[Assassin of Kings]

A discussion I've had with some members in this thread made me want to open this thread, to find out how most of the people really think. So, do you guys consider Arcania to be Gothic 4 and think that it's a worthy continuation of the series? I'd be grateful if a moderator posted a poll regarding this here in the thread ...

I personally think that Arcania is Gothic 4 only officially, only by the name, but as a fan of Gothic since 2004 (as far as I recall, then was the first time I played Gothic 1), I refuse to accept Arcania and I do not consider it Gothic 4. Moreover, I hope that if PB is ever going to continue the series, they'll ignore Arcania's story and continue the game from where it ended in Gothic 3.

[ICFabian]

Yup.

[Assassin of Kings]

Yup.

I understand that you consider it Gothic 4, as that's how it is called, but do you also think that it is a good game and that it's a worthy sequel of Gothic?

[Ariogaisus]

Nooooooooooooooooooo.

[Hellbilly]

The question in the topic is put in a typically erroneous and possibly consciously misleading way.

The correct way to put it would be two questions:
1) Do you consider Arcania to be Gothic 4?
2) Do you consider Arcania to be a worthy continuation of the series?

To the first, the answer is obviously "yes". Those who answer "no" should really explain themselves properly, and "cuz I don't like it" isn't a good enough answer.

[Ariogaisus]

The question in the topic is put in a typically erroneous and possibly consciously misleading way.

The correct way to put it would be two questions:
1) Do you consider Arcania to be Gothic 4?
2) Do you consider Arcania to be a worthy continuation of the series?

To the first, the answer is obviously "yes". Those who answer "no" should really explain themselves properly, and "cuz I don't like it" isn't a good enough answer.

First answer. I really don't care for Arcania. Second answer. NO!

[Assassin of Kings]

OK, in that case, add a poll with 3 possible answers, please, if that's possible.

Do you think that Arcania is a worthy continuation of the Gothic series?

1. Yes
2. No
3. I don't even consider it Gothic

[Larisa]

Do you consider Arcania to be a worthy continuation of the previous Gothic title?

[Assassin of Kings]

Do you consider Arcania to be a worthy continuation of the previous Gothic title?

It's about all of the previous titles, not only about Gothic 3.

[DonPhoenix]

1) If only I could answer with no, but sadly my answer is yes

2) No, not at all. It doesn't have a Gothic feeling at all, story is... odd in my opinion.

I'll say it this way:
Gothic 3 already lacked atmosphere of previous Gothics but Arcania doesn't have ANY atmosphere of first two Gothics at all = not worthy continuation of the series...

[Dino]

No, it is not.

However I still liked it. It was a good game to play through once or twice. The plot was somewhat flat, the characters were not memorable, there were no unique weapons(unlike the Ancient ore Armor, Uriziel, Beliar's Claw, Heavy Paladin Armor, etc), the enemies were just stupid and the final boss fight was insultingly easy, just as in every other gothic game.

The good parts about it were the graphics, of course. As you may know by now, in these 5 years I am active here, I always say that the graphics is the MOST important thing about a game. Man, fuck games 2006 and older.
The combat system was at least as plain and simple as it gets, which is something I like. Of course I still have no idea why did they change the melee combat from gothic 2, because IMO that suited the gothic series best, but hey.
I really liked the magic though. Too bad it was so limited(like in risen but not nearly as bad)
I liked that the main characters from the previous games where here as well. And actually it was good that the Nameless Hero(whooops I mean Rhobar III ) had not gone crazy but it was just an amulet of the sleeper possesing him.

All in all it was a fun game to play through once or twice, a casual RPG that doesn't take too much time and isn't nerve-wrecking. And that's as far as it goes.
If people asked me after years "Hey asshole, do you remember this game called Arcania?" I'll say "oh yeah... I think I played through it once... can't remember any details though".

oh and as I side note: for me the Gothic series ended with Gothic 2 vanilla. I hate gothic 3 and I hate "Night of the dickhead I mean Raven"

[Larisa]

not only about Gothic 3.

Wasn't there at least a game between G3 and G4?

[TudoracheMG]

Yep,Arcania is definitely Gothic 4

[Maladiq]

Like it or not, Arcania IS Gothic 4.

Is it a worthy continuation of the series? I don't know, but it surely is a worthy continuation of Gothic 3.

[ICFabian]

Is it a worthy continuation of the series? I don't know, but it surely is a worthy continuation of Trainwreck 3.

^what he said.

[warstrike]

This game doesn`t even exist for me. When i say Gothic i think only at the 3 parts. Too bad people give it so much attention. Anyway,on topic : No !

[The Assasin]

It is not a worthy sequel, but it bears a name of Gothic 4, has connections with previeus Gothic titles. Same situation with Deus Ex franchise. DE2 isn't a worthy sequel of DE1, but it is still a Deus Ex, no matter how different it is from the previous title. The devs haven't made new Deus Ex 2...

[Assassin of Kings]

Wasn't there at least a game between G3 and G4?

Do you mean Gothic 3:The Beginning and Forsaken Gods? I haven't played either of those, but from what I've heard FG also isn't worthy of Gothic. But here we should discuss if Arcania is a worthy continuation of the first 3 games.

[Mage Master]

For me even Gothic 3 isn't Gothic. Let alone arcania to be a gothic. As games they are good but if I try to see them as Gothic games I just see complete fail and disappointment. I guess I would consider Arcania to be more of a Gothic story-wise since it makes more sense and I didn't expected it to be good(compared to G3). The key word being more.

I'm not sure witch question that answered and I don't really care.

[Larisa]

But here we should discuss if Arcania is a worthy continuation of the first 3 games.

Why only the first 3 and not the whole thing? In your own words:

It's about all of the previous titles, not only about Gothic 3.