View Single Post

Default 

May 26th, 2010, 00:54
I guess this is all a matter of personal preference but my experience is so different, I had to respond.

Originally Posted by Maylander View Post
- It contained things I consider a huge plus though, such as factions the player had to choose between and locations worth exploring.
I thought the exploration was terrible, because I found no interesting content anywhere. Awful quests, terrible writing. Can you give me an example of something you discovered that was worthwhile? I really tried - I discovered nice scenery but no interesting characters or scenarios.

- The scenery was far more varied than that of Oblivion, with as much variety as Gothic 3 (desert, snowy hills, dense forests, even a samurai city).
Agreed.

- The main quest was as bad as that of Oblivion, so they're pretty much on par there.
TW main quest (actually, all the quests I saw) reached new heights of awfulness - worse than Oblivion, which at least had less embarrassing writing and characterisation. But the main quest is such a small part, so why care about that compared to side quests? While they were linear quest lines, the Brotherhood and Grey Fox storylines in OB were excellent and the game was worth it for those two bits alone. What compares in TW?

- The combat system was more interesting, though it was poorly balanced initially. Among other things it had decent dual-wield
"Interesting" on paper, I agree. In practice, unbalanced, lacking weight, too clicky, even worse animations than OB.

- 3rd person view did not look as if the character was sliding on ice across any surface.
OK. Not a big deal to me.

G3 I loved - in spite of the problems - and I think is well ahead of TW.

-= RPGWatch =-
Dhruin is offline

Dhruin

Dhruin's Avatar
SasqWatch
Super Moderator
RPGWatch Team

#17

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 11,967