Both MacGamer.com and MacGamez.com have recently reviewed PoG. Personally I think the reviews were overly harsh, particularly MacGamez.com which makes repeated referrence to PoG not "reign(ing) supreme over the likes of Baldur's Gate II or Diablo II." MacGamer also makes a similar comparison. While it is testament to the quality of Ambrosia products that their software is put in competition with that of commercial software companies, I really don't think it is a fair comparison to make. A quality shareware title should not be knocked in a review because it isn't "as good as" a commericial title in the reviewer's opinion. That's like slamming an independent action film because the special effects don't quite meet the standard of the big budget Die Hard movies.

This is also one of the few times I've seen a game knocked for being easy to use and quick to jump into. Obviously both reviewers feel great joy in spending hours pouring over character information in games such as Baldur's Gate. As games like Diablo have shown, a certain level of simplicity is appealing to many gamers. The ability to jump right into a game and have fun for a few hours without having to bother with a lot of housekeeping is a positive, not a negative. I enjoy games like Baldur's Gate, but it isn't the same style of game as PoG and should not be used as a basis for comparison.

While both reviews mention the importance of the Coldstone engine to future titles, I think their heavy handed reviews of PoG overshadow this fact. In many ways PoG is as much a showcase and testdrive of the engine as it is a fun adventure romp. The idea that anyone with the patience, despite a possible lack of programming knowledge, could sit down and make a game like this is impressive. While they weren't reveiwing Coldstone I do think it should have factored more into their final analysis.

Just my two cents on the matter.

Check out the reviews for yourself here: (url="http://"http://www.macgamer.com/reviews/pog/pog.html")http://www.macgamer....ws/pog/pog.html(/url) (url="http://"http://www.macgamez.com/games/2001/09/pillarsofgarendall/")http://www.macgamez....arsofgarendall/(/url)

------------------
My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!
(url="http://"http://www.resistancehq.f2s.com/") Official Resistance Website (/url)

Quote

Normal game play is in real time, while combat is turn-based.

Huh? Did they even play the game?

------------------
GameRanger SN: Col. Patrick (EL)

I was wondering about that line myself. And I think the MGz reviewer mentioned something about not being able to turn the music off.

I'm going to keep my words brief here: something tells me that engaging in a long discussion here will get me flamed.

First off: I don't compare PoG to any commercial RPGs out there in the review. (There does come a period, though, where I can't help but think: "Why would I spend $25 on this instead of the original Baldur's Gate?") I consider myself very receptive to shareware - heck, I review more of it than commercial games, and I cowrote a column a year or so ago that spotlighted new shareware titles. I know there's a lot of good stuff out there, and a lot of talent. But I can't honestly say that PoG met the standards that Mac shareware, and Ambrosia, have established.

Regarding the whole jumping-into-the-game deal: Read the review. I honestly think that Ambrosia could have allowed for optional character customization - I think Avernum does it well.

Regarding Coldstone: The fact is that a review is written to function as an aid in a purchasing decision. If it's strictly a tech demo, don't charge for it. No one's going to say, "Well, I don't like the demo of the game, but it IS using the Coldstone engine, which might be cool in the future, so I'm going to buy it." I am personally looking forward to Coldstone's release and playing around with it, since I'm not a developer by any stretch of the imagination. But, frankly, PoG is marketed as a separate product, and ought to be reviewed as one.

-Pat (the Great) Miller
MacGamer.com - Senior Contributing Editor, Junior Newshound

------------------

/me not liking reviewers.
I noticed that they thought that PoG was targeted at the hard-core RPGer, when it really is targeted at those who want a simple, easy-to-learn game.
Also, they did not take into account that PoG doesn't do justice to Coldstone's capabilities.

<blockquote>Hard core RPG buffs, listen up: Those of you who want a deep and complicated plot, a roll-your-own character system, or a detailed combat system, you may want to stop reading here - Pillars of Garendall is most likely not for you. Those of you who prefer games like Zelda, with simple, easy-to-pick-up gameplay, keep reading.</blockquote>

Pardon? I don't recall saying anything about PoG being targeted at hard core reviewers.

As for PoG not doing justice to Coldstone's capabilities:
-I wouldn't know, because I haven't seen Coldstone.
-That doesn't affect the review at all. We review PoG, not Coldstone.

------------------

I don't like the review at all, but he has a point about not saying it was targeted for hard-core RPGers and about reviewing PoG, not coldstone. But, technically, PoG is only the base game and whatever plug-ins are in your folder. PoG is now only at the base of it's interestingness and extent. As soon as Coldstone is released, PoG will start to grow and it will become better, more interesting, and much longer (not that I don't think it is good eough already.) Each plug-in will be like a small update, or even a large one. It might even be possible to implement "roll-your-own-character" (like doobies hehe) type thing at the beginning.
The only thing I really don't like about PoG is the always-slashing-a-sword thing, which could easily be fixed by more graphics.

------------------
Signature 2.0 has entered beta.
It will be released this year.

Quote

Originally posted by Pat the Great:
**Regarding the whole jumping-into-the-game deal: Read the review. I honestly think that Ambrosia could have allowed for optional character customization - I think Avernum does it well.
**

You just plain don't get it. Avernum and Pillars of Garendall were designed to appeal to entirely different audiences. If we wanted to write another micro-managing tile-based RPG for hardcore RPG geeks, we'd write something like Avernum. That isn't what we wanted to do.

Considering you barely played the game before reviewing it ( based on your screenshots), considering the horrifically bad games you rated higher than PoG, and considering you failed to grasp that a game might be targeted intentionally at people who don't usually like RPGs...

I give your review a 2 out of 10 for poor insight, poor research, and poor grammar. I also consider it cowardly that you didn't respond to my eMail.

------------------
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

Quote

Originally posted by Kilvain:
Both MacGamer.com and MacGamez.com have recently reviewed PoG. Personally I think the reviews were overly harsh

It's easy to sum up how the reviews happened. Reviewer (who is undoubtably a hardcore gamer, otherwise he wouldn't take a low paying job that gives him free games) downlods PoG. Reviewer spends an hour or two playing it; takes a couple of screenshots. Reviewer says "hey! This isn't Diablo II or Baldurs Gate II!! Why can't I customize my character!!" Reviewer never bothers to actually play the game past 1% of the plot/quests.

Reviewer then writes a poorly thought-out "stream of consciousness" review of the game, which includes nothing about the plot (since he doesn't know it), has few people people spell/grammar check it for him, posts it to the web, and calls it a day.

------------------
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

Quote

Originally posted by Pat the Great:
**
Pardon? I don't recall saying anything about PoG being targeted at hard core reviewers.
**

Right; you just spent most of the review comparing it to hard core RPG games like Baldur's Gate, Avernum, etc. I guess you couldn't find too much to write about since you didn't bother playing the actual game much.

Understandable. Sad, but understandable.

If you understood anything about who the game was targeted at, you would not be asking for the ability to customize your character the way it was done in Avernum.

Anyway, I'm off to write review of how checkers would be so much better if its pieces had special moves like chess.

------------------
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

(This message has been edited by andrew (edited 09-08-2001).)

Looks like I was right.

Oh, by the way, I don't get paid.

------------------

I just cannot believe how harsh those reviews were. PoG is definitely not baldur's gate or D2. It doesn't even try to be. It is a completely different type of game. This is a game you can play during your lunch hour or something (or, if you ended up like me, staying up til 3AM gaining that one last level). Best 25$ I ever spent.

------------------
Apple Computer - The name of microsoft's research and development division
--------------------------------

Quote

Originally posted by Pat the Great:
**Looks like I was right.
**

Smugness is a shallow refuge from the truth. Color me unimpressed, "Pat" -- you have no argument.

Quote

Originally posted by Pat the Great:
**Oh, by the way, I don't get paid.

**

Right, you just get free games.

------------------
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

When I first started playing PoG I wasn't overly impressed, the graphics weren't too great, mouse control was a little jerky, the keys weren't customizable, the creatures made weird noises, but with time it's grown on me. I am now perfectly satisfied, and appreciate it for the great shareware game it is.

This doesnt really have to do with reviews, but I can't post my own messages because I only have yahoo mail..

Anyways, I was wondering if anyone knew where the heck the order of crystals (for the second dragon tooth) is? I've looked everywhere practically! Thanx

Quote

Originally posted by MrDuragon:
This doesnt really have to do with reviews, but I can't post my own messages because I only have yahoo mail..

So? What does having Yahoo! Mail have to do with anything? Why is that a problem?

------------------
Coreył (Cubed)
I'm a (url="http://"http://www.ambrosiasw.com/webboard/Forum6/HTML/001781.html#")Boozerama Bar(/url) kinda guy!

Spoiler Alert

Route to order of the crystal cave.

There is a path leading south from the plains of endlesswind to varendeep lake. On the north of the lake is a cave. Enter the cave and it will take you to the other side of the lake. There is an area here surrounded by rivers, with the only exits being the cave under the lake, and a tunnel entrance. In the southwest of this area is a place with a bunch of mages, there is a cave entrance here which looks like a skull. This is the cave of the order of the crystal. You need the path finding skill in order to get to the chest which has the tooth.

Hmm...

MacGamez.com sez:

Quote

The keyboard is used to manipulate and control the character's functions, while the mouse moves him around physically on the map. Precise control of the character is a bit difficult because the game seems to run at double speed.

You do know that you can control the character with the keyboard, no? And I wouldn't want to play PoG if it ran half as fast, as it apparently "should."

Quote

It never reaches beyond itself to make the game any more than a simple shareware role-player. Contributing to the list of problems with the game, the characters are two-dimensional, the weaponry is trite and uncreative and the scenery is redundant: the world maps are recycled from level to level, and sadly, Ambrosia can never get enough of green pastures.

Er... it's supposed to be a "simple shareware role-player," isn't it? How would you like the weaponry to be more creative? I never knew that DrivaTan and Utian were trite, much less the Elven Bow of Destruction and the War Axe of Misery. To each their own, perhaps, but I never found the scenery to be "redundant" or "recycled" - sure, some of the graphics are the same from screen to screen, but what do you want, everything to be prerendered uniquely?

Quote

Oddly enough, there are no obvious options to turn off the music or switch game resolution.

Did we leave that out of the manual, or did this guy just forget to read it?

Quote

This also means there is no way to configure the keyboard for custom controls or to adjust other game factors.

Ok, that's true enough, and it's been a gripe of mine. But the standard control setup is fairly well thought out, so it's not a biggie.

Given the numerous errors in the review (especially the frequent and repeated references to turn-based play, I honestly have to wonder whether the reviewer spent more than five minutes with the game. It's a fun, simple game, and that's what it's meant to be.

MacGamer sez:

Quote

Unfortunately, the dialogue in the game is sub-par - the text is laden with really bad one-liners, there's an annoying lack of punctuation, and the lines in general feel rushed and simplistic.

Fair enough. Goodness knows we griped enough about this during the beta.

Quote

The graphics, unfortunately, might also remind you of your Nintendo. While, thankfully, the characters are animated, and don't merely shift from tile to tile like older RPGs, the graphics feel amateur at best. The characters are rendered in a pseudo-3D style which looks stiff and somewhat cheesy by themselves. However, the background is completely flat, and the perspective of the character renderings combined with the flat background looks absolutely bizarre.

Funny, I disagree completely. PoG's graphics are better than anything I ever saw on the SNES, the perspective on the characters and the background seems identical to me (no "flatness" that I can see), and I don't see any stylistic clash between the characters and background. What gives?

Quote

The gameplay offers a few annoying bugs as well. Although the game was very stable on a G4/350, the game design found a few flaws: the most annoying was when loading games. Pillars of Garendall randomly generates enemies each time you enter a new section of the game - but it doesn't save the configuration of the enemies when you save a game, so loading a game will often magically create enemies right next to you. Other times, the loading screen between levels simply won't show up, and it appears the game has frozen until the next level comes up.

This I'll agree with. Nonetheless, the final ratings given PoG were insanely too low. Unless there are a ton of flaws which the reviewer simply forgot to mention and which I never noticed when playing the game, the reviewer has apparently taken off more than half of the possible points in several categories simply because he feels that they don't "measure up" to some ideal standard - the graphics and sound are not state of the art, but neither are they outright bad.

------------------
Sometimes I think we're alone.
Sometimes I think we're not.
In either case, the thought is quite staggering.
--R. Buckminster Fuller

I don't want to get flamed by Andrew (I didn't think he ever got that harsh) but I'm gonna give my two cents anyway.

I just finished the game. I had fun, but was disappointed. I didn't know the target market, and before playing, hadn't played a RPG for a while. I looked into PoG primarily for 2 reasons: it was OS X compatible and it was made by Ambrosia. I've been trying to support OS X developers, and was impressed Ambrosia had gotten to market a new OS X game pretty quickly. I had tried Clan Lord, but didn't feel like having to spend so much time talking to people, as I'm not a chatter. So, here comes PoG and I figure, what the heck, I'll try it. It was fun, and sometimes amusing, but also quite frustrating at times due to the repetitive nature of the game (repetitive graphics especially). I can appreciate the macgamer and img reviews perspectives. If I had read them before playing, I might not have bothered. That said, since I did play, do I regret it now? Well, no. I don't think I would have been as interested in the RPG genre if I hadn't played. I could've bought Balders Gate for the same price, but it's not OS X compatible. So, I'm going to just list my pros and cons and shut-up.

The Pros:
1. I could easily play on my Firewire PowerBook. It didn't require a mouse.
2. I didn't have to make a trip to the store to buy it. I got my code quickly.
3. I didn't have to switch to OS 9
4. It was fun.
5. The enemies were cool and varied. I especially liked the Guardian at the end.

The Cons:
1. No option to see the cutscenes/movies on the CD. I purchased a full copy, but don't get the full package in the download. I know, CDs are coming, but it doesn't do me any good now.
2. The scenery graphics. Honestly, I was left feeling, especially late in the game, that Beenox was just plain lazy. Perhaps if I had been able to see the movies, that may have made the endless grasses and caves a little more bearable, but that wasn't an option. The best scene was the pan over the giant's body. I noticed they tried with the rocks sticking out of the water on Reefs Island, but it just wasn't enough. I think $30 (well, I asked for my $5 back, so $25) should have bought a little more diversity.
3. I thought it stunk that there were only three types of dungeons: the rocks, the lava, and the crypt.
4. The NPC dialogue coding. I noticed that sometimes a NPC's dialogue won't change properly to reflect a quest being completed.
5. The main character graphics. Why does the character change when you use a bow, but your weapon is a sword and shield when you wield the two-handed axe? This is confusing until you realize it's just an oversight.
6. A small quibble - if Helden's hat is supposed to be funny-looking, why does is look just like the caps you can buy at the store?
7. The ending. I was disappointed. I wanted more than to just read about what happened. I don't know what, but I know I felt cheated.
8. The manual. I couldn't find any explanation of the attributes. I still don't know what they do and why you'd want one over the other. Does marksmanship only help those with bow and arrow? What does vitality do? I read on the boards that it affects how much life you get from level to level, but I don't know how the person figured that out.

OK, that's it. The cons outweighed the pros that I listed, but that's because I was more interested in giving critical feedback than positive. No one should look at this and be discouraged from trying it out. I think the demo does give you a good idea of what you're getting into, and overall, I had a good time. I guess at the end I just felt cheated by no cut-scenes, the same old dungeon and scenery, and the wimper of an ending.

I was also dissapointed by the MGL review. It was the worst review they ever had other than dissing Monkey's Island because "You have to cheat." Said game being a terrific adventure where you play a pirate who does indeed cheat in a contest to get a prize. Complaining about cheating in Monkey's Ilsand makes as much sense as dissing Unreal Tornament because you have to kill people. Blug!!

However, there are genuine failings in the game. Everyone complains about the writing; I'll soon email 4 pages of corrections which I made. The outdoors area/ forest pastures do get boring; the Garendal Map is about 2 to 4 times too big. And finnally, Andrew, it's bad form to criticise a reviewer no matter how badly he blows it.

Quote

Originally posted by no name:
. And finnally, Andrew, it's bad form to criticise a reviewer no matter how badly he blows it.

I don't agree. The reviewer clearly barely even played the game -- if he's going to be lazy and unprofessional about his reviewing methodology, the gloves are off.

------------------
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.