It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Beating back some balance into the world.

Sudeki, a vibrant anime-ish action-RPG with exciting real-time battles and a robust character development system, is available on GOG.com for only $5.99.

Sudeki, a world torn apart into light, shadow and dark. Rent asunder by deceit and betrayal, the land cries out for a peace that only four united heroes can bring. Beyond the protective walls of Illumina Castle lie miles of pastoral, rolling countryside, though once a serene landscape, the Aklorian forces have transformed the countryside into a charred battlefield. Simply passing through the region is unsafe, as travellers must be ever alert for ambushes. Four friends have joined together to aid their queen. Though destined to encounter ancient gods, primordial wonders, and marvellous inventions, foes and betrayal haunt their every step. A keen eye could prove vital, exposing essential clues. And as the companions make their way through darkness and light, they’ll discover that those two extremes have more in common than they once imagined… With real-time, bone-crunching combat with incredible spells and combos, the ability to control any one of the four champions at any time, and skip between them at will, and the power to customize each character's armor, weapons, and spells and evolve new powerful attacks, this colorful action-RPG title is a real blast to play!

When Europeans experiment with the anime aesthetics interesting things happen, and Sudeki is a perfect example of that rule. Check it out, for only $5.99 on GOG.com.
avatar
Johnmourby: 1 is bad, 10 is excellent, 5 is minimum of acceptability. More than five is some kind of recommendation, less than 5 is some kind of warining. What's to get?
What's to get? That some people don't use that system. Some people use percentages. Some people use stars. And event when it comes to 1-10 scale, not every outlet is using precisely the rankings you have outlined - it should be as you say, but as it stands, 7 is the new 5! It's a terrible, terrible mess right now with absolutely no unification whatsoever. If everybody used the word 'geezer' differently, word geezer would die pretty damn fast.

avatar
Johnmourby: If subjectivity and vagueness offend you Then you may as well do away with the words good and bad.
Yes, please. Words 'good' and 'bad' in a review are just as unhelpful as numbers are. When a reviewer uses one of them, he damn well needs to explain why he said that in detail so I can decide whether or not do I consider the same thing good or bad. Or he/she just needs to not use them at all and get on with the useful bits.

avatar
Johnmourby: As they too seem to be precise but are infact subjective. You might not be able to but subjective feelings into numbers but I can.
No. No you can't. That people think they can do that is why we're in this mess in the first place. Using numbers to describe subjectivity is just making numeric represenataion meaningless.

avatar
Johnmourby: Words are relative to space. So are numbers.
No, numbers are not relative to space. That's the whole point of numbers! Go and tell what you just told me to a matematician, he'll shoot you on sight...

avatar
Johnmourby: And considering how many critics, professional and amateur, seem incapable of giving a strong indicator as to whether something is good or not without them maybe it's good to have them.
Shortcuts created due to a lack of competence are not a good reason. On the contrary, it makes the situation even worse.
Hey, only Windows Vista,7,8?! I used to play it on Windows 2000 when it came out! How can you actually reduce compatibility?

This is a great game. It's not a conventional RPG/Adventure but it has its own mood and its own set of rules. I don't remember too much of it now but I remember I had a great time and it was a good experience. What's more to ask? Thanks, GOG, finally you've released a game I know. :-)
avatar
ng: Hey, only Windows Vista,7,8?! I used to play it on Windows 2000 when it came out! How can you actually reduce compatibility?
http://www.gog.com/forum/general/release_sudeki/post34
avatar
ng: Hey, only Windows Vista,7,8?! I used to play it on Windows 2000 when it came out! How can you actually reduce compatibility?

This is a great game. It's not a conventional RPG/Adventure but it has its own mood and its own set of rules. I don't remember too much of it now but I remember I had a great time and it was a good experience. What's more to ask? Thanks, GOG, finally you've released a game I know. :-)
The developers changed a lot of the input code and what not when they released it to Steam a month ago. I'm sure their priority was only to get it working on 7/8 without the use of compatibility modes since XP had less than a month of support at that point.
avatar
ng: Hey, only Windows Vista,7,8?! I used to play it on Windows 2000 when it came out! How can you actually reduce compatibility?
avatar
triock: http://www.gog.com/forum/general/release_sudeki/post34
Thanks. So I can and I will run it on my XP. That's what matters to me.
Oh man I remember this game! For me, it was pretty...terrible, haha. The problem was that it was quite hollow and repetitive, apart from the story being utterly forgettable. The combat was fun, though, and it did have some good moments.
Post edited April 24, 2014 by tapeworm00
avatar
ng: Hey, only Windows Vista,7,8?! I used to play it on Windows 2000 when it came out! How can you actually reduce compatibility?

This is a great game. It's not a conventional RPG/Adventure but it has its own mood and its own set of rules. I don't remember too much of it now but I remember I had a great time and it was a good experience. What's more to ask? Thanks, GOG, finally you've released a game I know. :-)
avatar
zaine-h: The developers changed a lot of the input code and what not when they released it to Steam a month ago. I'm sure their priority was only to get it working on 7/8 without the use of compatibility modes since XP had less than a month of support at that point.
I will still use it. Anyway, according to Judas it's playable on most XP systems so I'm willing to risk it a bit.
avatar
Fenixp: What's to get? That some people don't use that system. Some people use percentages. Some people use stars. And event when it comes to 1-10 scale, not every outlet is using precisely the rankings you have outlined - it should be as you say, but as it stands, 7 is the new 5! It's a terrible, terrible mess right now with absolutely no unification whatsoever. If everybody used the word 'geezer' differently, word geezer would die pretty damn fast.


Yes, please. Words 'good' and 'bad' in a review are just as unhelpful as numbers are. When a reviewer uses one of them, he damn well needs to explain why he said that in detail so I can decide whether or not do I consider the same thing good or bad. Or he/she just needs to not use them at all and get on with the useful bits.


No. No you can't. That people think they can do that is why we're in this mess in the first place. Using numbers to describe subjectivity is just making numeric represenataion meaningless.

No, numbers are not relative to space. That's the whole point of numbers! Go and tell what you just told me to a matematician, he'll shoot you on sight...

Shortcuts created due to a lack of competence are not a good reason. On the contrary, it makes the situation even worse.
A lack of unification doesn't bother me on this. Heck some people can be really creative with their score systems. The now disbanded Spill Crew's ratings were quite funny. The fact that five and seven don't quite mean the same thing for everyone doesn't bother me. It's just case of adjusting for the other guy's way of thinking. Like with words.

So you would like to like a world without subjective terminology? I think I'll pass. I'd like to be able to get off a roller-coaster and say "That was awesome!" without having to go into scientific analysis as to why I felt that way.

Yes I can. Don't tell me what I think. You think you are a pineapple.

You said it first, not me. Maybe you're being overly literal here. Your complaint is that people assign numbers different values. I feel the difference is negligible. Probably less than words considering retard is considered an okay word in Australia.

"Shortcuts created due to a lack of competence are not a good reason". Tell that to safety railings.
Ooh, cool to see Sudeki here. Now with a low, low price, and more importantly released without a copy protection system that destroys DVD drives!
avatar
Johnmourby: A lack of unification doesn't bother me on this. Heck some people can be really creative with their score systems.
What can I say, it does bother me.

avatar
Johnmourby: So you would like to like a world without subjective terminology? I think I'll pass. I'd like to be able to get off a roller-coaster and say "That was awesome!" without having to go into scientific analysis as to why I felt that way.
First of all: No, but I would like a word where subjective descriptions of feeling are used for subjective terminology, such as good, bad, or indeed, awesome - as opposed to mutating the most objective terminology which exists into something subjective.

Second: It's reviews we're talking about here, those are where this is an issue. If you want to hear whether or not somebody thinks a game's good or bad, you don't read a review, you ask them. Review, on the other hand, should absolutely go into analysis as to why reviewer felt that way, otherwise it ceases being a review and becomes an opinion. Every reviewer should do all he can to fight subjectivity, and numeric ratings are nothing but subjective.

Worse than that: Numeric ratings are subjective in a guise of extremely objective representation. It's this completely meaningless feeling of objectivity which gets associated with these numbers which is probably the worst thing about the entire thing, as those are now used as far as to calculate bonuses to developers.

avatar
Johnmourby: Yes I can. Don't tell me what I think. You think you are a pineapple.
That's the problem, it's not about what you think. That's the absolute opposite of how numbers are supposed to work. What you're talking about here is what terms such as 'bad', 'decent', 'average' etc. were introduced into language for.

To elaborate: I'm not saying that just to be a dick, I'm saying that because to make the numbers meaningful, you need to associate meaning to them. Otherwise, every person reading your review will derive different piece of information from the number you gave to it. Seriously, when you say: "Average", everybody has a fairly clear idea of your meaning. When you write '5/10', people will come to a range of conclusions, going from 'terrible' to 'decent'. That's not to promote just saying 'average', as I said earlier, a good review needs to elaborate. Nonetheless, the word conveys that meaning far better than a number.

Of course, if numeric representations had a precise, generally agreed upon meaning, easily translatable to language, they would be understandeable, albeit useless as you could just use language to describe the same thing. As it stands tho, 'Average', 'Good' and 'Great' have a far more cut out and more widely agreed upon meanings than 5/10, 7/10 or 8/10

avatar
Johnmourby: "Shortcuts created due to a lack of competence are not a good reason". Tell that to safety railings.
Yup, let's compare a safety precausion and bloody numeric representation of an opinion :-P Let's just say: In my company, we use tools which actively make our work harder to increase its quality. When it's not about health and safety, cutting on corners is a terrible idea.

edit: Watch out. Made a couple of edits ;-)
Post edited April 24, 2014 by Fenixp
The only thing I remember from this game is the endless fetch quests. "I cannot find my trouser suspenders, I think I left it on the beach". I stopped playing not long after.

Mind you, I may give it another go now that is on gog. I liked the idea of the the game, but was initally put off by the fetch quests.
avatar
rtcvb32: Hmmm I have the impression a lot of games from the XBox and PS2 are going to be ported to PC soon and be much like this game, accessible so the game isn't lost due to no longer supported hardware.
avatar
hunvagy: I wish you'd be right. Would love to see the MegaTen games of the PS2 generation on the PC. And Valkyrie Profile 2 \o/
Hmm did I say PS2? Hmm it seems I did. PS2 although no longer covered, those games seem unlikely since there's the PSP which is basically a handheld PS2. Then there's the ps3 and ps4 which from what I can tell Sony filed a patent that they intended to use the Cell processor to emulate the PS2 architecture and play the older games. the PS4 is powerful enough that it could do it all in software since it has less hardware that's actually similar/compatible with the EmotionEngine chip.

Sorry I said PS2, that seems unlikely, but XBox titles were effectively just dropped for support except for a select few which got recompiled binaries to run on the 360. Better off running the PCSX2 emulator which locally re-compiles to native code, but still needs at least one powerful core to run it. As for the Xbone, I wouldn't be surprised they won't do the same thing with their 'emulation' they mentioned and just recompile to the x86 for select games.

Actually I'm wondering if a company fairly soon will include the common CPU chips and put them on a PCI board which then an emulator can take advantage of by using actual hardware for the hardest part of the emulation thereby speeding it up. It's not like those chips are all that expensive by themselves. Wouldn't be the first time hardware acceleration via hardware chips were used on different architectures.
Cool cool, we need more Xbox era titles here.
Great Release, thank you! More Games from this period please (and the 90s).
avatar
Johnmourby: So you would like to like a world without subjective terminology? I think I'll pass. I'd like to be able to get off a roller-coaster and say "That was awesome!" without having to go into scientific analysis as to why I felt that way.
avatar
Fenixp: First of all: No, but I would like a word where subjective descriptions of feeling are used for subjective terminology, such as good, bad, or indeed, awesome - as opposed to mutating the most objective terminology which exists into something subjective.

Second: It's reviews we're talking about here, those are where this is an issue. If you want to hear whether or not somebody thinks a game's good or bad, you don't read a review, you ask them. Review, on the other hand, should absolutely go into analysis as to why reviewer felt that way, otherwise it ceases being a review and becomes an opinion. Every reviewer should do all he can to fight subjectivity, and numeric ratings are nothing but subjective.

avatar
Johnmourby: "Shortcuts created due to a lack of competence are not a good reason". Tell that to safety railings.
avatar
Fenixp: Yup, let's compare a safety precausion and bloody numeric representation of an opinion :-P
Forgive the post-modernist philosophy here but there is a good case for saying everything is subjective, even numbers. Some otherwise fine people don't have the mental tools to think of numbers in an abstract way. To them Numbers are no more objective than anything else. We agree that 2 + 2 = 4. but if we were wrong our agreement wouldn't make right. Numbers are seen as objective because we agree on them. Not due to any magical properties.


But I'm being pedantic here. I don't know how you feel about me but I like you so I'm going to tell you why I'm so fond of scores. When I first started watching films in earnest the first film guide I had was a Variety one (this was before places like I MDB were around). Films were unclassified and unscored. Any critic who sees a world without scores as a utopia where everyone reads everything they say is dreaming. The only thing I had when flipping through the book to catch my interest were the titles.
Later I found the Radio Times. A guide that categorised films by genre and gave them star ratings. I bought it the same day and never looked back. Thanks to these two systems I tried out a lot of films I would have never even thought of reading about. Many of them are now among my favourite films ever. It also got me to try out some films way outside of my normal tastes on the claim that these were the best of their kind. And my life was richer for it.

I find without fail I pay more attention to rated reviews. I spend more effort reading reviews here on GOG than the thumbs up/thumbs down ones of Steam. It might not be an exact science but neither is reviewing.

So that why I love scores. They give me a reason to want to read about new stuff in the first place.

Also "If you want to hear whether or not somebody thinks a game's good or bad, you don't read a review, you ask them" when it comes to games I don't have people to ask if they're good or not. Just reviews.


Also just as you can say Reviewers should be eloquent enough not need scores you can say humans should be smart enough not to fall from high places but sadly that's not always the case.