15883 réponses à ce sujet

[Zinho73]

This review had me in tears.  

 

It is hilarious, indeed, but just to offer a counterpoint on the combat: I think the movement is a bit weird to get used to, but I can attack exactly the one I am aiming to, I use bombs and magic a lot and, if I just hold block, most enemies will break it.

 

In the first hour I thought the combat was very weird, but than it clicked and I am having a blast with it - But you CAN play spamming the dodge button and I admit it will look silly (and maybe boring). I just don't do that because it is way more efficient to use signs and bombs.

 

My verdict: it is a flawed affair that you can get used to to make awesome things. I dig it.

[Elhanan]

i just played TW3 and it's an amazing game. if anything, I hope Bioware will actually take notice of CD Projekt's success and perhaps improve their next DA so we could have the best from both worlds.

Imagine the next DA title with the same amount of cutscene goodies and reactivity *drools*
 
 
This!
 
no offense Elhanan, but since you've admitted to not actually playing or even owning the game, doesn't that kinda make you unqualified to even compare the two? I see you keep coming to this thread to defend DA:I and that's allright with me, but you seem rather ignorant of what is actually going in the Witcher 3. Nudity minigames? what the heck? Please, at least refrain from posting such uninformed stuff before playing the game itself.
 
As in words of Harlan Ellison: You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.

Not comparing anything; simply reporting what I have gathered on TW3. There are articles of mechanical problems (eg Hardcoded keys, CTD's, Graphic slowdowns, etc), and reports from Players. These are available for all to see; no head in the sand required.

And since comprehension may be an issue, the mini-game has profanity; do not know of nudity on the cards. Since that was reported in the first game, I doubt that error would be repeated. And CDPR had profanity, nudity, and sexual content in the TW3 promos as selling points; that is an informed opinion.

One does not have to walk into a propeller to understand it might be unpleasant; experience is not always required when one tries to make an informed purchase. A bit of reading and gathering intel can help avoid mishandling an investment. And I have discovered enough to know that the TW series is not for me.

[Elhanan]

Ah yes, that Polygon review. I made a post in the forums pointing out how strange it was that they got upset about the portrayals of women and misogyny, but just a week earlier had been celebrating and championing the ability of a female (or anyone) to have sex with as many females or males that they want (or really kind of do what they want sexually) and this was a completely unrelated issue. They kept saying sex =/= objectification or something, and then repeatedly insulted me to "get on the level" because I wasn't familiar with the standard enabling feminist power literature or something, that means you can do whatever you want sexually in your personal life and then overreact to the slightest hint of sexuality in media and 1 = 1 at the end of the day. Not to mention they never even blinked when DA:I came out with it's plethora of cutscenes or sex jokes, gave it game of the year in fact. It ended up attracting all these moderators and people and was finally shut down.
 
Anyway, I don't really go there anymore.

Understand; I do not use metacritic due to their flawed choices (eg; skewed algorithms, anyone can post a score, volumes of same day postings at launch or before). But I would not have seen that article had that developer not responded harshly; they gave the article credibility.

EDIT: Dev was from Astronaut; not CDPR.

[Greetsme]

It is hilarious, indeed, but just to offer a counterpoint on the combat: I think the movement is a bit weird to get used to, but I can attack exactly the one I am aiming to, I use bombs and magic a lot and, if I just hold block, most enemies will break it.

 

In the first hour I thought the combat was very weird, but than it clicked and I am having a blast with it - But you CAN play spamming the dodge button and I admit it will look silly (and maybe boring). I just don't do that because it is way more efficient to use signs and bombs.

 

My verdict: it is a flawed affair that you can get used to to make awesome things. I dig it.

Yeah, I like the combat.  It's sort of casual but good fun, especially when you get use to it.  I love the part in the video about the griffin fight, I nearly wet myself.  

[Elhanan]

You stated that the movement keys were hard coded, as I said there is a way to change them, it is given online (someone found it via a google search) and from what has been said in the forums that solves the problem and enables people to re-map their keys.

You keep stating that DAI has everything Witcher has, that is not exactly true, which you would know if you actually played the game. DAI may have settlements but they are not very well done compared to Witcher which feels more alive thanks to NPCs that move and interact with Geralt and the environment as well as each other.

As for the claim it's misogynistic, well I am a woman and I don't find it so, also a lot of the nudity can be avoided simply by avoiding brothels and bath houses, or choosing not to sleep with female characters. The profanity is not bad and certainly no worse than you hear in the street or on tv, like I said before you are getting a distorted view of the game because you aren't actually playing it. You don't want to play it that is up to you but please stop insisting that DAI has everything Witcher does, because it's untrue. Just as your assertion that even the mini game in TW3 has nudity in it. If you aren't playing the game you aren't in a position to criticise it, or at least have your criticisms taken seriously. Also I don't think the majority of people in this thread are attacking DAI most, like me, have numerous playthroughs under their belts and enjoyed DAI, we are just suggesting how it could have been better and how we would like future DA titles to be. Not even saying copy Witcher 3 just saying they could make better side quests etc...

Glad there is a walk-around; maybe some of those with AZERTY keyboards and the disabled will be able to play their investments now.

My reply of what was in DAI was made to match what was reported to be in TW3, as that content is extant. And I personally do not want a bunch of cut-scenes; watched enough vids to know how often Geralt has to re-sheath his blades. I did not care for them in the ME series either, and some have been lobbying Bioware for years to return to actual gameplay instead of films. Much prefer the DAI technique over what has been seen in TW3. What I need to believe a character is alive is good writing and design; not a movie.

Many women also watch GoT, and have no issue with the way woman are presented there. But based on reported content, I choose to avoid it, too. As I mentioned, it is reported; still have no desire to purchase the games or books.

And Gwent has profanity; not nudity of which I am aware.

[Zinho73]

Yeah, I like the combat.  It's sort of casual but good fun, especially when you get use to it.  I love the part in the video about the griffin fight, I nearly wet myself.  

It is epic stuff, man.

 

IN my play, I walked into a village and triggered some monsters. They attacked and I flee. I got back there later and everyone was dead except for this one guy that attacked me on sight LOL.

[HiroVoid]

Understand; I do not use metacritic due to their flawed choices (eg; skewed algorithms, anyone can post a score, volumes of same day postings at launch or before). But I would not have seen that article had CDPR not responded harshly; they gave the article credibility.

From the GameZone article, it looks like the ones who criticized the Polygon article was a developer from a company called 'The Astronauts'; not CDPR.

[Gileadan]

And Gwent has profanity; not nudity of which I am aware.

Ahh... you are referring to the names of certain low-ranking infantry cards, yes?

 

Though I wouldn't be surprised if there's a nymph card somewhere, too.

[Seraphim24]

I want to say it's because Ben Kuchera is an idiot with no standards as to who he employs, and the heavy majority of Polygon's writers are simplistic parrots who only espouse the agendas and ideologies they're told to push, because they lack the ability to critically think (as shown by their working for a garbage publication like Polygon).

 

I don't think he wrote that article, to be honest, but generally Polygon just seems to have this inane logic (that I've seen other places also, here also at times to be honest), where something like Tera Online with really provocatively dressed characters would be an abyssal demonic horror (despite not being graphic sex or something of that nature), but if someone walks outside and is ravaged in a gangbang by a bunch of strangers (or you have graphic visceral sex, complete with nudity, in a game, etc) this is completely acceptable because sex = good, objectification = bad. It's basically like the sky is blue and everyone can see it, but they insist that it's green.. you are like... uh huh.

 

Not to mention, I consider TW to be a pretty romantic series with lots of highly positive interactions, strong females, all kinds of stuff. They just wanted to be incendiary to draw attention to their "cause."

 

Understand; I do not use metacritic due to their flawed choices (eg; skewed algorithms, anyone can post a score, volumes of same day postings at launch or before). But I would not have seen that article had CDPR not responded harshly; they gave the article credibility.

 

That's why I'd trust your own logic and instinct, do you have a problem with the Witcher? If yes, don't play it, if no, play it. Relying on gamers on issues of sexuality is like relying on a 4 year old to drive a helicoptor or something.

[Elhanan]

From the GameZone article, it looks like the ones who criticized the Polygon article was a developer from a company called 'The Astronauts'; not CDPR.

Good eye; excellent catch. I stand corrected. Thanks!

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Remember everyone, no personal insults against individuals or groups. 

[HiroVoid]

Good eye; excellent catch. I stand corrected. Thanks!

No problem.  The title's worded really poorly.  It just sounded strange and especially catching the last part of the quote, it didn't sound like CDPR, so I took a closer look at the article.

[o Ventus]

I don't think he wrote that article, to be honest, but generally Polygon just seems to have this inane logic (that I've seen other places also, here also at times to be honest), where something like Tera Online with really provocatively dressed characters would be an abyssal demonic horror (despite not being graphic sex or something of that nature), but if someone walks outside and is ravaged in a gangbang by a bunch of strangers (or you have graphic visceral sex, complete with nudity, in a game, etc) this is completely acceptable because sex = good, objectification = bad. It's basically like the sky is blue and everyone can see it, but they insist that it's green.. you are like... uh huh.

 

Not to mention, I consider TW to be a pretty romantic series with lots of highly positive interactions, strong females, all kinds of stuff. They just wanted to be incendiary to draw attention to their "cause."

 

 

That's why I'd trust your own logic and instinct, do you have a problem with the Witcher? If yes, don't play it, if no, play it. Relying on gamers on issues of sexuality is like relying on a 4 year old to drive a helicoptor or something.

 

@bold: That's why I said that Ben Kuchera has no standards as to who he employs. Any idiot who can read and has fingers to type with can sign up and be a writer for Polygon.

[Elhanan]

I don't think he wrote that article, to be honest, but generally Polygon just seems to have this inane logic (that I've seen other places also, here also at times to be honest), where something like Tera Online with really provocatively dressed characters would be an abyssal demonic horror (despite not being graphic sex or something of that nature), but if someone walks outside and is ravaged in a gangbang by a bunch of strangers (or you have graphic visceral sex, complete with nudity, in a game, etc) this is completely acceptable because sex = good, objectification = bad. It's basically like the sky is blue and everyone can see it, but they insist that it's green.. you are like... uh huh.
 
Not to mention, I consider TW to be a pretty romantic series with lots of highly positive interactions, strong females, all kinds of stuff. They just wanted to be incendiary to draw attention to their "cause." 
 
That's why I'd trust your own logic and instinct, do you have a problem with the Witcher? If yes, don't play it, if no, play it. Relying on gamers on issues of sexuality is like relying on a 4 year old to drive a helicoptor or something.

Do not rely on gamers; rely of gathered information from news articles and other consumers. And of one does not care for Polygon, there are others:

http://www.eurogamer...ild-hunt-review

http://www.theartsde...her-3-wild-hunt

http://www.pastemaga...aked-truth.html

[o Ventus]

Do not rely on gamers; rely of gathered information from news articles and other consumers. And of one does not care for Polygon, there are others:
snip

 

So, "don't rely on gamers, rely instead on gamers"? At least, one would reasonably assume that the people writing the reviews for these publications, and the "other consumers" are gamers, having purchased and played the game to give an opinion on it.

 

And lol @ "rely on gathered information from news articles [...]" as though online publications are known for their lack of bias and consumer-friendly approach. Not sure about anyone else, but I stopped putting stock into what a lot of sites said after I learned that GameSpot fired one of their writers for giving Kane and Lynch a mediocre score, and after the whole slew of "gamers are dead" articles. You know game journalism has reached a new low point when some "reporters" (Leigh Alexander comes to mind) flat-out admit that they don't hide their bias and admit to forwarding an agenda.

[Seraphim24]

Do not rely on gamers; rely of gathered information from news articles and other consumers. And of one does not care for Polygon, there are others:

http://www.eurogamer...ild-hunt-review

http://www.theartsde...her-3-wild-hunt

http://www.pastemaga...aked-truth.html

 

Yeah so this is the other problem, if you want my opinion? Skyrim has plenty of issues when it comes to representing women. How many powerful women are there anyway? Every major leader, every major city, everything is run by men, and most organizations also. The only counter-examples I can think of are the Dark Brotherhood and maybe that one western city. There isn't a single opportunity (basically) outside of your followers or your PC itself to interact with females in a powerful sense.

 

All these simpletons are using very base logic, oh my god! A woman is shredded into pieces! Oh my god! A woman is beat up. Look, I saw a quest in the Witcher where one woman bashes another woman's head into a table, just because something is raw doesn't make it "misogynist." It's just violence, it just is, it's just reality (at times). In my experience, it's people who are actually more comfortable with issues of sexuality that tend to express these issues in a game (TW, GoT), the people who are afraid don't do anything and lob bombs at the ones that do in order to try push the spotlight away from them and their own disabilities in this respect.

 

And lets just pretend Ciri and Triss aren't infinitely more empowered and interesting than every female in Skyrim or DA combined because then we won't have to ignore the enormous gaps in logic or sense of treating all these other games as somehow better at all this than the one game that's actually pretty good at it.

 

Just because a game doesn't directly deal with the issue of females (or males) and their sexuality (i.e. see sexless universes like LOTR or Skyrim) doesn't mean the issue isn't there, 99% of the time it means they actually have a razor thin grasp on the issue and are simply dodging the issue (which is much worse, generally).

[o Ventus]

Yeah so this is the other problem, if you want my opinion? Skyrim is one of the worst games in the universe when it comes to representing women. How many powerful women are there anyway? Every major leader, every major city, everything is run by men, and most organizations also. The only counter-examples I can think of are the Dark Brotherhood and maybe that one western city. There isn't a single opportunity outside of your followers or your PC itself to interact with females in a powerful sense.

 

All these simpletons are using very base logic, oh my god! A woman is shredded into pieces! Oh my god! A woman is beat up. Look, I saw a quest in the Witcher where one woman bashes another woman's head into a table, just because something is raw doesn't make it "misogynist." It's just violence, it just is, it's just reality (at times). In my experience, it's people who are actually more comfortable with issues of sexuality that tend to express these issues in a game, the people who are afraid don't do anything and lob bombs at the ones that do in order to try push the spotlight away from them and their own disabilities.

 

And lets just pretend Ciri and Triss aren't infinitely more empowered and interesting than every female in Skyrim or DA combined because then we won't have to ignore the enormous gaps in logic or sense of treating all these other games as somehow better at all this than the one game.

 

Just because a game doesn't directly deal with the issue of females (or males) and their sexuality (i.e. see sexless universes like LOTR or Skyrim) doesn't mean the issue isn't there, 99% of the time it means they actually have a razor thin grasp on the issue and are simply dodging the issue (which is much worse, generally).

 

I would strongly hesitate to say Ciri or Triss are more empowered or more interesting than EVERY female character in Skyrim or DA. Skyrim has Aela and Serana (the latter of whom is pretty widely regarded as a good female character, from what I can tell). DA has a huge cast of good female characters. Morrigan, Cassandra, Isabela, Aveline, and Leliana all immediately come to mind.

[Seraphim24]

I would strongly hesitate to say Ciri or Triss are more empowered or more interesting than EVERY female character in Skyrim or DA. Skyrim has Aela and Serana (the latter of whom is pretty widely regarded as a good female character, from what I can tell). DA has a huge cast of good female characters. Morrigan, Cassandra, Isabela, Aveline, and Leliana all immediately come to mind.

 

It's something like this

 

Triss > Ciri > Saskia >>  Phillipa > Franceca >> Morrigan = Sabrina  >>> Cassandra >> Aela > Isabela >> Aveline = Aela > Serana >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Every character in GTAV (female or male).

 

Polygon gave GTA a 9.5! G T, freaking, A. I'm pretty sure every other single one of those other sites did too (Eurogamer, etc).

 

I realized I was applying my nuclear-impossible to meet standards there for a minute, but my point is that you can't blank on these other games and come down hard on TW of all things. So much of it doesn't make any degree logical sense.

 

With even modest pressure, you see exactly what you said, it's everyone simply parroting the other opinion.

[herkles]

I think some of the armor in TW3 look great, and would love to see Bioware try some for their games

 

I agree. As I mentioned before they are based on Real world designs. The same thing goes for the clothing as well. They are based on armor and clothing used in the late medieval and renaissance periods, around the 1400s and 1500s. 

 

Bioware doesn't have to limit themselves to one area for their designs, but the usage of real world designs is good because it had to stand up. Since we could be going to Tevinter, why not have byzantine inspired armor, or persian, or perhaps even some indian? Clothing is actually far more important to Dragon age then the Witcher. Since we can play mages who often do not wear armor but clothing. I wouldn't mind seeing a few female magisters wearing something similar to an indian sari

 

As for the small isolated villages, they are not useless nor just filler to make the world alive. Often times they tend to have say an inn or a herbalist or a shop of some sort. Sure they are in the middle of no-where, but when you are in an area surrounded by monsters they become highly valuable. It is really good to have a place return to. 

 

In regards to the darkness of dragon age, the odd thing is that inquisiton could have easily been much darker if they SHOWED us the darkness, especially from the books. 

 

For instance, if Val Royeaux, and I have ideas of how Val Royeaux could be vastly improved,  had the elven alianage(which I am surprised it didn't) then it could have revealed stuff about the various factions before the ball. You could have people talk about Celine's burning down the allianage and show the ruins and people whom were injured or lost relatives. Then you have Gaspard and the Cheviliers and their hazing ritual of going around the slums and shanking the elves who are caught outside the area, one could show that happen or see the aftermath of it to the elves.  For Brialla's faction, perhaps you assist or get ropped into allowing her agents to kill a family that opposes elves including children. 

 

Dragon age often is said to have Racism, but telling us that doesn't help when they don't do much showing beyond "knife-eared" show us the oppression. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

What is Dragon Age?
Dragon Age is what you want it to be.

And that's necessary for a quality roleplaying experience.

[Grieving Natashina]

And that's necessary for a quality roleplaying experience.

I feel the same way as Teddy does, but what do you mean?

[Sylvius the Mad]

TL,DW: Bioware needs to find a better way to compel the gamer to have an emotional response. We want drama, give us a reason to care about your setting and all the people in it!! Dont be afraid to have a political agenda... But if you do, you NEED to find a way to get players invested and see the sides you want presented. Make us care about people.

I completely disagree. The game should not be trying to speak to the player at all.

The game should offer a detailed environment in which the player's character has a chance to become emotionally invested, but if the game tries to engage the player directly, it dramatically limits the range of personality types the player can play.

I'm never going to care about computer game characters, but the other characters in the game world (some of which are crafted by me) might.

[HiroVoid]

Do not rely on gamers; rely of gathered information from news articles and other consumers. And of one does not care for Polygon, there are others:

http://www.eurogamer...ild-hunt-review

http://www.theartsde...her-3-wild-hunt

http://www.pastemaga...aked-truth.html

Gonna try and go through this one article by article:

 

Eurogamer:

 

Going over the second-last paragraph, the main criticism seems to be about low necklines/provocative outfits more than anything.  When they talk about mysogyny, it seems mostly in respect to the world itself which is true since the world is very sexist, unlike Dragon Age's.  I also found the last sentence interesting in respect to comparsions to Bioware.

 

Even its adolescent sauciness has a kind of honesty: this is a video game in which sex is messy and fun and, well, sexy, as opposed to the calculating negotiation it is in BioWare's games (or the pervy sideshow it is everywhere else).

 

TheArtsDesk:

 

The main criticism seems to be once again outfit design.  I think this quote also represents their stance on the matter best.

 

It surely would have been possible to create a medieval world that's nasty to women, without there being too much actual nastiness to women in the game?

For a large part, it seems that it may be that they find the game too dark in general in this respect compared to games that tend to focus more on the 'tell, don't show.'

 

PasteMagazine:

This is actually a preview rather than a review.  There actually is Geralt ass that can be seen later on in at least one scene I saw, though true, it is mainly focused on the women.  There also seems to be a heavy amount of self-consciousness from the writer as well.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

 

Yeah so this is the other problem, if you want my opinion? Skyrim has plenty of issues when it comes to representing women. How many powerful women are there anyway? Every major leader, every major city, everything is run by men, and most organizations also. The only counter-examples I can think of are the Dark Brotherhood and maybe that one western city. There isn't a single opportunity (basically) outside of your followers or your PC itself to interact with females in a powerful sense.

 

All these simpletons are using very base logic, oh my god! A woman is shredded into pieces! Oh my god! A woman is beat up. Look, I saw a quest in the Witcher where one woman bashes another woman's head into a table, just because something is raw doesn't make it "misogynist." It's just violence, it just is, it's just reality (at times). In my experience, it's people who are actually more comfortable with issues of sexuality that tend to express these issues in a game (TW, GoT), the people who are afraid don't do anything and lob bombs at the ones that do in order to try push the spotlight away from them and their own disabilities in this respect.

 

And lets just pretend Ciri and Triss aren't infinitely more empowered and interesting than every female in Skyrim or DA combined because then we won't have to ignore the enormous gaps in logic or sense of treating all these other games as somehow better at all this than the one game that's actually pretty good at it.

 

Just because a game doesn't directly deal with the issue of females (or males) and their sexuality (i.e. see sexless universes like LOTR or Skyrim) doesn't mean the issue isn't there, 99% of the time it means they actually have a razor thin grasp on the issue and are simply dodging the issue (which is much worse, generally).

 

 

It's something like this

 

Triss > Ciri > Saskia >>  Phillipa > Franceca >> Morrigan = Sabrina  >>> Cassandra >> Aela > Isabela >> Aveline = Aela > Serana >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Every character in GTAV (female or male).

 

Polygon gave GTA a 9.5! G T, freaking, A. I'm pretty sure every other single one of those other sites did too (Eurogamer, etc).

 

I realized I was applying my nuclear-impossible to meet standards there for a minute, but my point is that you can't blank on these other games and come down hard on TW of all things. So much of it doesn't make any degree logical sense.

 

With even modest pressure, you see exactly what you said, it's everyone simply parroting the other opinion.

 

An intelligent logical person on the internet, in BSN of all places. Who would have thought it ? 

 

What I find surprising is that people who have never played any one of the games in The Witcher series somehow see themselves fit to make judgments of the game by relying on game journalists and think that their opinions are somehow valid or could be taken seriously. At least watch full LPs of The Witcher games in YouTube from someone like Gopher or read up on the books on which the games are based on. 

 

Here is a link to Gopher's channel - https://www.youtube....hersVids/videos

 

At the end of the day, people hate The Witcher universe because of its politically incorrect tone, its mature tone which tends to offend people with a certain flawed and infantile world view. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

I feel the same way as Teddy does, but what do you mean?

Every good roleplaying game is a sandbox. They're not all open world sandboxes like TES, but the nature of roleplaying is such that the game can't really direct the play. The player needs to be in control of his character's decisions.

The strength of a roleplaying game comes not from what we do in it, but what we could do but don't.

What choices we think are important define what the game is to us. So a good roleplaying game is always going to be whatever the player wants it to be. I can play through DAO twice and the core story is going to differ wildly between the two.

That's a good roleplaying game.