Yes. But I did play DA O on the 'puter too and the exact same things I find annoying about DA Is I found about it.
Am talking about DA:I one, it's just horrible, and every time i cheated my way out, they release an update that screw things all over.
I don't know about now, am planing another playthrough soon, so i guess we'll see.
Originally planned to start another playthrough when they release the second sp dlc, but that isn't happening soon, didn't try elf so i'll give it a shot.
Oh come on, everything i listed was better in DA:O, it's a matter of perspective i guess.
um gear set i meant, am playing divinity right now i got confused.
Tactical camera the same, you're on console aren't you?
No it wasn't.
I come here to make a light hearted jest about DA's hotter boys and state my personal preference for one series over another and of course someone has to go all apesh*t with the "your opinion is invalid because stating your opinion is making an offensive ARGUMENT against my opinion BLASPHEMY". No wonder these threads go on forever.
I enjoyed DA:I enough to clock 150+ hours within a month whereas I kept putting TW3 off despite only clocking 60 something over a couple of months. I know, insane right? Cry me a river! He's all yours
I'm glad I'm not alone in having a much easier time staying in DAI than in TW3--which is way more fatiguing. It's not even a matter of challenge anymore. I've figured out a build that makes combat quite tractable on the Normal setting. It's more like everything feels like pulling teeth. Just trying to manage some gear and sell off excess inventory is a lengthy exercise that just breaks up what I want to be doing. Wrong merchant? He has no more money? His icon disappeared from the map because he went to sleep? I have to run across 3 towns to do all the buying, selling and crafting? What is up with all these materials to dismantle this way, and combine that way? Will these puny runes ever get any good? Ugh!
And yeah, I wish I could smack Roach over the head and carry him across those little climbs and drops he can't manage.
I'm glad I'm not alone in having a much easier time staying in DAI than in TW3--which is way more fatiguing. It's not even a matter of challenge anymore. I've figured out a build that makes combat quite tractable on the Normal setting. It's more like everything feels like pulling teeth. Just trying to manage some gear and sell off excess inventory is a lengthy exercise that just breaks up what I want to be doing. Wrong merchant? He has no more money? His icon disappeared from the map because he went to sleep? I have to run across 3 towns to do all the buying, selling and crafting? What is up with all these materials to dismantle this way, and combine that way? Will these puny runes ever get any good? Ugh!
And yeah, I wish I could smack Roach over the head and carry him across those little climbs and drops he can't manage.
The main reason I had an easier time staying in DA:I is probably my companions, for self-explanatory reasons, and also the major missions. While TW3 is great for what it is, my biggest gripe with it was how every major objective is broken up into a very long series of open world tasks that sometime feel like fetch quests. Just when I expect something very interesting to happen, I find out I have to collect 5 more things or brainwash two more people.
The climactic moments in TW3 get drowned out by this open world structure. Even though I have to do a bunch exploration bullsh*t in DA:I to colelct enough power for major missions, atleast I know I'm working towards a major event, and those major events get to stand out in their isolated instances. When I think of DA:I, I remember Adamant Keep, Winter Palace, attack on Haven, companion quests, Wild Arbor, etc. When I think of TW3, my memories of the Baron's quests and the attack on Kaer Morhen get jumbled with memories of having to do a billion other tiny little chore-like things that tested my patience after awhile.
One could argue that's more of a "realistic" experience because yeah, you got to do alot of little things to make big things happen. But it's one thing to work like this physically in real life, but it doesn't work for me as a game, because really I'm just sitting here for two hours pushing "E" to interact, hoping something huge is going to happen any moment.
Roach, however, I like 
He's super fast and runs fairly well, which I can't say for the IQ's horse. Which works out anyway, because I would prefer running with my companions regardless.
Are The Witcher 2 and 3 really that good? I mean, the story seems fairly interesting, if a little bit too far on the grim, dark fantasy side for my immediate liking. But from my 6 or 7 hours playing the first one, the overall gameplay and such was really bad. I was interested, but I couldn't get into it. And I'm really against playing the sequels of a game without playing the first one.
I just mean to say that based on my initial reaction of the first one, I can't even fathom how somebody could compare The Witcher with the Dragon Age series- if not by quality, then by flavour. They don't seem to be alike at all to me.
The main reason I had an easier time staying in DA:I is probably my companions, for self-explanatory reasons, and also the major missions. While TW3 is great for what it is, my biggest gripe with it was how every major objective is broken up into a very long series of open world tasks that sometime feel like fetch quests. Just when I expect something very interesting to happen, I find out I have to collect 5 more things or brainwash two more people.
The climactic moments in TW3 get drowned out by this open world structure. Even though I have to do a bunch exploration bullsh*t in DA:I to colelct enough power for major missions, atleast I know I'm working towards a major event, and those major events get to stand out in their isolated instances. When I think of DA:I, I remember Adamant Keep, Winter Palace, attack on Haven, companion quests, Wild Arbor, etc. When I think of TW3, my memories of the Baron's quests and the attack on Kaer Morhen get jumbled with memories of having to do a billion other tiny little chore-like things that tested my patience after awhile.
One could argue that's more of a "realistic" experience because yeah, you got to do alot of little things to make big things happen. But it's one thing to work like this physically in real life, but it doesn't work for me as a game, because really I'm just sitting here for two hours pushing "E" to interact, hoping something huge is going to happen any moment.
Roach, however, I like
I feel however that this works in the witcher because all of these little events all contribute to a bigger narrative. One of the things that I admire about the Witcher because the basic plotline of the Wicher, all three games 'is Geralt goes to look for a girl.' Yet on this journey he gets caught up in larger and larger events that then build up and on top of one another. ME 2 and DA O actually did this really well too. At least the Human Noble Origin in DA O did this really well. But in the Witcher 3 this has the unfortanate side effect of...my favorite quest of the game so far is Wild Hearts, a side quest...this should not happen. Because you are right the bits about DA Is main campaign were so memorable and so complete.
Though on the flip side it is for this very reason i am finding it easier to stay in the Witcher, because I do not feel the world is as deep or as interesting and its a lot easier to go into the game and waste time 'exploring' and doing random quests and avoid the main story if I a in a bad moood or tired or had a rough night, or am having a roguh night...whatever the case may be. Witcher 3 is more like crack to me or just a rush whereas DA I is meat and potatoes.
Are The Witcher 2 and 3 really that good? I mean, the story seems fairly interesting, if a little bit too far on the grim, dark fantasy side for my immediate liking. But from my 6 or 7 hours playing the first one, the overall gameplay and such was really bad. I was interested, but I couldn't get into it. And I'm really against playing the sequels of a game without playing the first one.
I just mean to say that based on my initial reaction of the first one, I can't even fathom how somebody could compare The Witcher with the Dragon Age series- if not by quality, then by flavour. They don't seem to be alike at all to me.
The main reason I had an easier time staying in DA:I is probably my companions, for self-explanatory reasons, and also the major missions. While TW3 is great for what it is, my biggest gripe with it was how every major objective is broken up into a very long series of open world tasks that sometime feel like fetch quests. Just when I expect something very interesting to happen, I find out I have to collect 5 more things or brainwash two more people.
The climactic moments in TW3 get drowned out by this open world structure. Even though I have to do a bunch exploration bullsh*t in DA:I to colelct enough power for major missions, atleast I know I'm working towards a major event, and those major events get to stand out in their isolated instances. When I think of DA:I, I remember Adamant Keep, Winter Palace, attack on Haven, companion quests, Wild Arbor, etc. When I think of TW3, my memories of the Baron's quests and the attack on Kaer Morhen get jumbled with memories of having to do a billion other tiny little chore-like things that tested my patience after awhile.
One could argue that's more of a "realistic" experience because yeah, you got to do alot of little things to make big things happen. But it's one thing to work like this physically in real life, but it doesn't work for me as a game, because really I'm just sitting here for two hours pushing "E" to interact, hoping something huge is going to happen any moment.
Roach, however, I like
When I said that everything feels like pulling teeth, that's what I meant. Inventory management is one example. Whatever you do is way more of a chore than it should be in a game of this vintage. There's a certain old-school feeling in all the things in TW3 that get streamlined in most other new games. Some may even like this chore-heavy approach. I don't.
I keep editing my old post, the one which answers the OP's question. I keep coming up with more and more to add to it.
I am replaying Witcher 1 right now. I enjoyed it enough at the time, to go on to play TW2 - which was a much better game overall IMO. TW1 was different - had interesting lore and the more I played it, the more I liked it. TW2 took me a while to get into - bought it for PC and then later for XBOX. But the XBOX version I finished twice so again, took a while to get into it, but pretty good overall. TW3- was reluctant to start playing but frankly - it blows me out of the water. Yes, dark and gritty - but deep and rich. I rushed through my first play through and left out a lot. Now I am going through it slowly. The evolution of Geralt's character is amazing. I look forward to getting back to Inquisition at some point, but totally loving my Witcher experience. Am now reading the books as well.
Not even close. Witcher 3 is vastly superior to Inquisition. I liked Inquisition but CD Projekt Red is vastly superior to Bioware, now that it is under EA ownership. Bioware is a shadow of it's former self.
Not even close. Witcher 3 is vastly superior to Inquisition. I liked Inquisition but CD Projekt Red is vastly superior to Bioware, now that it is under EA ownership. Bioware is a shadow of it's former self.
Although I certainly enjoy both games, I find it interesting that CD Projekt Red fans tend to forget that the company is both huge and subsidized by the Polish government....not exactly a small-time developer...
Would miss the Pause function, CC, and race, gender, and voice choices. And if DAI is the best selling title thus far, tis a giant shadow....
Just leave him to his vastly inferior opinion.
Although I certainly enjoy both games, I find it interesting that CD Projekt Red fans tend to forget that the company is both huge and subsidized by the Polish government....not exactly a small-time developer...
CD Project Red is part of CD Project Capital Group which also owns GOG.com. CD Project Capital Group has been the largest distributor of computer and video games in Eastern Europe.for many years. The company is also large enough to be listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange and is one of the leading companies in Europe..
CD Project Red is part of CD Project Capital Group which also owns GOG.com. CD Project Capital Group has been the largest distributor of computer and video games in Eastern Europe.for many years. The company is also large enough to be listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange and is one of the leading companies in Europe..
So wat? Biower iz part of EA!1111!
So wat? Biower iz part of EA!1111!
And Bioware needs to get out of there like.. pronto.
EA bought Bioware. It would likely no longer exist if they hadn't.
If all of Bioware's talent just up and left, EA would still own the name and all the IPs. It would just mean that the next Mass Effect will be a phone game or something.
Both are great and different type of games.
However, if you had to put a gun on my head and choose, I would definitely pick Witcher 3. Mainly because the exploration doesn't feel as much of a chore.
Both are great and different type of games.
However, if you had to put a gun on my head and choose, I would definitely pick Witcher 3. Mainly because the exploration doesn't feel as much of a chore.
Although I certainly enjoy both games, I find it interesting that CD Projekt Red fans tend to forget that the company is both huge and subsidized by the Polish government....not exactly a small-time developer...
I'm sure EA, as a corporation, has sleazed it's way out of paying billions of taxes over the years. Corporate welfare is alive and well all over the world.
I'm sure EA, as a corporation, has sleazed it's way out of paying billions of taxes over the years. Corporate welfare is alive and well all over the world.
True or not, what does that have to do with CD Projekt Red not being the smalltime developer its fans make it out to be?
MP.
True or not, what does that have to do with CD Projekt Red not being the smalltime developer its fans make it out to be?
I think it's an attempt at false equivalency. A way to say "These guys are doing something bad so it's okay to bash them while ignoring the flaws of our chosen developers"
Personally I liked TW3 but DA:I was the more enjoyable game. TW3 could very well have used the exact same type of campaign Batman Arkham Knight did "Be Geralt" because that is what it feels like is going on. It's fun, but I am not as invested in the tale and characters as I was DA:I.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
