I enjoyed it, but you should know going in that it's a low-budget indie game that was not originally written in English. If you already played the prequel "Styx" series of stealth games which got to benefit from OOAM's money, the difference may be jarring. However if you can shrug and enjoy a cross between a gritty low-magic medieval fantasy and a "two wildly mismatched characters have to go on a road trip together, how will they ever get along?" comedy in the form of a turn-based rpg brawler, I think there's a good chance you'll have fun. But I would still advise getting it on sale.

(If you did not play the Styx games yet, I do NOT advise playing them first thinking the series is meant to be played in chronological order. I've seen a lot of people try that and just end up confused. The series writing assumes you will play in the order the games were released, which means OOAM is first.)

Thnx for the ffeedback, def looks fun to me, gonna wishlist it!

Origineel geplaatst door ed:

I enjoyed it, but you should know going in that it's a low-budget indie game that was not originally written in English. If you already played the prequel "Styx" series of stealth games which got to benefit from OOAM's money, the difference may be jarring.

hold up, how is Styx a prequel if it assumes you played OOAM? how does that work? or is the Styx: Master of Shadows taking place sometime during the OOAM game or something like that? i'm curious because im interested. i'm planning on playing OOAM, playing through Styx Master of Shadows first, thinking chronology would be a good idea. according to you you, it isn't.
I'd like you to explain why its not recommended to do so.

Origineel geplaatst door Uncle Sam:

hold up, how is Styx a prequel if it assumes you played OOAM? how does that work? or is the Styx: Master of Shadows taking place sometime during the OOAM game or something like that? i'm curious because im interested. i'm planning on playing OOAM, playing through Styx Master of Shadows first, thinking chronology would be a good idea. according to you you, it isn't.
I'd like you to explain why its not recommended to do so.

OOAM was the first game released. Master of Shadows came out some years later, and is set many years before OOAM. However, the games assume you will play them in the order they were released--Master of Shadows will NOT stop to explain things you are already supposed to know about the world, the timeline, the word "rakash," and certain characters from playing OOAM. (Meanwhile, a major OOAM character reveal scene for Styx, who has total amnesia before a certain point in his life, is going to be pretty weak if you already know everything about him and the mystery of the goblins (itself an important subplot) in detail.)

I was on the MOS forums from day one IIRC, and I have personally watched a whole lot of people since then get confused, frustrated, and mad because they thought playing Master first was a good idea. I can still recall some of the more specific reasons why off the top of my head, but getting into details would require me spending too much time writing a wall of text that just spoils both games. Please just take my word for it, I consider "chronological order" to be a trap and "release order" to be the intended experience. Do what you want, in the end, but that is the safer bet. I hope you enjoy the series.