[Kurufinwe]

Woo, feedback! Great.

Originally Posted by Ariel Type

First of all, the review doesn't mention that this is a sequel of sort to an earlier attempt in adventure making. It was called "Legend of Djel" and share the same universe and characters.

Actually, there's a reference to it (the first sentence of the review!). Then again, I don't think it really matters, since the world feels like such a big, tired cliché.

Secondly, the graphics. I was very surprised to see "the graphics are also often unimpressive" in the context. C'mon, it was one of the most impressive adventure games for its time (1992!). The pictures are beautiful and highly detailed, the drawn characters are memorable, and as for FMV - it was new at that time, and the attempt made in Ween was rather good.

I completely disagree. 1992 was the year of LB2, KQ6, Indy 4, Dune, QfG3, Kyrandia, etc. Those had great graphics. Frankly, when I look at this, this, or that, I can't help but find the drawings dull and the choice of colours, indeed, "gaudy and jarring". But you're free to think otherwise, obviously.

"The lack of even a single joke" was also a surprise. The game never takes itself seriosly, as a matter of fact. It is all about funny characters and situations. Just remember that little stupid insect, or dragon turned into fly, or wonderful Urn ("I feel merry when I hear word strawberry"). You have a cold heart if these moments didn't touch you (joking)

I said that I liked Urm. For the rest, I'm still completely unsure whether the game takes itself seriously or not. It doesn't feel like a parody, or even comedy. The Gobl*ns games, or Woodruff, are definitely comedy, but Ween feels like it's trying to be an epic KQ5-clone (but utterly fails), with just a few jokes here and there (Uki and Orbi, possibly the mosquitoes etc.), which just managed to make me cringe (once again, apart from Urm, whom I really loved).

The puzzles themselfs are very inventive and fun to solve. As a matter of fact, the whole game is played more like first-person Goblins. There are many unique opportunities which were introduced in the game - making of different potions, use of sacred objects (there were actually only three of them, and they were easy to recognise, as they were all made of iron), the help of friends.. The game gets harder near the end, and the puzzles become more obscure. But for the most time they are very fun to solve and, again, surves as a nostalgie for Goblins nicely.

Once again, I think I've made my thoughts clear in the review. I did find the puzzles good and inventive at first, but thought they got too repetitive, tedious and illogical after a while (after the end of the three trials, basically). The whole of Volcano Island was horrendous in that regard.

I think the conclusions made in the review are unfair. There are very few games of such type and style (and almost all of them belong to Coktel), and it is sad to see that people try to kill them with their sharp word.. But well, everyone has his own opinion.

Then again, maybe the reason why there are so few of them is that they're bad? Since you're constantly making reference to the Gobl*ns games, I'll add that if I had to review them (which hopefully won't be the case), I'd probably rate them higher than Ween. Because they're funnier. Because the graphics look better, with a real style of their own. Because they don't pretend to have a plot and characterization (esp. the first two), instead of trying and failing there. And yet I tend to like Ween better, because the puzzles are mostly much more logical and inventive. But at the end of the day, I wouldn't recommend either to today's gamers (as I already said before, I consider the historical or nostalgic value of games utterly irrelevant to a review written here and now).

Ah yes, I missed that. My fault. Then again, those paths are not just alternative little puzzles, but solid levels, and I don't understand the complain "but remains quite a minor feature". How many games offer you an opportunity to progress in a different way?..

To name just a few from the same year, KQ6 and Indy 4. The alternative levels in Ween are just two levels out of twenty-something, and I don't think anyone should replay the whole game just for them (contrary to what happens in KQ6 and Indy 4).

Originally Posted by Ninth

I think is worth noting that you also don't like Goblins 3 very much (perhaps there's a review incoming?), while I love it. This may account for the fact that despite all its flaws I still enjoyed playing Ween quite a bit, when you obviously didn't. To me it's a neat and pretty puzzle-fest, the same way that Goblins 3 is, even if Goblins 3 is clearly the superior game by a fair margin.

(the two threads will probably get merged at some point, so I'm answering that too)
I didn't dislike Ween, though I found it pretty forgettable (and tedious at times). But whether I personally liked it or not is irrelevant; what matters is whether I'd recommend it. And I wouldn't, except to people with very specific tastes, and who would be able to forget some of the game's flaws. The only question is whether those people would be able to realize that it might be a game for them based on the review. Maybe I presume too much, but I think they would.