I never rely on a game forcing me to fight in a satisfying way. When I approached W2 for the first time, I was like "oh whatever, I'll suffer through the combat somehow" after seeing videos of people spamming light attacks until enemy dies - rolling - spamming light attacks until enemy parries, etc. Eventually I ended up having a lot of fun just by using everything at my disposal, all signs, bombs, traps, throwing daggers and approaching each fight differently. Not because I needed to, but because it was fun.
I'll never uderstand people who play for 'maximum efficiency' and then complain how the gameplay is boring because the most effective style happens to involve mashing 2 buttons or something. Do you play games to prove something/to exploit their defficiencies or to have fun?(general rhetorical question, not a response) If the game does not force you to play in an entertaining way, make your own fun. It's extremely difficult to design a combat system that would not get exploited sooner or later. If a player skips entire aspects of the gameplay because they don't need them to win, there is noone else to blame for making it boring.
Motto of the day: Create. Your. Own. Challenge.
Oh believe me i am using all the tools at my disposal, but i think the gameplay was exceptional in The Witcher 2 and its lesser here. The talent system is somehow more passive and it doesn't give the room to explore builds. That is just my opinion and i don't find the gameplay to be engaging enough so far. We'll see later on if it actually develops into something more.





Retour en haut






