N
NewDArt
Guest
If I can interpret your answer as "I've never done that, no." - then sure
Sure. I think we simply disagree about what is and what isn't worth skipping.
Yup
Witcher 3 - Revenues
- Thread starter HiddenX
- Start date
If I can interpret your answer as "I've never done that, no." - then sure
Yup
If I can interpret your answer as "I've never done that, no." - then sure
It's like I said, I listen to it if I want to. If I don't want to (i.e. not in the mood) then no, I don't feel the need to force myself to listen to it.
N
NewDArt
Guest
Ok, so you've never done that. Cool, thanks
I guess that would make it harder for you to understand me in this way.
Ok, so you've never done that. Cool, thanks
I guess that would make it harder for you to understand me in this way.
I'm not sure how much that has to do with me not understanding why someone would force themself to do something they don't want to do. To me, that sounds more like an OCD type of thing. I don't mean that in a negative way.
N
NewDArt
Guest
If you don't understand wanting the whole story and presentation without necessarily being in the mood for exhaustive dialogue when you go on a quest - then there's probably little I can do to aid your understanding.
I can see why someone would consider it OCD, especially if they're not particularly interested in nuanced human behavior.
That's the hard to understand part I was talking about
If by whole story and presentation you mean even the mundane things, which seems to be what you're saying, then yeah, I agree there's probably little you can do to make me understand that.
N
NewDArt
Guest
Sure, if you think the quests are mundane - then that's what I'm saying.
To me, the majority of them were really quite interesting - but I still wasn't always in the mood for the exhaustive dialogue involved.
Again, you don't understand the nuances involved, and that's ok.
I don't recall ever saying that, but ok.
I was pretty clear in that I was talking about the more basic conversations with cookie cutter NPCs.
But I realize it's easier for you to project that the other person just doesn't understand, and I'm fine with that.
N
NewDArt
Guest
Well, the example we've been talking about for a little while was a quest with unpredictably exhaustive dialogue.
In Witcher 3, I can be in the mood for a nice quest and interesting dialogue. The problem, however, is that a lot of the quests have a TON of dialogue - and you don't really know that before taking the quest.
I never said anything about cookie cutter conversations being the problem. That was you focusing on that part, even though I already said I skipped repeats. I don't deliberately listen to cookie cutter conversations, why would I? I'm saying the game is full of interesting dialogue - and unlike you, I couldn't always predict when something interesting would be said.
I said the problem was that the game simply had too much dialogue - even during many of the trivial interactions. Beyond that, the problem is also that the game isn't very interesting OUTSIDE of the dialogues.
In any case, it certainly doesn't feel like you understand or want to understand.
So, maybe we should stop wasting more time in this thread?
Well, the example we've been talking about for a little while was a quest with unpredictably exhaustive dialogue.
In Witcher 3, I can be in the mood for a nice quest and interesting dialogue. The problem, however, is that a lot of the quests have a TON of dialogue - and you don't really know that before taking the quest.
I never said anything about cookie cutter conversations being the problem.
I said the problem was that the game simply had too much dialogue - even during many of the trivial interactions. Beyond that, the problem is also that the game isn't very interesting OUTSIDE of the dialogues.
In any case, it certainly doesn't feel like you understand or want to understand.
So, maybe we should stop wasting more time in this thread?
I think you meant the example you've been talking about perhaps. I thought it was pretty obvious way back when I said "peasants, guards, etc" that I wasn't talking about skipping any dialogue of significant importance.
As far as the game not being interesting outside of dialogue, now you're just drifting back into subjectiveness again. I'd wager that a great many people would disagree, but that's really a moot point.
You can pretend I don't want to understand. I'm cool with that. Anyways, I agree this is becoming a waste of time.
Just wait until Star Citizen is out
I hear it'll be out two weeks after Grimoire
....and the first of many, many argument threads between JDR and DArtagnan. I've missed those!
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 8,836
- Joined
- April 12, 2009
- Messages
- 23,459
And I just grabbed a bowl of popcorn.
Damn.
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2009
- Messages
- 23,459
S
sakichop
Guest
Yup, it's subjective
I agree that combat is better in Witcher 3 - but I found Witcher 2 was better balanced in terms of challenge. That was for the release version, though - which you probably didn't play. Didn't find it unresponsive, though, just less refined and it required more personal skill.
They changed some significant combat stuff with the EE - though I forget the details. I just know that it played differently when I replayed it a few years ago.
C&C in Witcher 3 is better, yes, but I don't really care about C&C when I'm not playing my own character. To me, that's like choosing what another person should do in a story - which feels more like those old Sword and Sorcery books than anything else.
But you're right, Witcher 2 has less exploration - though there IS some exploration. So, I can't agree it was non-existant. What's there was much more interesting, to me, because the areas were much smaller and they could fill them up with less filler crap.
The way you're describing Witcher 3 - going from quest to quest - is exactly how Witcher 2 played as well. The difference is that Witcher 3 is bigger and has freeform exploration - which didn't do much for me, as I found exploration dull and bland.
I suspect I would have loved Witcher 3 if I played it like that - but I found the game more or less presented itself as this huge open world game that's supposed to be full of great stuff to find, like Skyrim or Risen.
Since I found the freeform exploration extremely underwhelming, I was left highly dissatisfied, as that's the kind of gameplay I prefer.
I was never big on endless cutscenes and dialogues. I've always been more of a gameplay guy - and story should serve as the motivation FOR the gameplay, not as THE primary gameplay.
But that's me, and we're all different in that way.
If you're big on sitting back and picking your dialogue option - watch a nice cutscene for another 5 minutes - pick dialogue option - and so on, then Witcher 3 is easily the best CRPG of all time.
I tend to get impatient when a game has too much of that - and Witcher 3 has a ridiculous amount of it. I tend to want to get on with it and go develop my character, find some loot, kill some stuff, explore some cave - and so on.
Since all those things were middling - at best - in Witcher 3, it just isn't for me.
I think we're pretty much in agreement about everything except which game is better.
I didn't like the density of the witcher 2 because I also am not a big fan of endless dialogue and cutscenes. The density of w2 gives me no place to hide when I want a break from it. The w3 with the bigger world and more things to do ( even if I agree they're middling) gave me an opportunity to take a break from the dialogue.
I'm a combat and exploration gamer first dialogue and story still play a part in my enjoyment but it's usually pretty small. That's why W3 impresses me so much in this area. for me to keep playing mainly for the dialogue and story speaks to how well done it is.
I get a bit of a feeling from your post though that if the W3 was the same length as W2 you might lean more toward W3, but I could be wrong. I get the impression that you like W2 better because it ended sooner and you could be done with the cutscenes.
N
NewDArt
Guest
I get a bit of a feeling from your post though that if the W3 was the same length as W2 you might lean more toward W3, but I could be wrong. I get the impression that you like W2 better because it ended sooner and you could be done with the cutscenes.
I would have loved Witcher 3 if it was like Witcher 2 - only longer.
My main issue was that I'm more into freeform open world exploration than story-driven CRPGs.
I mean, I don't even like some of the "best" of those, including Planescape Torment.
So, that was the angle from which I approached and fully expected Witcher 3 to deliver a strong alternative to the good open world games, including Gothic and Skyrim.
But otherwise we quite agree
N
NewDArt
Guest
I hear it'll be out two weeks after Grimoire
….and the first of many, many argument threads between JDR and DArtagnan. I've missed those!
To be honest, I thought we could avoid those for a while longer
I'll do my part in not doing it again for a while.
S
sakichop
Guest
I would have loved Witcher 3 if it was like Witcher 2 - only longer.
My main issue was that I'm more into freeform open world exploration than story-driven CRPGs.
I mean, I don't even like some of the "best" of those, including Planescape Torment.
So, that was the angle from which I approached and fully expected Witcher 3 to deliver a strong alternative to the good open world games, including Gothic and Skyrim.
But otherwise we quite agree
Yeah, I gotcha.
I didn't like torment either and to take it a step further I prefer IWD over BG.
iwd (and more so iwd2) were fun. BG-2 was a lot of fun; I got bogged down in BG and never finished so i can't really comment. I guess I like mindless hacking with a bit of story thrown in here and there to keep it motivated. Actually that is not totally true - i really liked divinity earlier games (which had better stories than D:OS); i don't know what i like. Witcher 3 is ok but i still need to finish.
![:]](https://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/images/smilies/pleased.gif "Pleased :]")
I don't think anyone is a fan of endless cutscenes, but the only part of TW2 that fits your description is the prologue. Are you sure you played the rest of the game?
I get that you don't like a lot of cutscenes, and that TW2 does have a lot in comparison to other open-world RPGs, but I don't get the blatant exaggeration. You'd have people who haven't played the game thinking that you just sit there and watch cutscenes for hours on end. That's not even remotely close to reality.
BoboTheMighty
SasqWatch
…ten pages later
NewDart: I'm tired of my own arguing.
Seriously dude, it's fine to disagree…a few comments , reason why we have forums, but dozen plus more of spamming the topic even when unrelated to matter at hand: it's not what is being discussed, it's you. At some point, you realize people have their own reasons for seeing things differently and simply move on.
Kind of like watching a person in the street trying to argue with everyone around on what favorite food should taste like and to prove them otherwise.
At the end of the day, what's the point? Is there some kind of "prize", I'm missing here?