15883 réponses à ce sujet

[HiroVoid]

Actually, going by this review as well:

 

http://www.thejimqui...ld-hunt-review/

 

There seem to be a good amount of reviewers who seem to enjoy the Witcher's take on sex quoting this from the article:

 

For all the heat the Witcher series gets for its sex and violence, it has to be said that the writing on display is far more clever, adult, and intelligent than it gets credit for. With Wild Hunt in particular, I don’t agree with the common complaint that women are mere window dressing, as they’re just as well-written and arresting as any other character, while Ciri in particular is great fun to play as. The sex that crops up in the main plot, meanwhile, is practically charming – featuring comedy moments that come across as affectionate rather than sleazy.

 

Hell, Geralt’s relationships with women and his inevitable erotic dalliances are more believable and humanized than the “sex as reward” segments in your average BioWare game, for whatever that’s worth.

[AresKeith]

 

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. 

 

 

Generalizing again?

[Sylvius the Mad]

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.

I started reading the Witcher books, and I had to stop, because they frustrated me so. Not because of the books' content, but because of the games.

You see, I think The Witcher books create an excellent setting for a game, and I would love to play that game, but unfortunately the game I tried (the first one) was awful. The combat was unplayable dreck, so I couldn't make it through.

I wish The Witcher games were better. But they're not. The combat is awful. I have no idea how much roleplaying freedom the games offer, because I never got that far.

[Hazegurl]

Thank you!  I only recently started putting my thoughts on vid format.  But yeah, the thing about Dorian I felt was that while I liked the character, I felt the climax was greatly lacking.  It may have been important from a personal standpoint, but for what it means for the world isn't much, and the world is our focus in DA:I.  The scope is different for Witcher I feel, bcause so far we are simply a single protagonist trying to do the best he can in a world thats apathetic at best..  I feel like the Witcher is far more personal and leaves me more greatly invested at just the intro, rather then the whole of DA.  Thats the feeling that I want Bioware to re-create.

 

I understand that its a whole new team and people are leaving all the time, but this was the legacy that the fanbase expected.

 

I agree, I think Dorian's personal quest to meet his father should have been for those on a romance path with him or perhaps let it simply be one of the multiple personal quests involving Dorian that the player can play out.  Like the Zoltan and Dandelion quests.  Particularly Dandelion, which had quite a few layers to it that was bigger than it began yet still not majorly interfering with the world at large.

 

 

VelvetV:

How so?..   I like all companions and advisors, and some of them I love , except Solas who I liked initially but then he annoyed me to no end with his wise-man attitude! I want to smack him now, my character is also a mage and a rift mage, too, so why the heck is Solas behaving like he's the only one to know anything about magic and rifts   

 

DA:I's companions are definitely the favorites of mine, across all RPG games I've played. With an honorary mention of Minsc & Boo from BG, and Roche, those were stellar, too.

 

And while I haven't completed TW3 yet, I struggle to care for any main characters in it as of now. As for secondary charactres like baron, I just don't consider "grey" as an automatic win, if I still don't care for his feelings or sob story. I've seen such guys in real life too closely to find him even the littlest bit interesting *shrug*, so I suspect that anyone who was blown away by his story never met them and consider him or his story exotic or something. If I want total, 100% realism and greyness, I prefer to listen to real people. Doing it in games is cheap when there are multitides of real people around who're like this. In games I prefer better people than in real life. Or worse (for villains), but then I want an option to deliver justice by killing them.

 

I actually forgot about Cole and Solas! lol!!  I also liked those two a lot but I never worried about Solas as I saw him as very intelligent and able to get out of most situations.  My relationship with him is the reverse of yours.  I punched Solas but I started to like the guy and sort of saw him as my Mage's mentor.  I really liked Cole.  I felt bad taking him into the fade.   But my favorite DA companions are sort of spread across the games.

 

Sten, Morrigan, Fenris, Isabella, Dorian, Solas, Cole

 

As for the Witcher.  Zoltan is my favorite dwarf, Dandelion is awesome, Triss is the love of my Geralt's life, and Ciri is Geralt daughter 100%.  That emperor can suck it. lol!!

 

With all honestly, I prefer the small yet tight knit groups moreso than meeting new companions all the time.  I like to see the relationship dynamics of a group of friends moreso than how each individual interacts with the PC. This is why, no matter how much I enjoy the DA companions they just don't hold a candle to the Mass Effect squad mates and their relationship with Shepard or the relationship between Geralt and his friends in TW series.

 

As for the Baron, I just have to disagree.  I don't think there is anything wrong with realism in a story, I find it far more of a cop out to portray a one sided storyline with a cardboard cut out for a character.  It's the writer's easy way out instead of developing a real person with a variety of feelings.  What I love about the Bloody Baron story is that you don't have to like him. The story doesn't tell you to like him or hate him, or even care about him.  The story doesn't try to pull at your heart strings.  It's simply the way it is. You can choose to help or walk away. Or help for your own reason. That's what I like the most about it. 

 

I just began what I want to be a longer play through of the game on my save Triss world state.  I had skipped over some contracts in my first play through and I decided to do some this time. I ended up taking a contract of helping this guy (don't want to spoil).  But I ended up having to make a later choice of helping this other guy connected to this contract in a way or end the contract and get paid for the job I had already completed.  The choices were, help this guy out which could result in all three of them getting hanged or leave this one guy to get hanged.  That to me makes a much better story and choice than just "Save everyone and feel good about yourself or save no one cause of reasons" That greyness is what makes me care more for the people and the world they are living in. In DAI it's either get blankets or don't. Either way nothing is changed.  Refuse to help the Baron, and you see the results later on of that choice.

[Seraphim24]

 the world is very sexist, unlike Dragon Age's. 

 

Lies, nothing's perfect but I'd put TW ahead of DA. See, objectification =/= sex, etc, etc.

[o Ventus]

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.

 

So what is the purpose of confining the definition of "RPG" to terms so strict and inflexible it borders on absurdity?

[o Ventus]

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.

 

Ignoring how unabashedly biased that order list is...

 

I don't see what the issue is with giving GTA a 9.5. It's a good series that has been consistently good with its delivery and quality. Polygon is idiotic nonsense, but as the saying goes, a broken clock is right twice a day.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Actually, going by this review as well:

 

http://www.thejimqui...ld-hunt-review/

 

There seem to be a good amount of reviewers who seem to enjoy the Witcher's take on sex quoting this from the article:

 

For all the heat the Witcher series gets for its sex and violence, it has to be said that the writing on display is far more clever, adult, and intelligent than it gets credit for. With Wild Hunt in particular, I don’t agree with the common complaint that women are mere window dressing, as they’re just as well-written and arresting as any other character, while Ciri in particular is great fun to play as. The sex that crops up in the main plot, meanwhile, is practically charming – featuring comedy moments that come across as affectionate rather than sleazy.

 

Hell, Geralt’s relationships with women and his inevitable erotic dalliances are more believable and humanized than the “sex as reward” segments in your average BioWare game, for whatever that’s worth.

That's one issue I have with the Witcher franchise. It forces you to have to be in certain relationships. 

 

Plus what's with the articles bashing over games? It's like the commercials of a brand that involve bashing another brand. All it does is make me lose respect for the brand that is bashing. 

[HiroVoid]

Lies, nothing's perfect but I'd put TW ahead of DA. See, objectification =/= sex, etc, etc.

Err.....I meant more the WORLD being sexist.  Men and women can both be seen as warriors pretty equally in Dragon Age's world for just one quick example.

[Akrabra]

When it comes to the bit about sex, i felt like The Witcher 3 handled it more maturely than the other games in the series. It wasn't that bad in the second game either. What mostly bothered me in the Witcher 3 was the clothing of some women, i mean there has to be a normal shirt without cleaveage that the women in this world can wear? Also at one point of the game you visit a bath house where all the men wear towels, but almost all the women are naked. What is that about? Can't men be naked in videogames?

 

For the nastiness against women, i don't quite get it. There are ofc alot of horrible people in The Witcher, but Geralt is not one of them. You the player have the power to change events of how men treat women and vice versa. I think this is important. Won't go into spoiler territory, but there are alot of strong women in this game that you can actually help to achieve better lives and other things, which is good. Anyway, my point is gone, just rambling. weee

 

What i wanted to add regarding Skyrim, yes there are few women in power, but the ultimate power can be a women. The Dragonborn is the Dragonborn and the sex doesn't matter. That is what a roleplaying game with gender choices should mean. People can question you because of it, but ultimately you are the one power that helps them.

[JeffZero]

Growing up on Final Fantasy and related fare, I didn't even know there were video games which offered choices on that matter until much later on in my life. The Witcher's linear elements don't bother me at all. Unfortunately, the games themselves fail to catch my interest.

[Elhanan]

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).

Skyrim not only offers Asrid from the DB, but the game is filled with examples: Adrianna Avernici, Uthgerd the Unbroken, Janessa, Lydia, Irileth, Carlotta Valentia, a couple of the ladies from both the Battle-Borns and the Gray-Manes, and that is from Whiterun. And unless one skipped it, one can start the game spending the night in Gerdur's home; the leading female in the village of Riverwood.

But my personal fave is Rikke, as she is a fine example of leadership:

http://elderscrolls....ki/Legate_Rikke

Then in DA: Flemeth; Done, or could be. But I prefer the the Human Noble's mother in DAO, Aveline in DA2 (also the best romance in the game; arguably the series, IMO), and Divine Justinia in DAI as more mortal examples.

[AresKeith]

When it comes to the bit about sex, i felt like The Witcher 3 handled it more maturely than the other games in the series. It wasn't that bad in the second game either. 

 

Outside of the Triss scene it kinda was bad, the women was naked but Geralt still had pants on

[Hazegurl]

I also hope Bioware take a leaf out of CDPR and make funny stuff like this.

 

 

I stumbled on this by accident and had a good LOL moment.

 

I prefer these types of hidden cheeky humor instead of over the top facepalm worthy humor that someone like, say, Iron Bull uses all the time. 

I love stuff like that in games, it reminds me of MGS 4 when Octacon tells you to swap out the disc then reminds himself that your playing on the PS3 and thus don't have to, then Snake using a PS3 controller to control the MK II.

[Elhanan]

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

Last one first: ... "It has issues, however, and not the kind that can be patched out (though there are a fair share of bugs to be stamped out before release too). I saw no people of color in the game at all, for one. Women are treated poorly, either as objects to be desired or as inconsequential (though Ciri wasn’t really shown, and I am definitely still interested in playing as her)...."

The first article uses a sim thought I have heard a few times; that it is not as bad as other games, books, films, etc. Not being bad at all is what I would prefer, and TW3 appears to be bad enough.

[AresKeith]

I love stuff like that in games, it reminds me of MGS 4 when Octacon tells you to swap out the disc then reminds himself that your playing on the PS3 and thus don't have to, then Snake using a PS3 controller to control the MK II.

 

One of the things I love about Kojima is that basically make fun of themselves 

[Sylvius the Mad]

So what is the purpose of confining the definition of "RPG" to terms so strict and inflexible it borders on absurdity?

I'm confining only in that it needs to permit roleplaying.

Watching a pre-written story does not count.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

Err.....I meant more the WORLD being sexist.  Men and women can both be seen as warriors pretty equally in Dragon Age's world for just one quick example.

 

Sexual dimorphism. Look it up. That is a reality of the human species, not a myth.

 

CDPR simply wants to make a believable world.

 

This does not mean women are inferior to men or cannot be warriors, it just means there are less women who are warriors compared to men in the world of The Witcher.

 

TW3 has a few female warriors and all of them are good.

 

For example, there was a female swordfighter who gives Geralt a hard time in Novigrad and a female warrior in Skellige who was never defeated in combat before. 

 

 

Generalizing again?

 

Yes I am and I am not going to apologize for it. Generalization is part and parcel of this world. We generalize animals. We generalize groups of people. We generalize types of cars. We generalize electronic devices. We generalize games into genres like RPG. We generalize types of gamers. 

 

The notion that generalizing is an inherently bad thing is a byproduct of a postmodernist school of thought, a way of thinking which has absolutely no basis in reality. I suppose you, AresKeith, should stop perusing catalogs or fill out forms or bother learning science. They generalize a lot in there. 

 

The phrase "generalizing again" and its variations are a lot like the phrase "check your privilege" and its variations. Both are simply deflections which are offered by those who cannot argue.

 

I know that there are people who dislike The Witcher games for lots of reasons. The books are better to them or the combat is clunky. However, I was talking about hate, not dislike. Hate is a very strong dislike and in the case of The Witcher games, the hate comes for notions that have no basis in reality like "Witcher world is misogynistic" or "Witcher world is sexist". 

 

You want me to name names and make these people with fragile feelings cry harassment ? I have no problem doing that but these fragile creatures will then run to the mods. 

 

 

Last one first: ... "It has issues, however, and not the kind that can be patched out (though there are a fair share of bugs to be stamped out before release too). I saw no people of color in the game at all, for one. Women are treated poorly, either as objects to be desired or as inconsequential (though Ciri wasn’t really shown, and I am definitely still interested in playing as her)...."

The first article uses a sim thought I have heard a few times; that it is not as bad as other games, books, films, etc. Not being bad at all is what I would prefer, and TW3 appears to be bad enough.

 

What does having people of color do for the story that CDPR is telling ? Does having them improves the game in any meaningful way apart from ticking the "diversity" checkbox of some social justice weasel ? 

 

Seriously, I am a 23 year old Tamil Indian who is a Malaysian citizen. I can speak 4 languages smoothly, I have an Afro hair that make people mistake me for African and my skin color is very Middle Eastern....I am a diverse as you can get....& I really would like to know how having people of color can improve this game ? Especially since this game was based on books written by an author who drew many references from northern European myths and themes.

 

This is a lot like saying that  Lord of the Rings is somehow bad because it does not have people of color in it and were written by white old man. 

 

Well, why don't I apply this standard to other parts of the world ? Why is it that Ramayana or Mahabharata or the Bhagavad Gita incredibly Indian ? There are no inclusions and representations of Chinese people or White people or Africans in it. Or how about video games from Japan ? There are very little inclusions of diverse people of color in their games. Many of their characters are skinny, have big eyes and weird spiky hair. Or what about horror movies from Thailand ? There seems to be very little inclusion of diverse people of color there as well. 

 

Does this mean all these things are bad or awful ? Or is it that these things are written to cater to a particular audience ? In The Witcher's case, the games are based on series of books written by a Polish man for Polish people to read. CDPR simply follows the lore. The same goes with Tolkein's works. They are written for a particular audience. Neither of these people expected that their works would gain global recognition and status. Neither of these people expected that there would be spoilt brats demanding inclusion of characters for no reason other than to tick the diversity box either. 

 

It is truly odd that Westerners get to and have to deal with ridiculous standards such as "diversity" and "representation" for the entertainment medium such as books, movies and video games while the rest of us in the world get a free pass. Either you have the same standards across the board or you don't have it. Since I don't like shoehorning characters into something because of sex or skin color, I say we give the whole forced "diversity" and "representation" thing for some mythical equality in real life a middle finger. More choices are good but forced choices ? No. 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I know that there are people who dislike The Witcher games for lots of reasons. The books are better to them or the combat is clunky. However, I was talking about hate, not dislike. Hate is a very strong dislike and in the case of The Witcher games, the hate comes for notions that have no basis in reality like "Witcher world is misogynistic" or "Witcher world is sexist". 

Not neccesarily. For example I can say I hate the Witcher franchise, but it's not for the kind of reasons you stated. 

[Zjarcal]

 

Yes I am and I am not going to apologize for it. Generalization is part and parcel of this world. We generalize animals. We generalize groups of people. We generalize types of cars. We generalize electronic devices. We generalize games into genres like RPG. We generalize types of gamers. 

 

The notion that generalizing is an inherently bad thing is a byproduct of a postmodernist school of thought, a way of thinking which has absolutely no basis in reality. I suppose you, AresKeith, should stop perusing catalogs or fill out forms or bother learning science. They generalize a lot in there. 

 

The phrase "generalizing again" and its variations are a lot like the phrase "check your privilege" and its variations. Both are simply deflections which are offered by those who cannot argue.

 

I know that there are people who dislike The Witcher games for lots of reasons. The books are better to them or the combat is clunky. However, I was talking about hate, not dislike. Hate is a very strong dislike and in the case of The Witcher games, the hate comes for notions that have no basis in reality like "Witcher world is misogynistic" or "Witcher world is sexist". 

 

You want me to name names and make these people with fragile feelings cry harassment ? I have no problem doing that but these fragile creatures will then run to the mods. 

 

 

Badass alert!

 

On topic, well it's a dumb topic, nothing to add.

 

Both franchises are good, I'm yet to play TW3 but I thoroughly enjoyed TW1 and TW2 (despite some issues), soooo... better to just enjoy both and have fun than get involved in petty squabbles over subjective ****.

[AresKeith]

 

Yes I am and I am not going to apologize for it. Generalization is part and parcel of this world. We generalize animals. We generalize groups of people. We generalize types of cars. We generalize electronic devices. We generalize games into genres like RPG. We generalize types of gamers. 

 

The notion that generalizing is an inherently bad thing is a byproduct of a postmodernist school of thought, a way of thinking which has absolutely no basis in reality. I suppose you, AresKeith, should stop perusing catalogs or fill out forms or bother learning science. They generalize a lot in there. 

 

The phrase "generalizing again" and its variations are a lot like the phrase "check your privilege" and its variations. Both are simply deflections which are offered by those who cannot argue.

 

I know that there are people who dislike The Witcher games for lots of reasons. The books are better to them or the combat is clunky. However, I was talking about hate, not dislike. Hate is a very strong dislike and in the case of The Witcher games, the hate comes for notions that have no basis in reality like "Witcher world is misogynistic" or "Witcher world is sexist". 

 

You want me to name names and make these people with fragile feelings cry harassment ? I have no problem doing that but these fragile creatures will then run to the mods. 

 

 

You mean like the same way people on the other of that arugment like to use buzzwords that lost all it's meaning because they use it as insults now?

[rashie]

 

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. 

 

I think there's a lot of truth to this statement. Unlike modern Bioware, CDPR certainly isn't afraid of using politically incorrect themes heavily, seen a good few scenarios so far that could easily offend people if they start to read into it more than taking it for  being a work of fiction, such as what "whoreson junior"s (a character named that) house looks like on the inside once you find the bastard.

 

They portray bad people doing bad things in a way similar to GTA at times.

 

Should note a lot of the storytelling the witcher games have are based upon slavic mythology, and things rarely end in a happily ever after manner in those tales.

[AmberDragon]

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.

No oneis saying you should buy or play the game, you are making far too many assumptions based on articles and virtually calling those of us who actually play the game liars. Apologies if that is not your intention but that is how you are coming across. The Gwent game I played had no profanity, perhaps depends which character you play at the game. As for the rest sorry but until you ACTUALLY play the game your opinion is not well formed. Again you don't like that type of game fine but stop criticising it based on hearsay, as for how alive a game feels it has absolutely zero to do with cut scenes for me, it's about there actually being npcs that move around, interact, go about daily life, children playing in villages etc.. which as much as I liked DAI it did NOT have and your claims that it had the same show your lack of knowledge about Witcher 3 and it is something you won't learn through articles or youtube.

Now that is the last time I will respond to you because you will only continue to blindly parrot incorrect information about Witcher 3 and blindly defend DAI despite it's short comings. As I said no one is forcing you to play the game, although why you are searching youtube for game videos for Witcher if you find it so offensive is beyond my understanding. I am sure you could find better ways to spend your time than suffering through something you find so abhorrent. As much as I love DAI I won't blindly defend it against a game which does side quests etc better (and again nothing to do with cut scenes the side quests have more content to them).

[Elhanan]

I think there's a lot of truth to this statement. Unlike modern Bioware, CDPR certainly isn't afraid of using politically incorrect themes heavily, seen a good few scenarios so far that could easily offend people if they start to read into it more than taking it for  being a work of fiction, such as what "whoreson junior"s (a character named that) house looks like on the inside once you find the bastard.

Funny; thought Bioware has done an excellent job of handling mature materials in a reasoned way. Personally, I would say that the DA series has handled religion in a better manner than many other fine talents (eg; Joss Whedon). And I think that the presentation of human rights has been done in a way to invoke thought and debate; not to simply press Hotkeys on Players.

And since Bioware has also discussed rape, slavery, murder, bigotry, and a few other choice topics in their games, I cannot see that they have been afraid. However, when I look at the threads discussing either game, and see locker room humor over the included so-called mature materials, I do fear for humanity as a whole.....

[Elhanan]

No oneis saying you should buy or play the game, you are making far too many assumptions based on articles and virtually calling those of us who actually play the game liars. Apologies if that is not your intention but that is how you are coming across. The Gwent game I played had no profanity, perhaps depends which character you play at the game. As for the rest sorry but until you ACTUALLY play the game your opinion is not well formed. Again you don't like that type of game fine but stop criticising it based on hearsay, as for how alive a game feels it has absolutely zero to do with cut scenes for me, it's about there actually being npcs that move around, interact, go about daily life, children playing in villages etc.. which as much as I liked DAI it did NOT have and your claims that it had the same show your lack of knowledge about Witcher 3 and it is something you won't learn through articles or youtube.

Now that is the last time I will respond to you because you will only continue to blindly parrot incorrect information about Witcher 3 and blindly defend DAI despite it's short comings. As I said no one is forcing you to play the game, although why you are searching youtube for game videos for Witcher if you find it so offensive is beyond my understanding. I am sure you could find better ways to spend your time than suffering through something you find so abhorrent. As much as I love DAI I won't blindly defend it against a game which does side quests etc better (and again nothing to do with cut scenes the side quests have more content to them).

Nope. Someone else assumes; never called anyone a liar. Not assuming anything from the articles or the vids either; simply confirming the issues. But one does not have to even do that; simply watch the promo vids. That is from the mouth of the horse, so to speak. And I have no desire to purchase one that looks good, but has bad teeth and is unhealthy.

Have fun storming the castle!