安装 Steam						
					
				
				
									登录
											 | 
						语言
						
																																															繁體中文(繁体中文)
																													日本語(日语)
																													한국어(韩语)
																													ไทย(泰语)
																													български(保加利亚语)
																													Čeština(捷克语)
																													Dansk(丹麦语)
																													Deutsch(德语)
																													English(英语)
																													Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
																													Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
																													Ελληνικά(希腊语)
																													Français(法语)
																													Italiano(意大利语)
																													Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
																													Magyar(匈牙利语)
																													Nederlands(荷兰语)
																													Norsk(挪威语)
																													Polski(波兰语)
																													Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
																													Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
																													Română(罗马尼亚语)
																													Русский(俄语)
																													Suomi(芬兰语)
																													Svenska(瑞典语)
																													Türkçe(土耳其语)
																													Tiếng Việt(越南语)
																													Українська(乌克兰语)
																									报告翻译问题
							
						
 
											 
													

 
						 
						 
						 
						 
						 
						 
						 
						

 
			 
						





The first "language" I'll talk about is the one that the big media outlets use. IGN, Polygon, PC Gamer, etc. all use this. They rate games between a 7/10 and 9/10, in the style of the U.S. school grading system which generally expects a 70%-90% scoring. Not above where your peers get jealous, and not below where you'd look bad. So, these big media outlets never deviate from the 7-to-9 scoring. Games get scored by those outlets like this, making all games seem decent, good, or great -- never terrible, and never exceptional. So that investors will just throw money at these games, not understanding how gaming really works.
With all this said, an unpatched version of Daikatana would probably get a 7/10 from reviewers today, while gamers would throw a 4/10 at it. A patched version would totally get a 7/10 from everyone. Maybe an 8/10, but that'd be a hard one because the sidekicks are so glitchy.
I've only just discovered Daikatana after reading Masters of Doom and wanting to see what the game was like... so the first time i experience it is with the 1.3 patch and with this guide and honestly i'm enjoying myself.
However I should say that I've played the 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 with save gems (limited saves) and it's not impossible to make constant and fast progress. The issue becomes that you can only carry three save gems and when you get fourth stone then you absolutely have to make a save there and then. That system just isn't fleshed out all that well.
I personally don't think that the episode 1 is overall the worst one. The problem with episode 1 is that it starts with the three worst levels in the whole game which are the swamp, sewer and jail. After that episode 1 is rather fun to play when you have Superfly, some weapons and mostly ok'ish levels.
I've also hit the character limit in Steam guides have so it's rather difficult to make changes.