15882 réponses à ce sujet

[Wolven_Soul]

My original $0.2 for political thingy could be put in DAI. They kind of address point 2 in the latest DLC but I did not brought it so could not further discuss it.

 

Just saying, $0.2 would actually be twenty cents.  

[straykat]

DA was doing fine with it's mix of epic and politics and other mundane matters. It's only in Inquisition it went off track. The game I expected things to get more intriguing. Not worse.

 

I have no grounding for this, but I want to blame Weekes.. just because he's new and I suspect he looked at the background/lore bible or whatever they got and decided to masturbate with all of it. That's how noobs are usually.

 

Or maybe David Gaider engaged in a bit more self-hate and thought this is what people really want. He's wrong. If that wasn't so, you'd see movies and all kinds of books engaging in this. Even the very father of Epic storytelling just talks about mundane stuff. Homer just wrote about a guy trying to get home. Or warring over women. lol

[line_genrou]

TW2 political machinations were far more superior than TW3 making it a more complex game.

 

Kaedweni camp is the best camp.

 

 Storywise, yes it is more complex, which in this case doesn't mean it's better. It comes down to preference, I guess.

Gameplay and other aspects: TW series isn't complex at all. So I don't understand when people say TW3 is "dumbed down" as if the other installments was oh so complex with its mechanics. So I guess they all mean the story when compared to TW2's most of the time tiring politics.

[TmTapani]

The issue with most games with political stories as a focus is that they make your character to be a super-extra-important demigodly being that decides the fates of nations. Or factions. No one succeeds in anything until you personally intervene and take action. I like personal stories more myself. Sure Geralt got mixed up in political schemes in the games, quite often actually, but it was because everyone was using him as a pawn in their schemes. He wasn't made the leader of anything after a few short quests and given power. He always had a personal agenda (1. Revenge / getting the mutagens back 2. finding the kingslayer 3. locating Ciri ), politics be damned. A few powerful men just were in the way of all that and the political things got sorted out that way.

[line_genrou]

On another note, I'm playing new game+ with the polish dub and damn, Geralt's voice is almost completely different. His voice is so deep and strong. Honestly english dub Geralt kinda sounds like a pansy in comparison, even tho I love that voice too.

[FKA_Servo]

On another note, I'm playing new game+ with the polish dub and damn, Geralt's voice is almost completely different. His voice is so deep and strong. Honestly english dub Geralt kinda sounds like a pansy in comparison, even tho I love that voice too.

 

Do you have to flip that in GOG Galaxy, or is it an option? I was looking for it and I wasn't seeing it in the game.

 

I'm getting ready to start a NG+ and I suspect that it will probably be the best way to play the game (assisted with some judicious and sparing console cheating to add the mutagens that required dickery to procure the first time around).

 

I started my vanilla game on blood and broken bones, eventually it got easy, switched it over to DM, eventually it got easy. I'd like to get my ass kicked. And I appreciate the ability to start the game with a loaded talent tree and not have it trivialize anything.

[Xetykins]

I watched a few polish version of the game and I did not like the geralt there. It just missed that dry sarcasm that the english version have. But I think it is also really about me needing to understand what my character is saying without my eyes continuously glued on the sub area.

[ashwind]

Do you have to flip that in GOG Galaxy, or is it an option? I was looking for it and I wasn't seeing it in the game.

 

I'm getting ready to start a NG+ and I suspect that it will probably be the best way to play the game (assisted with some judicious and sparing console cheating to add the mutagens that required dickery to procure the first time around).

 

I started my vanilla game on blood and broken bones, eventually it got easy, switched it over to DM, eventually it got easy. I'd like to get my ass kicked. And I appreciate the ability to start the game with a loaded talent tree and not have it trivialize anything.

 

You need to download the language pack for that option to appear. Once you have the language pack, you can then select sub title / voice languages independently.

 

Like Xety, I find it troublesome to have to keep looking at the subtitles

 

IMO, DM on vanilla with a totally new character is more challenging than NG+. Going against a pack of lv 5 wolves / lv 6 nekkar with vanilla gear at level 1 I find to be the most challenging 

[line_genrou]

On DM when I got to the middle of the game it became so easy. The only challenge was in HoS. I got my ass kicked a few times.

[line_genrou]

I don't know if everyone already seen this

 

 

He's a member in this forum and I agree 100% with what he said

[FKA_Servo]

IMO, DM on vanilla with a totally new character is more challenging than NG+. Going against a pack of lv 5 wolves / lv 6 nekkar with vanilla gear at level 1 I find to be the most challenging 

 

I just tend to take issue with the idea that a battle seasoned, century old badass still starts at level 1 with no toys, which I hate. Yeah, yeah, gameplay reasons, but whatever.

 

Starting with a full complement of talents and alchemy formulae is far more satisfying. And since it's not like I'm unlocking anymore slots, I assume the game will just get harder rather than easier on DM. That's my hope at least.

[Ryzaki]

Once again, you can absolutely meet all the factions before making a choice about which one you want to join.  Not a single solitary one of them tells you that you either have to join that moment, or you can never join at all.  Also once again, unless you can offer up something to back up the statement that most people only beat games that have valid replayability in it only once, then it simply isn't so.  Some might replay it again right after they do it the first time, some might wait till the next DLC, like me, or some might wait a year to do it.  I am not saying most people are going to play it more than once, I can't back that up, but it doesn't seem like you can back up the reverse either.  In all honesty, it doesn't even matter if most people do only play it once, that's their choice.  That's not going to stop me from wanting them to design their game better so that I feel I have a reason to play it more than once.

 

I realized right from the get go that they were all about killing everything, because that dude Clarke makes some kind of comment about all mutants, ghouls and synths should die.  And he even will send you out on missions that are nothing but killing one of those three groups.  

 

People talk about you getting into the institute, but there is absolutely no reason that those random people would know about the thing that Sturges asks you to bring back.  And once they see Hancock, Curie, Strong or Valentine, they should absolutely be telling me to either get them off the ship or they're going to kill them.  They are constantly saying how these groups need to die, yet they allow you to bring those companions on board?  Never made sense to me.  The Brotherhood is supposed to be dead set in their various purposes, they should not have allowed those characters on.  It annoyed me that they did.  Well, with Curie, there is no way for them to know that she is actually a Synth, that and...well...she's just adorable.  

 

Initially I said more than possible, and it is also more than possible that I could win the lottery, doesn't mean that it is likely to happen.  *shrugs*  Semantics, not really important enough to be arguing over.  Especially since the initial point was that it is quite possible to meet Deacon before Danse.  I think...yes? 

 

No, them being mutually exclusive wouldn't make for better writing automatically, but it would have made for a story that made more sense.  But they really didn't write it very well at all with what they did try to do.  I will give them credit though that they at least tried to make it make sense.

 

I have a feeling we're just gonna keep arguing in circles, maybe we should just agree to disagree again.  

 

You can yes but at the time they offer you to join them? No. Uh...most people beat all games only once. This isn't in question. It doesn't matter how replayable the game is. The majority only beat it once. (A good portion never finish it at all). Also yes I can back up the reverse here you go! http://www.ign.com/a...at-finish-games Now if you'd like to show some evidence most peopled repeat them? I'd be glad to see it. It's like people on this board forget they're a minority of players.

 

Feral ghouls, violent mutants and you don't even know anything about gen 3 synths until you get to diamond city. Again the game expects you to meet everyone in a certain order. They expected people people to meet Danse before Deacon. Therefore the only thing you know about synths, ghouls and mutants to this point (unless you got lucky with random encounters) is that they're trying to kill you on sight. Preston tells you about normal humanish ghouls but you might not have met one at this point. And their are no non violent super mutants you meet in this game other than Virgil who distinctly wants to become human again. Even Strong talks about wiping out humanity.

 

I just said it was a plot contrivance. As for allowing you to bring the companions aboard. Yeah they want to stay in your good graces cause you can help them achieve their goals. They're using the player this is not a difficult concept!

 

It's possible to meet Deacon before Danse. But to Deacon before Danse you A. would've ignored Danse's quest and B. Would've had to go to Goodneighbor/Diamond City pick up the RR track and then go do that quest (again a quest that is in a higher level area and requires a lot of fighting said enemies). It's possible yeah. It's also possible to go through the entire game not joining a single faction til you're forced to by the Molecular level then joining the Minutemen. That doesn't mean it was likely people didn't join the MM til TML.

 

No it wouldn't. You'd need plot contrivances (even more than we already have) to automatically have them aggro just because you joined another faction. (Like if you never meet Danse and went straight to Deacon why would the BOS be hostile to you on sight?) Or if you joined neither and went straight to the Institute (how would they even know you were working with the Institute til the broadcast?)

 

Fair enough.

[Akrabra]

I just tend to take issue with the idea that a battle seasoned, century old badass still starts at level 1 with no toys, which I hate. Yeah, yeah, gameplay reasons, but whatever.

 

Starting with a full complement of talents and alchemy formulae is far more satisfying. And since it's not like I'm unlocking anymore slots, I assume the game will just get harder rather than easier on DM. That's my hope at least.

If you imported or simulated a Witcher 2 save then Geralt should have started at that level, which was max level 35 in TW2. Same as imported Shepard starts at 30 in ME3 with an imported 30 save. 

[FKA_Servo]

If you imported or simulated a Witcher 2 save then Geralt should have started at that level, which was max level 35 in TW2. Same as imported Shepard starts at 30 in ME3 with an imported 30 save. 

 

Then something must have gone very wrong. I definitely imported a W2 save, and my choices were definitely reflected, but I definitely started the game at level 1.

 

Are you talking about NG+? I know that bumps you up to 30 if you start it any lower.

 

And did ME3 really start you at 30? I know you got a bump, but I didn't realize it was that big. I haven't played the game since release, and then, I only completed it once.

[Akrabra]

Then something must have gone very wrong. I definitely imported a W2 save, and my choices were definitely reflected, but I definitely started the game at level 1.

 

Are you talking about NG+? I know that bumps you up to 30 if you start it any lower.

 

And did ME3 really start you at 30? I know you got a bump, but I didn't realize it was that big. I haven't played the game since release, and then, I only completed it once.

No no, i meant that it should have been like that. Not that it is like that. My English is abit rusty. Mass Effect 3 started you at level 30 as long as you imported a level 30 save from Mass Effect 2, which was brilliant, one good thing the game actually did.

[TmTapani]

I don't know if everyone already seen this

 

 

He's a member in this forum and I agree 100% with what he said

 

Thanks for linking that. Glad I'm not the only one who had issues with Gaider's writing.

[Akrabra]

I don't know if everyone already seen this

 

 

He's a member in this forum and I agree 100% with what he said

Think it was linked awhile back, quite a long time ago infact. I disagree with most of what he said

[TmTapani]

Think it was linked awhile back, quite a long time ago infact. I disagree with most of what he said

Those are fighting words, missy.

 

No, really, what do you disagree with? I found the arguments well enough though out and presented..

[Akrabra]

Those are fighting words, missy.

 

No, really, what do you disagree with? I found the arguments well enough though out and presented..

Missy? Do people mistake me for a woman?

[TmTapani]

Missy? Do people mistake me for a woman?

Sorry, but your avatar on two different forums has been that of a woman. You might have mentioned your gender before but I haven't really noticed it / paid attention to it. Really sorry for making the assumption.

[Akrabra]

Sorry, but your avatar on two different forums has been that of a woman. You might have mentioned your gender before but I haven't really moticed it / paid attention to it. Really sorry for making the assumption.

Two different forums? Well if i give off that vibe i am not sure what i should do with my life. 

[TmTapani]

Two different forums? Well if i give off that vibe i am not sure what i should do with my life. 

Again, I'm sorry.

[Akrabra]

Again, I'm sorry.

There is no need to apologize, offense was not taken. I will get back to you on my thoughts about the video.

[Blooddrunk1004]

The TW3 is also a really great game, my only problem are the villains and Mary sue Ciri and quite honestly, I wish CDPR had not bothered trying to follow the books.  When they did, the story became sort of a mess.  But HoS, omg! Proof, once again that CDPR shines when using the Witcher world as a backdrop for telling their own stories.  I'm so hyped for Blood and Wine.

Regarding Ciri both Sapkowski and CDPR pretty much said that she is a Mary Sue character. However Ciri is a well written character and despite her status she is Mary Sue done right especially in TW3 in my opinion.

 

Eredin is also well done villain in the novels but in game he is a trainwreck and almost as failure as Corypheus was. The only thing that Eredin did better than Cory is that he at least screwed stuff up everytime he and his riders appeared but he still wasn't handled properly and is nothing compared to his novel version.

 

Meanwhile Gaunter O'Dimm not only makes Eredin look bad but he is also one of the best villains i've seen in gaming.

[Hazegurl]

DA was doing fine with it's mix of epic and politics and other mundane matters. It's only in Inquisition it went off track. The game I expected things to get more intriguing. Not worse.

 

IMO, DA went off track politically around DA 2.  I actually like DA 2 more than DAI but everything was so over exaggerated in that game it was hard to even take it seriously. It was a comical mess. I eventually wanted the option to high tail it out of Kirkwall on Isabella's ship and just leave all those crazies to rot.

 

The issue with most games with political stories as a focus is that they make your character to be a super-extra-important demigodly being that decides the fates of nations. Or factions. No one succeeds in anything until you personally intervene and take action. I like personal stories more myself.

 

I agree, That's why I love Witcher politics. No one wants Geralt to be the leader of their armies, he's not put on a pedestal or anything. He has legit reasons for working with the people he's working with and it's usually for himself and the people he cares for on a personal level rather than him trying to save the entire world.  It's another reason why I liked DA2 up until the end where for some odd reason you *had* to choose a side. Hawke was a pretty low brow hero who had a close group of friends.

 

Regarding Ciri both Sapkowski and CDPR pretty much said that she is a Mary Sue character. However Ciri is a well written character and despite her status she is Mary Sue done right especially in TW3 in my opinion.

 

Eredin is also well done villain in the novels but in game he is a trainwreck and almost as failure as Corypheus was. The only thing that Eredin did better than Cory is that he at least screwed stuff up everytime he and his riders appeared but he still wasn't handled properly and is nothing compared to his novel version.

 

Meanwhile Gaunter O'Dimm not only makes Eredin look bad but he is also one of the best villains i've seen in gaming.

I don't hate Ciri, I love her relationship with Geralt and I don't think she's a terrible character alone, but I hope to never see her again.  She just seems a bit too high fantasy for my tastes.  I agree that Eredin was at least better than Cory but you're right, none of them could touch Gaunter. I was genuinely afraid of that dude.