of gaming enthousiasts, and that they expect eurogamer to uphold a certain quality standard. By all means, stand by your score of 4 if you think that's what the 360 version deserves, but don't just assume that the PC version is just as disappointing - you should know better. A quick comparison would've been enough to spot the most glaring differences.

    And of course, the excuse "do you really want us to review two version" doesn't fly. You didn't receive a PC review version? Just ask for it, or go out and buy the game! Don't tell me you only review the games that you *receive*? Plus, aren't you the guys who publish several head-to-head comparisons every few weeks or so? I think this would've been much more useful to your readership than the 360/PS3 framerate calculations you often come up with...

  • uzivatel #161 2 years ago

    @DuX1112: it defeats the point - you wont be able to tell much about the quality and as such it may actually mislead some readers instead of helping them
    another thing is, people tend to rate the game instead of the article - any review of bad game gets automatically low score regardless of how accurate or well written it may be

    no, easter Europe

  • skillian #162 2 years ago

    All people asking why EG didn't review the PC game - EG will never review the PC version of a game if there is an Xbox version available.

    I don't even think there is anyone on staff who can - all PC reviews, apart from the little casual games, are done with outside writers as far as I can tell. Maybe they don't have a PC in the office and run the website from a PS3 browser?

  • neems #163 2 years ago

    If you're a PC user, just get the demo and try it for yourself. Quicker than reading this thread, even on my dial up connection.

  • n0f8r #164 2 years ago

    Dan Whitehead - have you felt the gestalt yet?

  • kendoji #165 2 years ago

    Good lord you people need to settle down. So EG got sent an Xbox 360 game to review and it turned out crappier than the PC version. Do you really expect them to review every platform version of every multiformat title that comes out immediately upon release? Such big differences are rare among multiformat titles, so give them some time and a chance to publish something about it. All this nerd rage is bad for your blood pressure.

  • Obiwanshinobi #166 2 years ago

    It's been a hard day at work for many Gothic fans I see. Personally I wouldn't even consider playing this on the 360. Compromised controls, graphics and performance are to be expected in such case, surely?

    All people asking why EG didn't review the PC game - EG will never review the PC version of a game if there is an Xbox version available.

    I don't even think there is anyone on staff who can - all PC reviews, apart from the little casual games, are done with outside writers as far as I can tell.

    They actually did review the PC version of Freedom Fighters, years ago, separately from and before the console versions.
    Check out this:

    You may find it surprising that we're reviewing the PC version of Freedom Fighters first, but for some reason it was the first reviewable copy that we got our hands on. No matter though, because the beige box version of Io Interactive's third-person squad-based shooter is surprisingly solid - and the familiar WSAD keyboard and mouse-based control scheme works as well if not better than its console counterparts.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/09 @ 22:54

  • skillian #167 2 years ago

    That's a six-year-old review!

    But yeah, you did find one.

  • WJF #168 2 years ago

    Yikes, there are a lot of angry fans in this comments thread...

    Tbh, most multiformat (ie. with both PC Xbox and whatnot (PS3)) releases on this site are reviewed on just the Xbox, with no mention of the PC's performance, yet still retaining the multiple logos.

    Still, it's good to know the PC version's better than the review makes out. I /hate/ gothic 1 & 2 though. Mainly bought them because of some forumites from here whom I trust in terms of games -not in terms of handling stolen goods, natch - saying they were flawed gems, but turned out to be barely polished turds (Sorry Lou. :-D)

  • bgtpcg #169 2 years ago

    it's a bit ironic how eurogamer, the site that does all those 360/PS3 comparison videos, where they nitpick tiny details, barely even acknowledges the PC version here, where there is an actual difference in quality (a huge difference,I might add, in graphics, control, everything). While this review might be useful for 360 owner, anybody who was/is looking forward to pick this up for the PC should just disregard it. Actually if you liked the Gothic series its a must, its a lot more polished and a lot less buggy than Gothic 3 was.

  • whizzedout #170 2 years ago

    Sorry but you review of this game is wrong, maybe you should play the PC version, ohh and Fuck off.

    Edited by 1 at 03/10/09 @ 00:47

  • Otomox #171 2 years ago

    Okay i was at the beginning thinking the writer didnt liked the game or was angry about the 360 version but then i saw this.

    "The thing that annoys me most about Risen is the brazen way it steals ideas from so many better sources and pretends that they are in some way original. After half an hour an experienced RPG-er will likely be suffering from severe gamer deja-vu: chests are hidden and opened exactly as they are in Fable, the item collection and filing is practically the same as in Monster Hunter, dialogue and character interactions are a very poor copy of the system used by Bethesda, the setting has been done a hundred times before and the whole thing ends up feeling like a collection of leftovers."

    Get ur facts straight before u write such a bullshit. gothic 1 and 2 had this features way before Oblivion or lol Fable put it in their game.

    And make a seperate review of the pc version and 360 look only at the graphic differences.
    http://im g525.imageshack.us/img525/7859/...
    Edited by 1 at 03/10/09 @ 00:53

  • DuX1112 #172 2 years ago

    @ uzivatel:

    I know what you're getting at, but in cases like THIS, I think we (the readers, gamers, consumers) should also have "a say" on the game, or on the review, other than commenting. I think that a little "review rating system" won't hurt regardless of the 'reliability' of the rating. Reviews (even if they're written by EG or some other major gaming *industry* site) are always (at least a bit) subjective and therefore, always questionably reliable. So a second, third, fourth or a fifth opinion on the subject matter won't hurt, IMO.

    Plus, there are tons of ways to prevent fanboy/hater interventions on those "review" scores (limiting the review rating points, for a start). Every website running a forum knows how to handle this. Furthermore, why can't EG users rate/review games too (Gamespot anyone)? That's one way of providing an alternative view at a game, I should think. And a legitimate one.

    And as such, should be encouraged. You know, if people started rating reviews (or themselves having the ability to review/rate a game they played), I think EG will inevitably put some MORE THOUGHT into reviews like this?

    (EDIT: After all, I just discovered there IS a user option to review a game on EG. I apologize for the misunderstanding, but I do believe this aspect needs a little improvement.)

    I mean, how is it earthly possible to review a multiplatform game while testing/playing it on just ONE platform? That's like testing universal tires on a single car model (say a VW), instead of testing it on a variety of different vehicles. Or trying to judge the experience of sex based on just one (short) sexual experience with just ONE partner. Or testing condoms in the same fashion. Which is not just stupid... but also dangerous.

    (At the moment BTW, I am looking at an advertising banner for "Risen", right here on EG above my comment editor. It says: "Beautifully presented RPG that's well worth your time and money; 85%, PCZONE". Heh. It's not 85%, it's 4/10! Go figure. On a side note, I was always baffled why a horribly rated game would fill my EG "home" page with its advertising banner... Oh yes, it's industry.)

    One more point. I (still) haven't played the game because I don't have it yet, but this review craze is driving me nuts. EG says it's crap, Gamers say it's good/great. I guess I'll trust the Gamers (strength in numbers). ;)

    Btw, greetings from Macedonia. :)
    Edited by 3 at 03/10/09 @ 03:34

  • Albedo #173 2 years ago

    Wow, just wow... Eurogamer's review quality just hit a new level of low quality and non-objectivity (again). But i can't blame them really, in the age of instant-gratification gaming, anything that requires a bit of an effort and strays from the "ez mode" it's going to be harshly dealt.

    P.S. MS-DOS quality characters? ??? ??? really? Are you f***ing serious?

  • actionfitz #174 2 years ago

    OUCH!

  • Calundann #175 2 years ago

    Wow, I am glad I tried the pc demo first before reading this review. I must say that this is the most confusing review I have ever read, it felt more like a troll rant from some forum.
    I am sure the review fits well with the xbox360 version but its not fair to give it the pc tag.
    I can understand that the reviewer might have made a mistake but he could at least fix it and remove the pc tag.
    I am definitely buying the pc version.

    PS. I did wonder why there was no xbox360 demo, I guess I know now. That comparison pic a couple comments up was just scary :)

  • actionfitz #176 2 years ago

    @
    DUFFMAN5

    no offense... but are you fucking high?
    Two worlds was embarrassingly awful.
    in fact the guy at Game even accepted exactly that excuse when he gave me my refund lol.

  • spookyzombie #177 2 years ago

    Played the 360 version earlier and I have to agree with DW. Can't speak for the PC version, but I'd avoid this on the 360 at all costs. It just feels broken.

  • des #178 2 years ago

    There is nothing wrong with the 360 controls,game controls are good actually and it performs good.
    Been playing both versions a little bit and 360 version is basically a PC version with some settings on low some on high.
    360 version-low textures,vegetation off,the rest is pretty much the same

    So if you are looking for some overhyped crap that you will finish in 5-6 hours look somewhere else,if you want a great addicting RPG with some real presentation issues look no further.360 version wins in those issues,but its not a particularly good looking game on the PC either,Gothic 3 looks better,but Risen perform much better than Gothic 3.And has less bugs too...lol


  • LewisResolution #179 2 years ago

    @Otomox

    Um, that's quoted from an entirely different review. Am I missing your point?

  • Soul_man #180 2 years ago

    Been playing it for about a day now (I'm still in chapter 1), and for a Gothic fan at least, this game rocks.

    These days, most RPGs are designed to be easy and forgiving, to always point you in the right direction and hold your hand. Risen dares to be different, it is designed to be hard and punishing, to have (occasionally) confusing goals and require exploration. It makes the rewards much sweeter when you accomplish something. Much as I like Oblivion and Fallout 3, I really want there to be room for this kind of game as well.

    Yes, the animations are dated, but I don't care much about that. The great old-school CRPG gameplay is what matters, and Risen has that in spades.

  • bgtpcg #181 2 years ago

    @des

    thats not true, Risen is a good looking game on the PC (except for animations), obviously it looks a better than Gothic 3, and it looks a lot better than the 360 version. It isn't just the resolution and AA like in most multiplat games, 360 version lacks a lot of foliage, lightning is not quite the same, and the textures are awful. The PC version looks really nice on any half-decent gaming rig.

    Edited by 2 at 03/10/09 @ 14:42

  • des #182 2 years ago

    After few hours into PC version i still stand by my first impressions,G3 looks better,if i had to put it somewhere graphically it would be between G2/G3.
    Also foliage(vegetation setting) is completely off at 360 version,put vegetation off in PC version and you will get 360 version in terms of foliage.

  • UncleLou #183 2 years ago

    I am with des, Gothic 3 is a better looking game. They've obviously improved the few really ugly bits of Gothic 3 (like the coastline), but models, lighting, foliage/forests, and animations were all better in Gothic 3. Gothic 3 also had a lot more attention to detail. There was a ton of stuff lying about everywhere. Risen looks extremely sparse in comparison.
    Edited by 2 at 03/10/09 @ 15:26

  • crevus #184 2 years ago

    Well by reading this review and by playing the game it seems clear to me that Mr. Whitehead clearly lacks professionalism...the game itself is very different than what he described.Let's start with the graphics.Although not the best that are out now but they not near bad , I actually like them, especially the great care for details and the fact that everything is hand made not made by a generator(like in Oblivion, where every cave looked the same). Then the fighting system which is entirely different than how the reviewer described it. No, you can't kill anything by simply clicking, you have to block,to dodge, to use a strategy.Usualy entering combat with more than one oponents is suicide. The map I find very good beacuse it doesn't give you the feeling you have a gps but a an actual painted map which is very good for atmosphere. Quests are put on categories depending on where you got them...here I might agree that sometimes it's difiicult to find a specific quest.To solve a quest you actually have to think...yes you have to use your brain which for the reviewer might have been hard...well I don't blame him.Apart from this the game has great atmosphere, good animations(considering motion capture wasn't used) a good and interesting storyline and a lot of replayability....I enjoyed the game a lot and find that this review is poor made by someone who, from my point of view, has no idea about RPGs at all.

  • peppergomez #185 2 years ago

    well, gothic 3 was an appalling piece of shite, so i guess piranna bytes are incapable of making a good game. who's working on the next gothic game, or is risen the latest in that series? hope not.

  • JayG #186 2 years ago

    I gave up on gothic 3 pretty early on, but seems to be a lot of player made mod's and patches around at the moment. Is it worth giving it another chance in the future with mods?

  • ASHBERY76 #187 2 years ago

    That is a ridiculous score.This man should not review a RPG ever again.

  • UncleLou #188 2 years ago

    @JayG
    Don't know about mods, but the community patches have improved Gothic 3 significantly. Of course, some of the the main problems remain, for example that there aren't really any memorable NPCs compared to G1/G2 (Risen is doing a better job than G3 a few hours in already), but the patch fixes an insane amount of technical and quest bugs and hiccups, as well as improves the combat system.

    edit:
    Amusing that I get marked down for saying G3 looked better. Which is so blatantly obvious that I guess people just neg anything that doesn't blindly praise Risen.
    Edited by 2 at 03/10/09 @ 16:50

  • JayG #189 2 years ago

    To be honest, while risen is a great game, has lot's of things it can be marked down on. Jumping up to house's can be insanely difficult, seem's to be a hunt a pixel hunt like the good old days. And the lack of NPC's model's is insane. It's as if there is only 3 types of women on the whole island, and that ugly ginger guy seems to be everywhere i look. Graphic's are no where near what i expected, what i loved about Gothic was the huge vista's, it was an amazing looking game for it's time.

  • mapetz #190 2 years ago

    What a shame for ''eurogamer''.
    So long i read your site but just know i registered.
    And for what? Because i am so angry with you!
    How can you trust such irresponsible people to review a game.
    Are you interested in games at all or is this a job only to gain money?
    If this is the case this guy just robe you of your money.
    Five minutes review and ''wow i am rich again please pay me my hard earned money''.
    ..don't know what to say... you only managed to make EUROGAMER just eurogamer....
    I don't trust you anymore ....
    And what is this with only xbox review???
    Just keep doing your console promotion and leave pc gaming alone.
    And change your name to euroconsolegamer....it would be better for you and for us.

  • metalangel #191 2 years ago

    You guys seem to feel about this like I felt about the IL-2 review: we need experts in the genre to review games.

  • uzivatel #192 2 years ago

    @metalangel: most people dont want experts, most people want fellow fans to review "their" game...

  • DrowJones #193 2 years ago

    Wowgamer does not like an rpg which is not a copy of WoW. I act surprised.

  • MrCarrot #194 2 years ago

    Does EG have something against European RPG's?

    I put off buying The Witcher for ages because all I knew about it was that it got a mediocre review here. Then found it was one of the best western RPG's for years after I picked it up recently - easily on a par in most respects with Bioware's recent stuff.

    Well, as a great man once said: There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably Tennessee - fool me once, shame on m... shame on you. Fool me... you can't get fooled again!

    I'll be picking up Risen, just as soon as finances allow.

  • darc #195 2 years ago

    "well, gothic 3 was an appalling piece of shite..."

    Funny, a lot of people seemed to think as much, but I installed G3 right out of the box, and with out so much as a patch or a mod played through dozens of hours, never had any problem with it, and enjoyed the hell out it. Probably in my top 5 RPGs of all time. My best guess is that G3 had compatibility issues with a lot of hardware and for once, I got lucky with my rig.

    Got turned around on a couple of quests late in the game though, and confused myself to the point where I never got back and finished it.

  • Obiwanshinobi #196 2 years ago

    Seems like alot of people would have liked to have seen a separate review for the PC version, but surely a product which is launched simultaneously should represent the same quality regardless of the platform.

    For every person following the Gothic series and Piranha Bytes' ups and downs, Risen is a PC game primarily, which makes all sorts of sense from both developer's and most dedicated cRPG-ers' points of view. The 360 version, sir, is but a port, and as much as I agree that port SHOULD be of the finest quality possible, it wasn't very likely to happen, sadly. We're not talking last gen Ubisoft here. Neither that sort of budget nor that publishing policy.
    Now tell me, how fair is to review only a console port of much anticipated PC game, when the site is officially dedicated to the PC and console gaming? This review, with the PC logo rampantly sticked on next to the 360's, reads like written by someone who doesn't really care. By "really care" I don't mean "overlook the flaws", or "pretend he enjoyed it more than he really did". Surely it's not Dan Whitehead's fault if he doesn't think much of the Gothic series - he got a 360 game to review and he did the job, fair enough - but if this is the case, why didn't Eurogamer have Risen reviewed by someone more familiar with the cRPG genre? You can't seriously call yourself a cRPG expert if you haven't played Gothic games properly, and if you have and didn't like the experience, what's the point in giving you pretty much another Gothic game to review? Sounds like Risen isn't a "light" cRPG. It's supposed to be quite nerdy.
    I'm not saying what happened here was a disaster, no, but I can understand those with the PC/Gothic/cRPG background, who feel it wasn't quite as proffessional an approach as we'd expect from Eurogamer.
    Still, something keeps telling me that people most likely to enjoy this game will eventually play it, regardless of the Metacritic or Eurogamer score. Really good cRPGs happen too seldom to not give it a chance (I have no idea if Risen is really that good, but Piranha Bytes usually delivers).

  • Transcendent #197 2 years ago

    Why does it say "PC" at the top there?

    Dan Whitehead just lost all credibility as a reviewer for me. On my computer the detailed nature in this game is second only to Crysis. Crysis for fucks sake. I've played it on Very High.

    Also, the combat is brilliant, and so is the harsh leveling system. Go back to your 10/10 Oblivion and play it on easy you fucking paraplegic.

  • FortysixterUK #198 2 years ago

    223 posts to date...now thats a response and all almost overwhelmingly in favour of the game and against the review.
    Gotta love it.
    For the record I'm 6 hours in, the game has a harsh difficulty curve like any of the games in the Gothic line ( this is definately a Gothic game) and plays just fine...had the menu down a few minutes into the game.
    Frankly, if you aren't a fan of these vast sprawling RPGs why review it? Give it to a fan of the genre instead .

  • BabyJesus #199 2 years ago

    I've played this for around 10-12 hours on the 360, and It's excellent.

    The technical issues are ofcourse annoying but to be quite honest, the genre isn't about technical achievement. It is about story, dialogue, immersion and so on.

    I feel this has been reviewed as a pick up and play game, when it is a excellent throwback to old school rpg days. You cannot judge an rpg the same as you can judge an FPS.

    It's like comparing a lemon to an apple...they are both fruits right?

  • WantOn #200 2 years ago

    To be clear from the outset; I have never played a Gothic game of any description. However I just wanted to say something about the review. Considering it is tagged as 'PC', this tells me absolutely nothing about the PC version of the game. It comes across as a two-page rant/moan about XBOX 360 issues with the controller, whilst telling me precious little about the game itself, and no idea whatsoever of what it is like on the PC.

    I would strongly recommend a) removing the PC tags from this unless the review was rewritten to incorporate some aspects of the PC version, or b) having a second review for the PC version to see if they compare.

  • unacomn #201 2 years ago

    Is there going to be a review of the them on a real games platform?

  • marius_itd #202 2 years ago

    Eurogamer is one of my favourite gaming sites, but this time it has really disappointed me. I usually refrain from posting comments, but now I strongly feel that most of the people complaining about the review are right. Risen for the PC is by no means a 4/10 game. I woulnd't say it's 10/10, but in my opinion at least 8.5. It's really an enjoyable experience and eurogamer should do something about this review because, as it stands now, it's simply unprofessional.

  • lennon #203 2 years ago

    Couple of hours in and pretty enjoyable so far. The gfx are pretty rough (360) but this isnt about them I have already been sucked into the story and looking forward to playing again later. Thats what its about right?

    The menus are a little tricky but a hell of a lot easier than two worlds and not espiaclly any more difficult than oblivion (80 hours and I was still hunting around in that).

    So far a solid game for me.

  • fluff_the_tiger #204 2 years ago

    Dan whitehead review = fail

  • riplikethat #205 2 years ago

    This review is the saddest thing I have ever read here. Mostly cause I suspected for a long time that reviewers here just tag console reviews as PC since they can't be arsed to actually do their job properly.. and here we are.

    These days I just come here to read funny captions under thumbnails. Reviews are incredibly pathetic, esp. for games like Witcher and Risen for PC compare to shit like Oblivion and Fallout 3.

    Anyways, Gothic series, I was first introduced to it with Gothic 3. Like some of the gamers I got lucky and game ran without any crashes without even updating the game once. After sitting through the crap called Oblivion, I was shocked to find something like Gothic out there. The game actually felt like you were roleplaying instead of being a random character who stepped out of the character customization screen to kill.. rats. Levelling up, even those +1 strength upgrades, made a world of difference against different enemies. The battle was incredibly hard and I had to run away or trick one orc or some creature to stray from the pack so I could have a better chance at survival. It was INCREDIBLE (not like Mr. Dan, who probably wanted Fable like combat, one button and the game to do the work for him apparently). Suffice it to say, Gothic 3 is way underrated, the whole series is compared to crap Bethesda throws out the door for console kiddies.

    Now Risen.. what can I say? I already come here to read funny captions, like I said, this review means now I can without doubt just point people to such idiotic reviews and tell them why not to take Eurogamer seriously at all. Way to kill you reputation. I actually feel more sorry for the Alienware guys. Already they are considered a overrated expensive Apple version for Windows and now they are sticking their logo in the wrong places like Eurogamer. Poor guys.

    PS: Please remove the PC section. We know that when Witcher 2 is released for consoles, you will give it 10/10 and claim how "THIS TIME THEY GOT IT RIGHT!!111" and name it game of the year. It'll just look even more pathetic. Considering after so many comments you guys still haven't bothered apologizing to PC gamers and removing the PC tag, we know you don't care at all anyway.

  • Jonelo #206 2 years ago

    Only about the graphics , PC/360

    [link url=http://i4.photobucket. com/albums/y117/jonelo/risen/Risen_PC_vs_Xbox_360_3_09100311 5416.jpg
    ]http://i4 .photobucket.com/albums/y117/jo...[/link]
    [link url=http://i4.photobucket. com/albums/y117/jonelo/risen/Risen_PC_vs_Xbox_360_5_09100311 5421.jpg
    ]http://i4 .photobucket.com/albums/y117/jo...[/link]
    [link url=http://i4.photobucket. com/albums/y117/jonelo/risen/Risen_PC_vs_Xbox_360_10_0910031 1541.jpg
    ]http://i4 .photobucket.com/albums/y117/jo...[/link]
    [link url=http://i4.photobucket. com/albums/y117/jonelo/risen/Risen_PC_vs_Xbox_360_4_09100311 5418.jpg
    ]http://i4 .photobucket.com/albums/y117/jo...[/link]



    And about the topic of MrCarrol "Does EG have something against European RPG's? " well .... not only against RPGs .. I believe that is a cultural egocentrism , in all mass media in english lenguage, but especially in UK
    Edited by 4 at 05/10/09 @ 19:17

  • KayAU #207 2 years ago

    @riplikethat

    I completely agree with you with regard to Gothic 3. It was undeniably unfinished, but underneath the issues, there was a really good game. In particular, the beautiful, rich and varied game world made exploration very enjoyable. Piranha Bytes are probably about the best there are at designing RPG game worlds.

    As for Risen, I have enjoyed it from the start, and I am enjoying it more and more. So far, it is looking a bit like an improved Gothic 2. Which is not bad at all, seeing how Gothic 2 is (was?) my favorite PC RPG.

  • KayAU #208 2 years ago

    Gothic 3 is indeed pretty, but I think Risen actually looks even better overall. In the beginning, I thought maybe Gothic 3 was a little better looking, with its great scenic views, but after having spent some more time with it, and turning the "depth-of-field" effect off, I think Risen has the advantage. The textures and close-up stuff are of really good quality, and the lighting effects add a lot. The sky is also great, with its changing color at sunrise and sunset, the moving clouds, and the birds flying in the distance. I also really like the way the waves hit the harbour in the harbour town.

    Perhaps there are games with more polygons and superior technology, but I think artistic quality and atmosphere is more important. And Risen is, at least on the PC, a beautiful game.

  • uk_john #209 2 years ago

    Reading between the lines of this review, it's obvious the media is still pushing for dumbed down games. The reviewer obviously wants his hand held, wants a game map that tells him where to go and NPC's with exclamation marks above their heads to show they have a quest! I tell you, it's very worrying!

    As to his comments on the graphics; well, talk about juvenile! To describe them as 'horrible graphics' is patently ridiculous!

    The quality of media staff (I would never call them 'journalists'!) is going down fast - no wonder dumbed down games get the high scores with reviewers like this!

  • iq2luc #210 2 years ago

    4? :) this review is a joke.
    Eurogamer gives an 8 to Gothic III and a 4 to Risen :) ...but if you switch the scores maybe you get something close to reality.
    Risen is exactly what I expected from Gothic III, but Gothic III failed so miserably to deliver.

    Risen is FUN and has a quite immersive atmosphere... you just feel like you need to play it :) The storyline and the quests are entertaining, graphics is ok, sound/music fits, gameplay improved (related to Gothic series < 3), I really like the new combat system (I would love to see action-rpgs with a combat system similar to 'Blade of Darkness' - so much fun), skill tree and leveling is just as it should be. Is it original? no -- it is just another Gothic-like game, but this time is good and fun to play it (not broken, like Gothic III).

    It works very well on average systems (maxed out on 8800GTS at 1680x1050) and has no major issues (the only one I spotted and I'm not really happy with it is the camera zoom issue; I want to play with camera zoomed out to max, but after each NPC interaction it gets back to default zoom).

    I like this game and I give it a 9, a really FUN game to play!

    ---
    edited: just wanted to add that I totally agree with what uk_john wrote
    Edited by 1 at 06/10/09 @ 11:18

  • Nephirion #211 2 years ago

    Once again they let someone with no real understanding of the genre write the review ... nice one

  • mkreku #212 2 years ago

    Ok, I have clocked 30 hours in Risen now.. and I must sadly say that I am now in the camp that thinks this review is really, really bad. Risen is actually a fantastic game. It's shock-full of detail, it has an abundance of quests, the gameworld is absolutely brilliant, the voice acting is above average, the technology is smooth and stable, the graphics are fine (except some character models and animations), the atmosphere is superb and the story is beautifully realized. Oh, and it has so much exploration that if you're an explorer type of player, you'll be in heaven.

    I can't believe you scored it 4.. I'm leaning towards 9/10 myself. The best RPG I've played all year. Maybe even the best overall game this year!

  • Syfo #213 2 years ago

    well what can i say. either play game like this more than 30 minutes to review it or dont review at all becouse this review was atleast 50% inaccurate. separate reviews would be best. and not subjective oblivion/wow point of view. end of story.
    Edited by 1 at 06/10/09 @ 20:12

  • uk_john #214 2 years ago

    Could it be with so many 6-12 hour $60 games, like Dead Space and Mirror's Edge, that reviewers now spend no more than that to review a game,even if it's a 80 hour game?

    Used to be, games were reviewed only after being completed, now it's just about getting the review out quick. This review is a perfect example of 'speed over quality'!

    The ever lower quality of PC gaming coverage is killing the format much more than DRM or piracy, etc!

  • JayG #215 2 years ago

    Xbox version is actually mentioned in the guardian today.

    [link url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/gamesblog/2 009/oct/04/games
    ]http://ww w.guardian.co.uk/technology/gam...[/link]

    'So where to start with the 360 version then? The obvious place is the graphics. Sure, I wouldn't expect a 360 game to match the visuals of a high end PC but still. Low-res textures? Incessant and off-putting popup as the world comes into view? Ugly and poorly animated characters? Yup, Risen 360 has them all and more. Almost worse is the resolution issue. On an HD screen the fonts and icons are barely legible. On a standard def TV Risen would be practically unplayable. Then there are the fiddly controls, and general lack of polish throughout. '

    'Despite this the game comes recommended for PC owners who like the genre and fancy a challenge. It probably helps if you are German too. 360 owners who enjoy their RPGs would be well advised to wait for Dragon Age and Mass Effect 2'

  • spookyzombie #216 2 years ago

    @ JayG. Couldn't agree more with that review. I stated that in a previous post, but found myself in negative city. Presumably will do again as the PC boys don't seem to understand that their version isn't the one I'm slating.

  • dryden555 #217 2 years ago


    Eurogamer should be clear they never played the PC version of the game (which of course they wont do) when writing the review. It also looks like they didnt play the 360 version of the game for long.

    Eurogamer is not the website it once was. I give Eurogamer a 2 score for this review.

  • SheffieldSteel #218 2 years ago

    Ideally EG will publish a review of the PC game, with a score that represents that game.

    Failling that, they should clarify at the start/end of the review that the text is about the 360 version and is not representative of the PC game, and that the screenshots are of the PC game and not representative of the 360 graphics.

  • unacomn #219 2 years ago

    I'm going to ask again. Will the game get a review on a real gaming platform?

  • rockyourazz #220 2 years ago

    I have to comment about this score because I STRONGLY feel that it doesn't do the game justice in my opinion. The reviewer probably DID just play the xbox360 version OR he might have planned playing the xbox360 version first and the PC version afterwards but he might have been shocked too badly by the xbox360 version - He is only human after all and IT IS A VERY BAD VERSION - STAY AWAY FROM IT !!! Although I still don't understand why he chose to display the PC screenshots if his point was to show how ugly the game THAT HE ACTUALLY PLAYED is...I mean if I play the gameboy version of assassins creed I won't post PS3 screens of it because it is misleading...but since his intension throughout the article is to bash the game - and by showing the beautiful PC screenshots he actually contradicts his own point - I'm guessing he simply "cut corners" instead of taking an actual screenshot from his xbox360 - and since I am a person who "cuts corners" allot I personally forgive him and understand :)
    The PC version is great. The graphics are great and much more up to date than I expected with nice effects and a beautiful world that makes you want to explore and stay just a little longer.The low polygon characters are the only "downside" I have noticed about the visuals and that is AFTER reading about it and taking note to look for it - I didn't notice this myself.
    The reason why I didn't notice that was because the game is set in the third perspective and so you seldom get a full blown closeup - and the artwork for the characters is still beautifully aesthetic so it is a very minor issue that you might notice but you will be too busy with the game and that thought will be replaced by thoughts of "wow...where am I?...soooo pretty", "hey...I never noticed THAT there before...", "this is the most satisfying game I have played in years...why they don't make-em like they used to?" and "damn...forgot to learn how to pick locks again and I've just spent two hours fighting my way through this place...and the box is locked?!?!"
    There is usually a three hour "closure-process" to the game because you simply MUST take another look around the next bend...this means make time for yourselves in advance for regulating your new sleep patterns while playing this game - !!! WARNING !!! ADDICTIVE !!!
    This game makes me long for games that are not like I see all around me today...I don't know how to put it in words...it isn't in a sad nostalgic "I remember these kind of games" kind of way...it's in a "I remember how I love playing great games" kind of way...the people that made this game have made a great game that I enjoy in so many levels and they managed to surprise me and give me a feeling of a deep adventure that on one side I don't want to finish and on the other side I want to replay already with different choices :)

    My-Middle-Of-The-Game-Score :
    Presentation - 8.5 - Not as cinematic a story as some pop stuff but you are free to make of it as you wish - good amount of freedom with a sensitivity for people who want to dive in deeper as they see fit.
    Gameplay - 9.0 - A tough first two hours of getting used to a system that at first seems to think you slept with it's mother last night...it might seem hard on you at first until you finally get it - for the past few years you have been fed vanilla games that only need your time to get through them - not here...you need skill. This is a fighting system that actually feels like a fight...and this time in a good way - you strategize allot and save your game often - you need a learning period but in the end you feel like you can take on anything.
    Graphics - 8.5 - More than I expected in almost every department - technology,performance,art and design,and beautiful light scattering. The only issues I had was with the VERY VERY DARK NIGHTS...and I mean you won't be able to see your character - pitch black ...which is a shame because I was looking forward to seeing the beautiful forests and vistas I've seen at the daytime with the moonlight scattering through the trees and lighting up the dark. The second issue I have is that you will have to find some alternative ways of forcing AA because the game doesn't officially support it.
    Audio - 8.5 - Again I had gotten more than I expected to get...there are professional voice actors doing most of the work here to a respectful degree of polish. The music is very good and it sets the tone of the world very well...I just love the ambient sounds of the game and they make up a large portion of the audio....the sounds of the beach while hearing the strum of a Spanish guitar is just one of many fittingly intimate-dreamy "sonic scenes" in the game...
    Value - 9.5 - This is a game that is pretty much takes replay-ability for granted...This game ,by design, is an evolving one where you can make interesting and unplanned choices and the player is made to choose between paths that he will eventually be taking - the player might even choose without even noticing it until later...The value here is of a long term relationship...no...sorry....MUCH MORE :)

    OVERALL : 8.8/10
    HIGHLY RECOMMENDED AWARD :)

    PS:
    If I wasn't so tired I would change my first instinct score to a round 9 and give it a classic but I am still Playing so I still don't know if it is a classic yet... and I don't have time for ultra-complex mathematical problems..... :p
    Edited by 6 at 09/10/09 @ 15:44

  • Bucser #221 2 years ago

    If they have tested the X360 port of Risen and write a review about the pc game then they should have done the opposite for GTA 4. Test the game on PC and write the review about the console version... Maybe then it would not have turned up as a 9/10...

  • grenade_master #222 2 years ago

    Eurogamer is right. It IS crap! Whoever did the combat system and 4 meter jumps has to be shot.
    The Witcher is a good RPG, Risen is not!

  • kangarootoo #223 2 years ago

    Doubt anyone is reading this still, but I played the 360 version over the weekend. I might have added a point or two to the review score, but only one or two. I sent it back. Might pick it up cheap in a few months, perhaps after they have patched some improvements. Its not terrible, but its just aged when compared to the other RPGs out there. You are probably better off playing Oblivion again with a different character.

  • Ingenu #224 2 years ago

    Could we please have a PC review ?
    From one of RockPaperShotgun people if at all possible.

    I can't tell about the XBox 360 version, but the PC version is closer to 6 or 7 IMO.
    (And I almost always agree with eurogamer.net, which is the very reason I read it.)

  • immateriaux #225 2 years ago

    Bit pissed off with the laziness from Eurogamer with this review really, what's the point of a game review site that doesn't spot the difference between a PC to Xbox port and a XBox to PC port? Your whole raison d'etre is to inform, not just press a few "A" buttons and scribble notes between affected yawns.

    Edit: thankfully readers took the effort to put the record straight
    Edited by 2 at 14/10/09 @ 21:19

  • KayAU #226 2 years ago

    Since this one was posted, whenever I see a review here on EG, I just feel very skeptical. It would seem my trust in the review quality, which was the reason I started using this site, is pretty much gone.

    4/10 for Risen, 10/10 for Oblivion. That says it all, really.

    Kay

  • DuX1112 #227 2 years ago

    Gamespot gave it a 7 (out of 10).

  • DuX1112 #228 2 years ago

    Oh and BTW, Oblivion IS a GREAT game, and a good RPG. I don't get it, what's exactly wrong with it? Heck, when it first came out, it was like RPG redefined (at least graphically speaking), which did TONS for immersion. It sucked you in. The huge open world with (then) too-good-to-be-true graphics was just jaw-dropping. The quests, pretty nice (go follow someone, go investigate a house, go wait for a secret agent, go find a cure for your vampirism, win in the Arena). Yeah I got bitten by a vampire in one of 'em dungeons. And got addicted to boxing in the Arena (had a really high "Hand-to-hand" so I fist-fought half the opponents). :D
    So I think it deserves a 10. Or a 9. Nothing lower though.

    About Risen, I don't know, but the PC version surely ain't a 4. I installed it last week, did a quest or two, but had to quit it for lack of time and obligations. I still haven't made my mind on it. But now I will. :D

    *goes to play some more Risen*

    See ya people! :)
    Edited by 1 at 16/10/09 @ 00:08

  • KayAU #229 2 years ago

    @DuX1112

    Heh, I just finished a post on IGN.com about exactly why I think Oblivion was overrated. :) Since you asked, I will paste it here:

    "To me, Oblivion was a major disappointment. I was hoping for a Morrowind without all the flaws, but while several flaws were fixed, more fundamental ones were added. For one, the genericness of the landscape, combined with the automatically generated dungeons, and the enemies and loot which were spawned based on your level, took the excitement out of exploration. You could go anywhere, but it did not really matter were you went. For an open-world RPG, this is a huge flaw.

    Another thing which is important in any RPG, is character development, which I think was also broken in Oblivion. Thanks to the level scaling, levelling up would not necessarily make your character stronger (compared to the rest of the world), nor would it enable you to do stuff you could not do before.

    Finally, I found Oblivion to be seriously lacking in immersion. Even if you ignore things like very few voice actors compared to the number of NPCs, and characters with dialogue from more than one actor, there are just too many things which are inconsistent. For one thing, there is no logical relation between what the game says about your strength, and what your character can actually do. A novice swordsman can become arena champion in the capital, and a legendary archmage can be defeated by a couple of highwaymen. It doesn't help immersion that these highwaymen will at one point posess armor worth more than a medium sized town, either. Another thing which hurts immersion, is the way the world does not properly react to your character. Climbing in social standing is one of the major parts of the game, but people will treat you largely the same way, whether you are a petty thief, or the leader of the mages guild. Overall, the game world doesn't really seem to be affected much by what you do at all. I got the impression that Bethesda were trying to make sure all content was accessible at any time, and thus, the consequences of your actions had to be seriously limited. A poor design choice, I think.

    Don't get me wrong, Oblivion is not a terrible game overall. It has some strengths as well, such as its sheer scale, a high degree of polish, and even some decent quest design. It is just not the "ultimate RPG" the gaming press and some players seem to think it is. I think it is probably a decent next step for younger players whose previous "RPG" experience is World of Warcraft. A 10 out of 10 RPG, however, I think it is not."

    I could probably go on for a long time on this subject, but as IGN has a 3000 character maximum and a very mainstream audience, I tried to be brief and just mention some of the most important flaws.

    Kay

  • darc #230 2 years ago

    I think I'm very close to completing the PC version of Risen now. I'd give it a 9/10, personally. Gotta take that for what it's worth though - I was also a big fan of Gothic 3.

    Still, despite a few niggles, I think this is a fantastic game. The graphics are a little rough in some ways, but then the game will surprise you by looking downright gorgeous at times. In general, the NPCs are an ugly lot, but the landscape and vistas (sunrises, waterfalls) can be beautiful at times.

    I really don't get the people (including the original reviewer) who are coming down on the combat system. First of all, real-time melee combat is very rarely a ton of fun. Risen is actually the first RPG whose sword-fighting I enjoy. Enemies flank and circle, you've gotta work to their exposed sides and play against their rythyms - very realistic.

    But most important by far is the leap in immersion that is afforded by proper translation and acting. The acting and audio production in general are fantastic, which puts the game way ahead of any of the Gothic games. I'm guessing that much made it to the Xbox version, and should have lent more to the score. But hey, I haven't played the XBox version...

    Whatever, I'm just grateful Pirhanna Bytes got this one out in such good form. This game totally crept up on me - zero hype - and it has completely restored my faith in old-school western RPGs. First game in years (since Gothic 3) that I've enjoyed enough to sit at the PC and play for hours on end!

    (I was actually a little put off initially that the game was a full $50 on Steam, when the boxed copy on Amazon was $10 cheaper, but in retrospect, it was worth every penny.)
    Edited by 2 at 16/10/09 @ 18:41

  • darc #231 2 years ago

    P.S. I'll never get bored with telling everyone how much I hated the Witcher. :)

  • DuX1112 #232 2 years ago

    @KayAU

    I agree with many of the points you mentioned about Oblivion, about all the gameplay mechanics and glitches. But still, I think that gaming (or enjoying a game) is largely in the head. At least for me. I didn't pay that much attention to the gameplay details, and I understand they mean a lot to many gamers, but I kinda enjoyed the game from my own perspective.

    Speaking of this, there's one thing I've noticed lately, that IMHO, there are two kinds of games: ones that are so open and non-linear in terms of storyline progression and choices, which is highly stimulating to the gamer's fantasy, and others in which the story (as linear as it can get) grabs you by the neck and literally sucks you in.

    And both are very enjoyable. The "open-world-ly-ness" of Oblivion, Fallout 3 and others gave me much space for my own fantasy and "story" to kick in. Heck, at first I considered Fallout 3 the blandest piece of game ever, but 20+ hours into the game and a Super-Mutant-Juggernaut-Whatever breathing in your neck (and running out of Fatboy ammo) while walking the dog from one end of the map to the other... Is (for me) frighteningly immersive. Gives me the creeps, makes me actually care about my sidekick. Makes me care for the gameworld.

    The other types of games are like Fable or like Risen. Fable, huh, was pretty fable-ish. :D It was a story, and I enjoyed that I was in it, I loved the game. :D Next, Risen has a great atmosphere... I don't know what it is, but it is very likable. Very charming, kinda warm. Something in Risen subtly reminds me of Fable, whatever it is. Maybe some of the relaxed, chatty dialogues. Which Oblivion painfully lacked... etc. etc.

    But heck, I guess reviewers are people too, and sometimes can't help being subjective. If I was to review Homeworld 2, I would've given it a 10. Or a 100 (yeah that's how much I love that game). But heck, they gave it a 6... :)

  • KayAU #233 2 years ago

    @DuX1112

    Well, if it worked for you, that's great. :) I think probably the main difference between our experiences was immersion. To me, it felt too artificial and inconsistent for me to really create my own story. But as I said, it still was an okay enough game. I might have had a more positive experience with it if I had gone into it without any expectations, though. There was an incredible amount of hype preceding the release, and I was almost expecting a Gothic II-beater. I guess from that starting point, disappointment was hard to avoid. I was also rather appalled with the gaming press, which apparently was completely unable to find *anything* wrong with it.

    I think Fallout 3 was a bit better, though, so perhaps there is hope for Bethesda yet. Although, with the mass market success they have had, I am not sure how much they care about the approval of grumpy old RPG veterans. :)

    Anyway, returning to Risen, yes, it is certainly very likable and atmospheric. :) Piranha are really good at creating game worlds, and with everything being hand made, it just adds to the atmosphere. I also think that the immersion of these game worlds is superior what their open-world RPG competitors offer. Things here do not give the impression of existing solely for the sake of the player, or at least, it is far less obvious. If you are not familiar with Piranha Bytes' earlier games, you might want to check them out.

    Kay
    Edited by 1 at 17/10/09 @ 18:37

  • DuX1112 #234 2 years ago

    @KayAU

    Yup, I agree pretty much. Especially about the expectations thing and the way Risen shines. + 1 from me. :)

    And thanks for the nice chat.

  • Vurten #235 2 years ago

    While I appreciate a critical review a score of 4 seems harsh.
    After initial "whoah, did I just spend good money on this 2003 looking game with wonky combat" Risen grew big time on me.
    Finally an RPG that actually rewards you, makes combat seem dangerous and important.

    On top of that it has the best use of moral choices I've seen thus far. Most things are shades of grey, even "good" people kill and act greedy.

    Don't be put off by low scores, Risen demands attention and time but rewards you with some of the most solid NPC's n' quest seen in some time. I'll echo the "best pc game I've played this year" statement in an earlier comment.

  • mkreku #236 8 months ago

    I still get upset when I read this review. Shame on you, Dan Whitehead!