In some ways, Gothic 3 is the best of the Gothic series. In other ways…well, not so much. For a small example: PB finally fixed the awful U.I. and controls of the first 2 games, but somewhere along the way, they screwed up the strong combat mechanics of the previous Gothics, which rendered the improved U.I./controls of Gothic 3 as somewhat trivial. I would much rather wrestle with a poor U.I. and have rewarding combat than have a good U.I. with poorly designed combat mechanics. This is just one example of trading one problem for a new, more severe one.
One aspect that made Gothic 3 immensely enjoyable for me was the town liberation/takeover element. Not only were these quests simply a lot of fun and rewarding to complete, but they did a great job of conveying a believable war-time atmosphere in an open-world fantasy setting with a great sense of player impact on this conflict. This aspect of Gothic 3 made it worth playing for many enjoyable hours, despite some of the poor elements of the game. I wish Skyrim would have had a similar war-time feel to its Civil War - it just doesn't feel as if it's
really happening in the same way that Gothic 3's war feels. (This doesn't really matter in the long run though, considering that Skyrim is miles ahead of Gothic 3 in every other conceivable area
)
All in all, I think that Gothic 3 is (at least at times) a
very good game that suffered under the weight of its own ambitions and a rushed release which tarnished the reputation of the game thanks to a wide range of technical problems upon release. While many of the bugs and other technical issues have been fixed over time, some elements are unfortunately just a part of the game forever, such as the poor combat and other design flaws. "Untapped Potential" was the lasting impression I got from Pyranha Bytes' most ambitious game to date, but despite the lingering feeling of knowing that the game could have turned out better, it was still an enjoyable experience.