Witcher 3 - Free Game+ DLC released

zahratustra said:

I was reacting to the post about filler contents. Games don't need to be similar to talk about that.

Click to expand...

You're better off ignoring it.

Ok, let's pretend people have a problem with improper forum decorum in this case

zahratustra said:

Says the guy who thinks that Skyrim is the best thing since the sliced bread? Hah!

Click to expand...

Why go after people for liking a game? I've said it countless times I enjoy Skyrim, Witcher 3, and DA:I. Just because I think one or two of those has more filler than others…no reason to direct stuff at me.

But if you want to actually discuss it, Skyrim did a much better job at hiding the filler than Witcher 3 IMO. Skyrim didn't have a bunch of map markers for monster nests and single chests. Skyrim let you find that on your own. Witcher 3 also gives you tons of insanely over/under-leveled quests right away. Skyrim didn't do this and uses smarter behind the scenes level scaling.

That is my opinion. Many others have pointed out how gamey and non-immersive it is to have a level 30 half-brainless Nekker tear you to pieces and whatnot.

Please make any further comments intelligent and respectful. I'm sure that won't be an issue.

Brumbek said:

Why go after people for liking a game? I've said it countless times I enjoy Skyrim, Witcher 3, and DA:I. Just because I think one or two of those has more filler than others…no reason to direct stuff at me.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry Brumbek it was a bit of a kneejerk reaction. As JD have said - I really shouldn't get involved.
How is that for intelligent and respectful?

Why do I get the feeling that when people are putting "IMO" at the end of a sentence, that they're trying a bit too hard to sound they're convinced of what they're saying?
As for Witcher UI and quest markers...you do realize you can disable those and make the game as immersive as you like? Skyrim had extremely limited options in comparison and exploration required little to none environmental awareness...Bandit strongholds were in plain sight from the road and at the end of each dungeon, a nice little treasure chest was always conveniently placed in the center of the last room and you NEVER had to put any thought on how to get around any obstacles. And don't even get me started on those "puzzles"...those alone should make it obvious how much level of engagement Bethesda expects from a Skyrim player.
As for level scaling...that's one of many reasons that made Skyrim so unimpressionable to me. Never any sense of danger or reward, in exploration or otherwise...even the main story's antagonists were nothing but aerial pests and a convenient way to level up your archery.
I agree that Witcher overdid it with artificial difficulty and some monster/quest level could definitely use rebalancing, but even with it's flaws, the world did not feel so centered around you.

I guess some people just can't let it go

How about that Skyrim vs W3 thread?

Personally, I don't think it's of much use. People are too emotionally invested in this to be rational about it. But I'll gladly repeat why Skyrim destroys W3 in terms of freeform exploration a few more times, especially when it comes to dungeons - as W3 hardly has any. It would be so much easier if people stopped being in denial about it.

Isn't it enough that W3 walks all over Skyrim and all other open world RPGs when it comes to story and quests? Must it be the best at everything?

Created a separate thread for this topic:

http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1061350196#post1061350196

Ok, I guess we have different ways of interpreting it and both games have very different design goals. It would be a better comparison with Rockstar's Red Dead, in my opinion.
Personally, I'd leave out any game vs. game comparison on all fronts entirely, a lot of what factors there are purely subjective matter and it always ends up turning into something like this.
Just check out all the Witcher discussions at Bioware forums.

I don't think it's useless to exchange subjective notions, just as long as people can leave out the emotional baggage.

Since I think both games are great, I really don't have a problem seeing the ups and downs of both.

To me, it seems like a lot of W3 fans outright refuse to acknowledge some of these issues, but I could be wrong.

DArtagnan said:

To me, it seems like a lot of W3 fans outright refuse to acknowledge some of these issues, but I could be wrong.

Click to expand...

I think Bethesda fans are king when it comes to ignoring issues, but it definitely happens with any game.

JDR13 said:

I think Bethesda fans are king when it comes to ignoring issues, but it definitely happens with any game.

Click to expand...

Fans in general are kings of denial, very true, but for this specific issue - I don't see Skyrim fans denying anything. Maybe I haven't looked hard enough, though.

Anyway, it's hardly the end of the world

There are a few reasons why people might enjoy NG+.

Given that TW3 allows you to change difficulty settings anywhere, anytime, I assume this NG+ mode supports higher levels of difficulty. That's the only right way to do NG+, in my view - the same way Diablo and its ilk have handled it. This means I could restart with a fully-loaded Geralt at the highest difficulty and try other tactics and character builds, and that's not nothing.

Another approach this allows is to take a more narrative approach the first time around, and focus the NG+ on collection/completion. Or vice versa - focusing a second playthrough on roleplaying the narrative without the (potential) distraction of character advancement and loot collection.

It's also a good way for some people to re-engage with a game they've already completed, many months down the line, in a way that respects all the time they've already sunk into the game while immediately providing new challenges.

If the difficulty is indeed higher then that's something but very little. Certainly not enough motivation for me to replay. Curious to know how the loot improves, as that was one one of the major weaknesses of the base game. 99% of the dropped loot was worthless once you got a witcher set.

zahratustra said:

I'm sorry Brumbek it was a bit of a kneejerk reaction. As JD have said - I really shouldn't get involved.
How is that for intelligent and respectful?

Click to expand...

Well said! Thanks for this comment.

BoboTheMighty said:

Why do I get the feeling that when people are putting "IMO" at the end of a sentence, that they're trying a bit too hard to sound they're convinced of what they're saying?

Click to expand...

I admit I have that problem. I can sound like my opinion is immutable, but then I change my opinion at times and enter into an exestential crisis. But seriously, yeah, all of us can always strive to be more caring and considerate rather than dogmatic. The only good dogma is Dragon's Dogma, which is one of the BEST GAMES EVER, and if anyone disagrees I will flip … wait…calm down, caring…compassionate…loving. Phew…

BoboTheMighty said:

Skyrim had extremely limited options in comparison and exploration required little to none environmental awareness…Bandit strongholds were in plain sight from the road and at the end of each dungeon, a nice little treasure chest was always conveniently placed in the center of the last room and you NEVER had to put any thought on how to get around any obstacles. And don't even get me started on those "puzzles"…those alone should make it obvious how much level of engagement Bethesda expects from a Skyrim player.

I agree that Witcher overdid it with artificial difficulty and some monster/quest level could definitely use rebalancing, but even with it's flaws, the world did not feel so centered around you.

Click to expand...

Excellent points on both games. I won't disagree at all. See, I don't just blindly love Skyrim or pretty much any other game I don't think. Skyrim totally caters to the player and gives contrived exits to dungeons for convenience. But honestly, I like that. I'd rather not backtrack through an entire dungeon.

And Witcher 3 has an awesome living world that definitely feels more believable than Skyrim. No argument there. Then again, Witcher 3 is a 2015 game and Skyrim is a 2011 game, so there is that.

DArtagnan said:

But I'll gladly repeat why Skyrim destroys W3 in terms of freeform exploration a few more times, especially when it comes to dungeons - as W3 hardly has any. It would be so much easier if people stopped being in denial about it.

Isn't it enough that W3 walks all over Skyrim and all other open world RPGs when it comes to story and quests? Must it be the best at everything?

Click to expand...

DArt, I find myself agreeing with you which confuses me! I do love the hand-crafted locations and exploration of Skyrim despite Skyrim being visually less interesting. And yes…Witcher 3 is oddly lacking in real dungeons…a good point.

And I really like your last point. Each game has its own strengths. That is why I like to discuss it. I love Skyrim, W3, and DA:I for different reasons. Each does some stuff way better than the others. Here's hoping someday we get mix of all three.

DArtagnan said:

It's just another name for what games like Diablo have been doing for decades - as they were designed around this very feature. They also handle it much better than most when it comes to the mechanics.

Click to expand...

Games like Diablo do this because they don't have enough story/world content compared to their level/loot content. It's not a feature as much as a way of extending the loot lottery game without having to create actual story/world content to match. The Witcher 3 has story/world content in abundance, and don't really need a game+ mode.

Mr Smiley said:

Games like Diablo do this because they don't have enough story/world content compared to their level/loot content. It's not a feature as much as a way of extending the loot lottery game without having to create actual story/world content to match. The Witcher 3 has story/world content in abundance, and don't really need a game+ mode.

Click to expand...

Whatever you think of it, it's still a feature that's integral to the design of most Diablo games and clones - and which is much better at extending whatever is there than most New Game+ modes I've seen in other games. But I agree it's just a way of extending life of a game, which is exactly what New Game+ is about.

However, I think Diablo 3 does this better with its new difficulty levels. I think the concept of replaying the same game with enhanced difficulty and more loot is a bit old in the tooth, and there are better ways to extend the life of something like Diablo.

Since I haven't played W3 with this feature, I can't say how well it integrates - but I'd be very surprised if it has significant new things to discover, which is part of why it works so well in Diablo.

I don't think it "needs" it either, but since a lot of people wanted it - it's hardly a bad thing that it's there.