New Review Posted: Myst III (XBOX)

Daniel Weissenberger · 03-23-2005, 02:50 AM

Mike Doolittle continues our 'all sequel/spinoff theme week' by reviewing Myst III: Exile:

"Myst III: Exile is a fine example of conceptual stagnation, an often mind-numbing exercise in tedium that despite grand intentions, feels more like a relic than a new and interesting concept. Like all Myst games, Revelation is a game of exploration, puzzle solving and storytelling. In each aspect, the game never breaks its ties to outdated technology sufficiently to be compelling or entertaining."

He discusses more of the game's questionable design decisions here.

(Slight typographical error changed)

MoriartyL · 03-23-2005, 05:28 AM

I am shocked to find such unprofessionalism on this site. The game you have written about is not Myst IV: Revelation but Myst III: Exile. The former is a fantastic game, whereas the latter is not. Correct this ridiculous mistake, before people assume that Myst IV is as flawed as its predecessor!

Dale Weir · 03-23-2005, 07:17 AM

Our bad. The mistake will changed shortly.

Dale

Hypatia93 · 03-23-2005, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoriartyL

I am shocked to find such unprofessionalism on this site. The game you have written about is not Myst IV: Revelation but Myst III: Exile. The former is a fantastic game, whereas the latter is not. Correct this ridiculous mistake, before people assume that Myst IV is as flawed as its predecessor!

Whoa there nelly! You could've just pointed out their mistake. It's not like it was done on purpose. These fellows are /real/ people, you know, not the mannequins that don't respond on other, lesser sites. So take a chill pill; they're correcting the mistake even as I'm typing this. (I checked, and there's currently a broken link.

)

Mike Doolittle · 03-23-2005, 03:21 PM

Oops! Ah well. If you think playing Myst III is boring, you should try writing about it.

EnduroGamer · 03-23-2005, 03:41 PM

I actually enjoyed what I played of Uru, but that was admittedly a different type of Myst game. Unfortunately, the Myst fans didn't like it and they went back tot he basics for Myst IV. IMO, a Myst game that Myst fans don't care for should have been viewed as a sign of progress.

Dale Weir · 03-23-2005, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnduroGamer

IMO, a Myst game that Myst fans don't care for should have been viewed as a sign of progress.

I couldn't put it better myself. But then again, I never felt Myst was ever made for anyone who would even remotely call himself or herself a gamer.

Dale

MoriartyL · 03-24-2005, 01:52 AM

Oy vay.

Now it says "Myst III: Revelation". The game is titled "Myst III: Exile. The fourth game, which you have not reviewed, is called "Myst IV: Revelation". All the screenshots you have posted are from the fourth game, which as I should once again point out is not the game you have reviewed.

As for your complaints of how Myst should change, I would argue that Myst III: Exile fails precisely because it did change in the wrong ways. I am a Myst fan (who does consider himself a gamer, by the way), and I didn't care for Myst III very much. So you should have loved it, right?

Seriously, it doesn't make any sense to throw out what worked before. The successful way to change an art form make additions to the formula which complement the existing framework, not contradict it.

I can see why you might think the game (Myst III: Exile, not Myst IV: Revelation) is conceptually stagnant. I actually agree that it would have been a better game had it not tried to imitate what makes Myst what it is, not because the framework is outdated (Myst IV is proof of this), but because Presto Studios, which made the third game, didn't really understand it. (The first two games were made by Cyan, and the fourth by Ubisoft.) Riven, the second Myst game, had puzzles that were extremely complex but felt natural. Exile's puzzles, on the other hand, all feel contrived. Riven had an interesting story and villain, whereas Exile's "story" is pathetic, and the villain is boring. In Cyan's games, the environments are very spread out, so that you can navigate easily. In Exile, the environments are cramped, so that it is hard to see where you are going, and you must often resort to clicking around wildly. I would not recommend Exile to anyone who has not played the other Myst games, because in all these vital areas it fails to follow the excellent example set by Cyan. If you want to see Myst done right, play Revelation, a game which makes significant changes within the framework that Cyan created.

EnduroGamer · 03-24-2005, 02:28 AM

Good post, MoriartyL.

What did you think of Uru? Also, did you like the Syberia games? I ask since you're obviously an adventure game fan.

Mike Doolittle · 03-24-2005, 03:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoriartyL

I can see why you might think the game (Myst III: Exile, not Myst IV: Revelation) is conceptually stagnant. I actually agree that it would have been a better game had it not tried to imitate what makes Myst what it is, not because the framework is outdated (Myst IV is proof of this), but because Presto Studios, which made the third game, didn't really understand it. (The first two games were made by Cyan, and the fourth by Ubisoft.) Riven, the second Myst game, had puzzles that were extremely complex but felt natural. Exile's puzzles, on the other hand, all feel contrived. Riven had an interesting story and villain, whereas Exile's "story" is pathetic, and the villain is boring. In Cyan's games, the environments are very spread out, so that you can navigate easily. In Exile, the environments are cramped, so that it is hard to see where you are going, and you must often resort to clicking around wildly. I would not recommend Exile to anyone who has not played the other Myst games, because in all these vital areas it fails to follow the excellent example set by Cyan. If you want to see Myst done right, play Revelation, a game which makes significant changes within the framework that Cyan created.

I've looked around the web and from what I've gathered, there was no big backlash over Exile. Some people thought it was too hard. Story wise, I haven't heard any major complaints. Basically the general reaction I gathered over Exile is that it was, well, another Myst game. Nothing more or less.

I think it takes a certain mindset to enjoy the Myst games, one that I admittedly do not have. I'm chugging along through the game, and I keep thinking, "Why can't I just go there? Why can't I just do that? Why can't I look more closely at that? Why can't I interact with this?" Just navigating a room is ludicrously slow. Real-time rendering would have made it so much smoother and better.

It's actually a nice break to play a game that doesn't rely on conflict to fuel the gameplay, but it could have been done so much better. The pacing... oy... it's just horrid. And it just never feels like I'm in another world. It feels like I'm looking at a static frame of a video game. When I'm not looking at my watch, anyway.

Zanbatou · 03-24-2005, 05:13 AM

I'd also like to know what Moriarty thinks about Uru, if he's played it. I'm one of those Myst fans who hated what little I played of Uru, but I'm looking for an excuse to give it another chance. It just struck me as being an even *more* contrived Myst game, except this time with full motion graphics. The new graphics are nice, but everything else seemed to be a step backwards. Maybe it would have played better as the MMO game it was envisioned as.

And for what it's worth, I actually had fun with Exile, though I definately wouldn't recommend it to non-fans.

Dale Weir · 03-24-2005, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoriartyL

Oy vay.

Now it says "Myst III: Revelation". The game is titled "Myst III: Exile. The fourth game, which you have not reviewed, is called "Myst IV: Revelation". All the screenshots you have posted are from the fourth game, which as I should once again point out is not the game you have reviewed.

Chi jumped the gun and made the review live when he shouldn't have. The review was (and still is) a work in progress.

Sorry for the mixup.

Believe me I'll let you know when this thing is straightened out.

Dale

Dale Weir · 03-24-2005, 08:24 AM

Okay, once again let me apologize again for this. The changes have been made and you can see for yourself in the link in the first post of this thread as well as the one below:
http://www.gamecritics.com/review/myst3/main.php

Dale

Snack Eater · 03-24-2005, 05:32 PM

I used to be into Myst. Never beat the first game. Beat Riven with a strategy guide. Have a copy of the third game for PS2 but don't play it because it has some of the worst load times and video quality ever. I can play about three minutes of it, and the only part at the beginning I like is the awesome music they play when the title shows up.

The story for the series is interesting, though it certainly gets less interesting with each progressive game.

I'm just not into that wander-blindly-across-massive-islands-looking-for-clues-on-how-to-solve-an-impossible-puzzle-on-the-other-side-of-the-game genre.

MoriartyL · 03-25-2005, 03:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnduroGamer

Good post, MoriartyL.

What did you think of Uru? Also, did you like the Syberia games? I ask since you're obviously an adventure game fan.

Sorry, but I haven't played either of those games. I don't have many opportunities to buy games and generally Nintendo takes precedence over PC games because I know that with Nintendo I'm in for a good time. The other adventure games I've played are very old (Secret of Monkey Island), and I don't find any of them as compelling as Myst (other than the third), Zelda (the 3D ones) or Metroid. Some day, I'll get around to buying all these games. But not now, with Zelda on the horizon and DK: Jungle Beat, which looks promising, and so many games which I've wanted to get but haven't yet.