Regarding those classes - I think they work on full simulation of the cyberpunk city, right? So I assume that initially you will get some small tasks related to your job/class. For example if you are journalist you have to go to the newsroom in the morning and tell your boss what you are working on etc.


New interview with Mike Pondsmith:

https://www.gamereactor.eu/news/5625…%20surprising/

I don’t think Ive made it a secret around here that combat is most important to me in games. So I know dark souls is almost all about combat and Im totally fine with that.:)

I spent 150 hours in the Witcher 3 and beat the main game and 1 dlc I plan to finish the second one ( blood and wine) eventually but the amount of cutscenes in that one is crazy. I would watch 20 min of cutscenes only to be presented with “let’s go” or a “not ready yet” with “let’s go” leading to another 20 min of dialogue and cutscenes.

Exploration is poor in TW3 basically it’s monster nest, bandit camp, treasure chest, liberate town ( which usually is kill 2-3 monsters or bandits) or kill random monster over and over again. average combat and no experience or meaningful loot for combat makes me want to explore even less.

Character progression is poor as well. I actually stopped spending my points around leve 23 or so because there was nothing else really interesting to pick and I didn’t want to get rid of my current skills since I can only activate 12 at a time.

Ill just stop there and not even get in to the leveled loot and quests since this isnt a Witcher thread but the game had many flaws imo. I did spend 150 hours though so what it did well was done amazingly well. I have no regrets with my time spent with the game but it could have been much better.

Seems to me we're seeing the difference between combat-driven players and players who enjoy deep stories. There are games that overdo the cut scenes but I didn't see Witcher 3 as one of those games. Enjoyed the dialogue as that is how the story is told.

Exploration also had a strong story-telling function in Witcher 3. I enjoyed the exploration as part of the story. But exploration primarily as a means to find more combat? I wouldn't have enjoyed that or exploration for the purpose of bigger and bigger battles.

Level up was fine as part of the story but I wasn't seeking more and more combat.

I don't believe one way is right or the other wrong. Seems to me that we ought to understand we aren't all playing for the same reasons. What's good for you might be bad for me, and vice versa.

Story driven RPGs are simply different from combat driven RPGs. Seems to me that's as it should be.

__

I know, I was just teasing you. I had to point out the irony though since Dark Souls is literally 95% combat. :)

I think you're exaggerating, but that wouldn't be anything new around here when it comes to TW3. Some people love to talk about the overabundance of cutscenes, but I never had an issue with them, and I'm not even a big fan of cinematics. I simply found them so much better than in other RPGs that I never felt like there were too many. Besides, it's not as if you're forced to watch them.

Your opinion. As I've said, I didn't have any issues with exploration in TW3 outside of the sub-par loot system. I loved how realistic the world felt especially compared to most other open-world RPGs. People explore for different reasons though, and I don't associate combat and XP with good exploration.

I wouldn't call it poor, but it's definitely limited. If you don't like the limitations you can always install the combat mod that overhauls it.

Quests aren't leveled unless you have level-scaling toggled in the menu. In fact, TW3 is the only RPG I know of that actually let's you choose whether or not you want level-scaling. Unfortunately that doesn't apply to loot which imo is the weakest aspect of the game.

They've heavily invested in R&D department and one of grants was for…‘City Creation – Comprehensive technology for the creation of “living”, large scale urban environments playable in real-time, based on rules, artificial intelligence and automation"
…whatever that is.

(And they have an architect working with their team on this).

What's this with "too many cutscenes"?
Cutscenes can be skipped. At least on PC.

I wish I could skip the damned grind praised by some the same way.

That is more or less, accurate. Seems some people went into expecting TES experience…this is entirely story driven: world exploration/progression, quest, combat/leveling is entirely built around it.
Simple main story comparison between these games directly shows this.

When it comes to storytelling, ambiance, quest discovery and world design/building it's the best there is…dungeon simulator would feel out of place here, some people cannot seem to understanding this.

A recent article on this by landscape designer ( including Dishonored, Mass Effect):

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20…ecommendations

It demonstrates a tremendous proficiency in the art of virtual landscape design I hadn't seen before. The landscapes are so good, that I am rather disappointed I can't see and explore them for the first time again. Its massiveness gave it a lot of space to play with but it manages to include everything from manmade formal gardens and agricultural landscapes, to mountainous and coastal landscapes forged by nature alone. And it is the details in every context and typology where the excellence is fully demonstrated and can be appreciated.

Yes, the only two negatives of the game: Shitty loot and very easy combat.
Been playing it for the story and the nice graphics in the end.

And you played it for the correct reason.
Want loot that's not supposed to be broken and used as crafting material? Go Diablo 3.
Want hard combat? Go indie games like Regalia. Yea, don't go dodgers, that's QTE2.0, not hard.

They are probably experienced enough to avoid this kind of leash on players.

[QUOTE=RPGFool;1061462181] It has a deep rich story and isn't just a console player button masher. /QUOTE]
Then a PC player one button masher. If TW3 is not a button masher, it disqualifies 99 pc of all products from being button masher.

Certainly, to me, the game felt a lot like being on auto-pilot. That was mostly because of the "Witcher senses" mechanic - because that's exactly the kind of gameplay I prefer over combat.

I would likely have ADORED the game if I'd been challenged mentally by the quests and especially those detective segments. That would have been a really fun challenge for me - and I absolutely hated that I was simply clicking red stuff without knowing why, half the time.

Atrociously bad game design - but, again, a concession most likely based on not wanting to scare away the casual audience.

I'm not embellishing anything here - and I truly felt like I was going from cutscene (dialogue sequence) to cutscene with minimal personal input, beyond the occasional C&C decision.

I can't stay engaged by that kind of drone-like gameplay and even though I was loving the story - I ultimately had to give up in complete boredom around halfway through Skellige. I did last ~100 hours, though - which is a true testament to the quality of the story.

As for combat, I'd say if you play on anything except Death March - it's definitely more of a button masher than the previous two Witcher games. I started out on the second hardest level (forget the name) - but I switched to Death March because I never felt challenged.

Naturally, this is only true if you're an experienced RPG player who're invested in developing a powerful character.

I imagine the game might well be reasonably challenging for people who literally just mash buttons without caring about creature strategies and patterns.

I suppose you must be trolling for fun.. as usual

But had you bothered to read dialog while playing the game (instead of mindlessly button mashing) you would have known what trails you were following, why you were clicking, (and probably lots of other things that escaped your attention). And since you didn't bother to read dialog, or otherwise try to understand why you were mashing buttons at any given time, it's no wonder you didn't understand what you were doing.

As usual you end up tripping over your own contradictory arguments -- your last comment that the game might have been challenging."for people who literally just mash buttons" in fact corresponds with your own description of how you played the game.

__

Why are you discussing it with him? He can't love the game as it doesn't have Elizabeth character, all females in it are independant "bitches" who won't do anything for you regardless of what you do. No, Elizabeth doesn't appear in the game even after 100 hours.

Because of "the unforgivable sin", he'll go nitpicking just anything in the game. I'd do it too, if I was him. I mean, I do exactly the same thing on all grinders, noticing what normally shouldn't be noticable, but am always ready to close one eye when something is not that good in a nongrinder.

@NewDArt, further to my last response to you, I believe I must have misunderstood your comments. That I missed what you were trying to say. So… a do over.

Seems to me based on you prior description of games you like and excel at, your proficiency at combat, and games you don't like, etc., you apparently consider complicated button mashing (and lots of it) as a highly desirable aspect of good games. You don't so much object to mindless button mashing; rather, what you object to is physically simple clicking and button mashing.

You find joy in conquering complex physical button schemes. Games are primarily physical sport for you. Nothing wrong with that.

Thing is that many of us play games for entirely different or additional reasons. We enjoy deep stories, complex characters, and rich detailed environments filled with complex conflicts and scenery different than our normal world. These present challenges of understanding to us. As we begin to understand the new characters, environments, lands, conflicts, etc. we find joy from the mental tasks and challenges we experience.

TW3 was the latter type of game. It wasn't "mindless" at all. Quite the opposite actually. the challenge was primarily mental, to understand, interact, and learn about a world, conflicts, people, etc. different than our own norm. In the process we learn and sometimes end up understanding ourselves and our own world just a little better.

TW3 wasn't primarily a physical performance based, physically challenging game. There was some of that of course, but that wasn't the central focus of TW3; hence, it wasn't your type of game. But even though it didn't satisfy your needs it did bring enjoyment to many others for entirely different reasons.

It's simply not possible to accurately measure the value of different types of games using a single yardstick.

Regards.

__

This is just an unbelievable BS saki (just like DArt damning TW3 for the lack of dungeons). You mean that exploring Novigrad or Oxenfurt (to just name the two) with their beauty and complexity is not an exploration?

I'm more than happy to exchange about the virtues and flaws of most games, but I don't feel like wasting my time on people who get personal about it.

It's simply not worth it, sorry.

You've got to get over yourselves first - and then it can become productive.

As for joxer, he generally doesn't get personal - but his mindset is a little too rigid and deliberately obtuse for my tastes when it comes to things like this.

I think he's pretty smart in his own ways - but too closed-minded and opposed to differing opinions overall.

I think that you have your terms mixed up DArt. "Getting personal" means attacking a person rather than an argument. That's where "personal" comes from you know?
I don't have a problem with you or saki but I do have a problem with some of your arguments.

There's no doubt that TW3 holds your hand on the default settings. However, it's also the most customizable RPG I've ever played in terms of HUD options and the mini-map.

I had pretty much every optional icon and marker disabled, and that made a significant difference. It forced me to utilize the main map, and actually look around, to see where I was going and made the game a lot more enjoyable for me.

Sure, it's exploration - but not exploration that I found interesting. I also don't find driving around in GTAV very interesting from an exploration point of view - because I'm not engaged by endless buildings and samey NPCs everywhere.

That said, those cities are VERY pretty - but that's not really what I'm looking for as the primary drive to explore.

I should probably add that I find cities really, really boring in most RPGs - including Skyrim. I'm much, much more into dungeons with unique stories or useful stuff to find.

The ultimate kind of exploration, to me, would be in games like System Shock 2 and Prey. I absolutely adore that kind of setting and sense of discovery - finding out what happened in a room or whatever scenario. Audio logs, journals, books, loot and so on.

Skyrim and Fallout 4 are great because a lot of the dungeons go for the same kind of exploration, though they're obviously not as detailed and thought through - because there are so many of them.