I'm the first to ignore all outside critique on a movie or game and just enjoy things on their own merits. But I really truely couldn't get into this game. Overall it seemed like it was trying to give you the impression that it was large and epic, without actually being that. There were so many screens that just existed to run across, or do one thing, which seems like a waste of time on the developer's part, and the player's too. (And then you enter entire "cities" to which they've devoted ONE screen!) Same with the lengthy dialogue; it talked big without actually engaging me. I constantly felt like the person behind this really wanted to write a novel, but made a game instead. The main character, sometimes I wondered if they even cared about her. It was annoying playing her because she was whiny and immature, and not in a funny Roger Wilco way, but in a milennial "I can't adult" way. And then all of a sudden she's spouting reams of dialogue later on just because the story seems to call for it - with no character progression showing how she might've changed. She just seemed like a vehicle for the author's "epic story" and not a character in her own right. Ultimately how does the game play? Like someone who doesn't know how to design a game, feeding into my belief that this should have jus been an epic novel. The game is plagued with "this can't happen yet because we said so" leaving me (and other people - I looked) very confused as to why something won't progress. There are things that should obviously work, which don't, because you haven't looked at the "right" thing yet or been through all the dialogue options for the right character yet - this game not only suffers from "lawn mower" dialogue (where you just ask every option, like mowing the lawn) it actually requires it. I could say more, because I kept trying to enjoy this and kept getting stopped, but the review is too long. 2 stars for good artwork and a technically impressive 1999 graphics engine.
To this day I cannot understand why this got such poor reviews and even public reception back in the day. I only played the demo and was blown away, not just by the ground breaking 3D graphics for the time, but just how open and free it felt, while still keeping the quests and NPCs meaningful enough for you to care about them - and playing the full version now, I can see my initial wonder was not only justified but even exceeded. I can still remember reading some journalist's passing mention of this game in a magazine, saying it was "dire" and making no other mention of it. Perhaps this game was just too far ahead of it's time, too ambitious, that people couldn't accept what they were seeing? That has been my only explanation over the years for odd games like this. Nowadays it holds up, because I've been playing this on my laptop to fall asleep, and it works well for that - it has an open ended, whimsical quality about it. Some games have clear distinctions between the "quest giving" areas, and the "battle" areas. Not this one. Near the beginning, you're talking to an oppressed people on tropical farm land on an island while guards who are looking for you, patrol frequently. An NPC conversation could be interrupted by some approaching guards and a battle starts. That NPC could die, and you could miss out on a worthwhile side quest. It pays to be paying attention ALL the time. A quaint little "safe" area where you can stock up, borders strangely, and uncomfortably close, to a set of very dangerous enemies lurking about nearby. Don't push your luck or they'll be lead into this "safe" area and it won't be safe anymore. Have fun with this!
