ROB_RIV'S PROFILE

"But I am going to handle the game in the best way I feel will entertain its audience. I've spoken to several backers who are aware of what the game is being created on and the concern really seems to be a non-issue."

Although you might not continue to use the current engine, the legality of what you're doing has been pointed out to you, and yet you defend it because "several backers are aware of it and think it's a non-issue".

Be it using illegally-obtained graphics or an illegally-obtained game engine, you seem to dismiss criticism by saying that "I got to the point where I acknowledged there are those who aren't going to support the game no matter what I do. Any and everyone has the right to tell people not to back the game, I can't do anything about that. All I can do is make the best game I can. I don't really see what the purpose of going back and forth is at this point."

What exactly is Topia Online? A MMORPG that has a level editor?

author=Feldschlacht IV

author=Rob_Riv

author=Feldschlacht IV

What about this game stands out, that Sailerius has missed out on mentioning? Aside from eplipswich who pointed out about a NPC explaining the "Spirit" concept, I've not seen many counters with actual corrections or examples of things worthy of praise.

I'm just saying that the game isn't that bad to merit a 0 out of 5, is what I'm saying.

Yeah, but how isn't it? If all of Sailerius's points are true, then it seems he's missing out some equally valid positives, of which none seem to have been mentioned.

You could easily read the other, 27 or so positive reviews for that, man. It's not exactly hard to find!

Or the people making claims on this particular review could explain why the rating is too harsh with reference to the equally valid positives that Sailerius has not mentioned.

author=Feldschlacht IV
If you didn't like the game, that's fine, but to say that there's literally nothing redeemable from an objective point of view, well, that's pretty silly to me, that's whats unclear. Basically you are saying that literally nobody should enjoy this game, and that an individual might just have more fun sticking his tongue in a fan.

I mean if this is supposed to be objective, no, I don't understand it, you're gonna have to break it down to me.

What about this game stands out, that Sailerius has missed out on mentioning? Aside from eplipswich who pointed out about a NPC explaining the "Spirit" concept, I've not seen many counters with actual corrections or examples of things worthy of praise.

author=Magi
i can only assume this self-indulgent tripe is a desperate attempt to cover someone else's own insecurities. might be better off buying some 100g iron armor to protect that fragile ego bro

Why can't you address the points made and not the person making them?

author=undefined
Case in point # 2: You mentioned the poor writing. Again, this reflects the style of game from the ancient NES days. Even the SNES had absurd points of dialogue ("spoony bard" anyone?), but a retro style game wouldn't be the same without it.

author=undefined
Believe it or not, there are a lot of people who believe nostalgia to be a good thing, just because you don't doesn't mean you should try and turn people away from a game that many will feel IS nostalgic. It DOES excuse bad writing and graphics, because it is EXACTLY what retro gamers are looking for and expecting.

When games are rated out of five stars, unless you grade on a curve whereby you allow retro games a lot of leeway in nearly every category, games such as the above will be rated low. Reading reviews by a reviewer that doesn't give a low rating for bad writing and bad gameplay in some circumstances would make star ratings pretty hard to interpret, as they wouldn't all be comparable.