[Once A Villain]

I realize it seems bizarre to be wondering about this nearly 7 years after a game's release, but I just now heard about this. I haven't read the actual review, so I'm curious about a few things (if anyone knows). I still have the Computer Gaming World issue where Gabriel Knight 2 was reviewed. It got a 5/5 and was called, "The kind of sequel all sequels should be." I believe it got the Overall Game of the Year award that year. The author gushed over the game, he had nothing bad to say about it. I'm wondering if the same author wrote the GK3 review. Also, does anyone know where I can read this review online, by chance? I just can't see GK3 being ranked that much lower than GK2, even though I do feel that GK2 is the better game.

[RLacey]

1.5/5 sounds a bit strange to me, though I do believe that GK3 is overrated; it's easily the worst game in the series. Of course, that's not saying much when the series in question is Gabriel Knight...

Either way, I can't help you with the review. Sorry.

[Once A Villain]

Game Rankings

That and Gamespot are my only sources. Both claim GK3 got a 1.5/5 in CGW. I was shocked as well, that's why I created this thread.

[LimpingFish]

The general consensous seems to be that GK3 was a pretty bad game, regardless of it being part of a respected series.

It also has one of the ugliest 3D engines I've ever seen, tho, even taking into account its age.

That it could've scored 1.5 / 5 doesn't shock me. Personally, I certainly wouldn't have scored it above 2 / 5.

[CrimsonBlue]

Good things about GK3: Certain puzzles, story, atmosphere, surroundings.

Bad things about GK3: Certain puzzles, stupid interface.

It fails on one of the most important things (interface), but when it shines it really shines. 3/5 from me.

[AFGNCAAP]

Originally Posted by LimpingFish

The general consensous seems to be that GK3 was a pretty bad game, regardless of it being part of a respected series.

You've got to be kidding me.

[Solid Snake]

Well Imo GK3 is definitely better than GK2

[Catbert]

The worst game was the second. That's pretty sincerely the worst acting I've seen in my life.

[RLacey]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

You've got to be kidding me.

Heh. That was the impression I got from most of the reviews I read at the time.

Personally, I think that the graphics were poor even for the time, the pacing is wrong and the villain both way too obvious and given too little interaction with Gabe. It's still a fun game, but it's not a patch on the previous two.

[Kurufinwe]

Originally Posted by RLacey

Personally, I think that the graphics were poor even for the time, the pacing is wrong and the villain both way too obvious and given too little interaction with Gabe. It's still a fun game, but it's not a patch on the previous two.

Yeah, because the villain wasn't obvious at all in the previous two...

(and I honestly had more trouble figuring out who was what in GK3 than in the other two)

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by Catbert

The worst game was the second. That's pretty sincerely the worst acting I've seen in my life.

Lucky you. I WISH that was the worst acting I had ever seen in my life, then I could claim to have never seen truly bad acting.



Actually, I don't think the acting across the board is great by any means, but a lot of it was quite good, particularly all the hunt club members, especially Von Glower and with the possible exception of Von Zell. I thought Gabriel was competently acted, and he even has a few strong scenes toward the end. Grace was good. The bad acting, for me, really came in the form of Mr. and Mrs. Smith. Almost everything else would be acceptable on television, though not a feature film.

By the way, the voice acting in GK1 is TERRIBLE. I have never made it past Chapter 3 with the voices on, they very nearly ruin the game. THAT is bad acting. GK1 is brilliant, but it's better with the voices turned off I think.

Yes, I belive they did give GK3 a 1.5/5. I don't have the issue with the actual review, but I do have an issue where they did a special on the five best and worst adventures they reviewed. I particularly remember two of the best games being Broken Sword 3 and Les Manly, and two of the worst being King's Quest 7 and GK3. I don't remember what they said about GK3, but who cares. They're wrong.

However, you ask if the same author wrote both the GK2 and 3 review. I highly doubt it. At that time, gaming press were jumping on the bandwagon and hating adventures, and usually hired no-talents who only played Myst to write adventure reviews.

[RLacey]

Originally Posted by Kurufinwe

Yeah, because the villain wasn't obvious at all in the previous two...

(and I honestly had more trouble figuring out who was what in GK3 than in the other two)

Regardless, he's underdeveloped.

Spoiler:

The sinister man with the strange house makes him the obvious villain (I did genuinely think "that's the villain" the first time Gabe meets him), while only talking to him once or twice meant that I still knew almost nothing about him as a character by the end of the game .

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by RLacey

Heh. That was the impression I got from most of the reviews I read at the time.

Personally, I think that the graphics were poor even for the time, the pacing is wrong and the villain both way too obvious and given too little interaction with Gabe. It's still a fun game, but it's not a patch on the previous two.

While I didn't mind the graphics at the time, your other two complaints are EXACTLY the ones that I had. Don't get me wrong, I love GK3. But this section from my review sums up my feelings on the same two issues you mentioned:

It sounds like another wild ride through a spellbinding plot, and for the most part, it is. However, while there is depth to the story that is comparable to the other games in the series, the pacing isn't quite as intriguing. Most of the heavy duty plot stuff comes on Day 3, which is the final day of the game. The days before that are spent searching for clues and piecing together mini-mysteries that are leading to something, but you don't know what. Then, finally, it's all dumped in your lap late in the game.

There's just not quite as much excitement to the overall plot when compared to the first two games. All the thrills really come in the last three time frames of Day 3. This is strange considering that in GK1, the ninth day had a climactic sequence before the huge finale on Day 10. In GK2 there was a dangerous and extremely cool sequence at the end of Chapter 5 to build up to Chapter 6's marvelous climax. Yet, in GK3, there's nothing much to get worked up about until the final time frame. Of course, if I really wanted to, I could berate the final areas for their overload of similarities to Indiana Jones or Broken Sword or all manner of other films, games, and stories that already exist. It struck me as being very unlike Jane Jensen, and a bit over the top, but she manages to weave some very nice puzzles into it so I can let it go.

One thing I can’t let slide, however, is the fact that despite the climactic moment of the game being very well done, it is disappointing how little development the lead villain received over the course of the adventure. This is especially surprising when one considers the first two games, which had villains as important players in the story. Don't get me wrong though, GK3 has an intelligent plot with well scripted dialogue (curse those who believe the dialogue has taken a dip in GK3), just like the first two; it's just barely missing the same league. However, GK3 has the best ending of the series (as in what transpires after the climax). It's nothing short of excellent, with a plot twist guaranteed to amaze you.


By the way, I think the story of how I got GK3 is kind of amusing. There is a website called Gaming-Age where I used to go a lot, and they had a contest back in 1999 to win a copy of GK3 and a GK3 mug (before the game had even come out). Being the GK nut that I am, I checked out the rules. All I had to do was write in and tell them WHY I deserved the copy of GK3 over anyone else. So I wrote something like, "I deserve GK3 because even though I'm male and heterosexual, I would have passionate sex with Gabriel Knight." The next week I got the game and mug in the mail. LOL.

[Catbert]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Lucky you. I WISH that was the worst acting I had ever seen in my life, then I could claim to have never seen truly bad acting.



Actually, I don't think the acting across the board is great by any means, but a lot of it was quite good, particularly all the hunt club members, especially Von Glower and with the possible exception of Von Zell. I thought Gabriel was competently acted, and he even has a few strong scenes toward the end. Grace was good. The bad acting, for me, really came in the form of Mr. and Mrs. Smith. Almost everything else would be acceptable on television, though not a feature film.

By the way, the voice acting in GK1 is TERRIBLE. I have never made it past Chapter 3 with the voices on, they very nearly ruin the game. THAT is bad acting. GK1 is brilliant, but it's better with the voices turned off I think.

Tell me what movie/game you saw that was worse, I'll watch and acknowledge if you're right ^^

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by Catbert

Tell me what movie/game you saw that was worse, I'll watch and acknowledge if you're right ^^

Equinox trailer

[Catbert]

Nah that's just awful in direction. The acting isn't good, but the narration and the way things are presented are what ruins it.

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by Catbert

Nah that's just awful in direction. The acting isn't good, but the narration and the way things are presented are what ruins it.

Well, I know, I just find it funny. But if you want to see worse acting, rent ANY Ed Wood film.

[AFGNCAAP]

Originally Posted by RLacey

Heh. That was the impression I got from most of the reviews I read at the time.

Personally, I think...

Whatever you think personally, I question LimpingFish's statement about "general consensus". I'm not above admitting that a game I like is generally considered bad (or vice versa), I just honestly don't think that's the case here. Widely considered the weakest in the series - possible (however wrong that is ), widely considered a bad game - I just can't see it, neither among the press, nor the regular gamers.

Originally Posted by Kurufinwe

(and I honestly had more trouble figuring out who was what in GK3 than in the other two)

Same here.

Spoiler:

If only because we meet him that late in the game.

Also, pretty much all the NPCs in GK3 do have their little secrets (unlike in the previous two, where most, if not all, secondary not-turned-out-villain characters are carelessly abandoned by the plot). It may be easy to guess the actual villain in GK3 in advance, but that honestly requires ignoring many red herring signals about the other suspects.

[NemelChelovek]

I've only ever played GK3, so I can't really judge it in the context of the series, but as a game I enjoyed it. I agree with the villain problem, but that was wasn't nearly as bothersome as

Spoiler:

fighting the demon Asmodeus in hand to hand combat

. That one kinda came out of the blue for what had been, up to that point, a game pretty much grounded in reality.