Reality Pump has been discussing the pit it fell into with its fantasy RPG Two Worlds, which didn't exactly go down a storm, in an interview with our colleagues over at OXM UK.
"Two Worlds was not only the first role-playing game we created as a company, but also our first console game, so we've learned a lot in the process", the developer told the magazine.
"The main lesson we learned is to be more realistic with our goals. With the original idea, we were all so excited to be working on an RPG that we tried to fit in every idea we had, even the ones that came late in the process."
This ultimately hurt the game, Reality Pump added, admitting that as a result "it had parts that were underdeveloped".
Two Worlds originally drummed up interest due to its Oblivion-esque free-roaming aspect, but it didn't even dint the armour of Bethesda's monster and averaged around a 50 percent review score on 360 and 65 percent on PC, according to Game Rankings.
However, lessons have been learned and are being applied to Reality Pumps' sequel, Two Worlds: The Temptation.
"With The Temptation, we clearly delineated the game's components at the start, and we're sticking to this target so the end result will be a more finely polished game", the developer's promised.
Two Worlds: The Temptation is due out autumn on PC and Xbox 360. You can read OXM UK's full interview with Reality Pump on its website.
two worlds lasted ½ hour in my xbox and a little longer in my sons. then my son sold it at school to some sucker for a fiver less. i will never touch another game from this company again. what a load of drivel.
I liked it too, though it did deserve the 50-60% rating. Good to know they are learning from their mistakes and try to fix them. I'll be checking the expansion out
Dear god guy, have you nothing better to do?! That was an essay...
Just to point out that most games are reviewed in their initial state (however buggy that might be), but good games get deserved scores. See Op. Flashpoint (and or Hidden&Dangerous) and STALKER for buggy examples that got a good score (both from minor developers).
I own and play this game regularly. I am a true RPG fan, not just a fan of fads like most oblivion fans seem to be. I remember and Love games like Ultima VII despite the fact that the graphics suck and the AI is flawed I still think its a great game.
Saying Two worlds graphics are bad is a Joke, they are a far cry from Ultima are they not? And saying the game is garbage because there are a few bugs is a Joke, after all what game has no bugs? The real question about bugs is will the company fix them? In this case the answer is yes, so I don't see a problem.
I honestly think people have forgotten the goal of games is not to be perfect, but rather to entertain. If you buy a game for the sole purpose of criticizing every bug then you will not enjoy any game ever.
And as far as basing your like or dislike of a game on review scores, if you do your an idiot. Everyone knows most review scores are scewed based ether on the reviewers likes/dislikes, or the company line, or both. Very few reviews I have read in the last few years have been even remotely fair, or accurate.
Look, the real problem with Two Worlds was... that it just wasn't really very good.
You can argue the toss as many ways as you like, but at the end of the day, the weak story, lack of depth, hugely flawed combat system (just press dodge at the right time and you're invincible? wtf?), poor graphics (particularly on the xbox 360 version), bad dialogue and utterly terrible voice acting completely let down the game.
Now, I'll not say that I didn't have some fun playing through the game. But I can't honestly say that I thought it was good.
And for the Oblivion comparisons, its fate, I'm afraid, that any title, film, book, or game, will be compared to its contemporaries. Oblivion is not the finest example of RPG the open-world genre has to offer, but it is the most popular in recent years, and its only sensible to draw comparisons.
As for the argument that this wasn't a major game backed by a major publisher, that's fair enough, it wasn't. But then, neither is The Witcher, but it that game far surpasses what Two Worlds accomplished.
To be perfectly blunt, I think Two Worlds was completely deserving of the criticism it received. Numerous people who watched me playing the Xbox 360 version - or who tried it themselves- repeatedly asked me just why was I playing it. My answer was only that it was mildly entertaining, and I had nothing better to play at the time. Now, there's something to be said for a game that is fun in spite of its flaws, and were it not for the underlying fun to be found in Two Worlds it would probably deserve only 4 or 5 out of ten, not 6 or 7. But its still very difficult to argue that the game was, in any sense, Good.
I got a good 7 hours into the PC version before finally deciding it was rubbish and not worth my time. Oblivion was by no means a perfect game but compared to this it may as well have been published by the divines.
It is curious to note how many forumites are prepared to make excuses for this pile of dross. Even the developers (in a breath of fresh air) are casually admitting the game was sub-par. Why are people so desperate to defend this mess of code? Purchase justification?
I know alot of people will be able to look past its (many) faults, and I did enjoy it on some small level but seriously. The game is crap. Deal with it.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
