I did say I thought I misunderstood you. Was trying my best to have a sincere, productive discussion and to understand differences in how we play games.
Am doing my best to move forward. The ball is in your court, man.
Best regards.
__
Sure, let's try.
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.
Not sure what I've said to make you believe this, but that's not what I'm about.
I generally prefer to avoid combat when possible. Meaning, if there's an option to go with stealth, I go stealth. If I can talk my way out of a situation - I usually go that route, and so on.
However, for games where combat is a huge and mandatory part of the experience - like Witcher 3 - I prefer combat where I can at least choose my own playstyle.
That's not possible in Witcher 3 - because you're Geralt, and that means you can't be a stealthy archer type character - which is my main preference.
If I can't be a stealth archer - I want to be a dual wielding stealth character. I can't be that in Witcher 3.
If I can't be either of those, then something like a Holy Paladin is among my alternative picks. I can't be that in Witcher 3.
If I can't be that, then I - at the very least - want to be able to dual wield. I can't do that in Witcher 3.
So, you see, in terms of playstyle - the game already screwed me over.
However, if I can't pick my own playstyle - I can still enjoy combat if it's well executed and it's full of interesting choices when I progress my character.
Witcher 3 isn't really full of that - because the most interesting choice you make is really about using magic or not - then what two spells you want to focus on.
Which is ok, but not terribly exciting.
But I really like the Igni sign - so I pretty much just focused on that.
Problem is that the VAST majority of enemies actually didn't require much in the way of tactics or strategy. The VAST majority of combat challenge is literally about dodging and timing - and absolutely nothing else.
In the end, that means the combat was not only very limited in terms of my arsenal - and my choice of playstyle - it was also very, very straightforward in terms of my tactical options during combat.
But that's me.
You find joy in conquering complex physical button schemes. Games are primarily physical sport for you. Nothing wrong with that.
Again, I have no idea where you're getting that from, but I think my above explanation should spell that out.
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.
What makes you think I don't enjoy those things? I do.
That said, I don't follow when you're calling them challenges. I have no idea what challenge you're talking about here.
But I'm pretty sure I've openly stated that I really, really like the story and characters in Witcher 3. Many, many times - in fact.
If you've missed that, you simply haven't been paying attention at all.
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.
Again, I don't see the challenge. Of course, if you think it's a challenge to read and listen to conversations - then I guess I follow.
To me, though - that's very passive and utterly void of challenge.
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 actually was - I'm just good at those things. I'm not being a smart ass, but I really am good at games that require a lot of fast movement and dodging.
That's largely what combat was about - pretty much regardless.
I'm not sure why you think I don't know that other people love Witcher 3. I'm extremely aware of that - and I actually think I know why in most cases. Perfectly valid reasons, too. Just not my own personal preferences.
I assume that's ok with you?
Well, I don't assume that - because you seem somewhat upset that I don't like the game as much as you do.
It's simply not possible to accurately measure the value of different types of games using a single yardstick.
I completely agree.
Not sure if anyone here is doing that, though.
I'm exclusively articulating my own opinion about the game - and why I didn't enjoy it enough to finish it.
I don't tell other people why it's a "bad" game. I'm explaining why I'm not as fond of it as most people seem to be.
That's really all it is.
Of course, I'm not a person who thinks it's appropriate to be ashamed of holding a minority opinion. I think any opinion is valid. Your opinion is just as valid as my own.
But I'm not going to sugarcoat anything - or serve my opinion up without being extremely clear about what I really think. That's just my way.