What games are you playing now?

kaos_war_monk said:

With a bit of tinkering you can swap keys around in the dosbox config so that you can play Daggerfall using WASD to move around. Fun part then is to remember where you assigned the ADSW keys when you need them

Edit - doh, I'm thinking of Arena, nvm I'll get me coat.


-kaos

Click to expand...

You can remap everything in Daggerfall, too. It's all a matter of getting everything where it feels comfortable in the heat of play, though. And anyway, I'm deep into Morrowind now. I always forget just what a great game it is until I get past the introductory stuff. Sure, Skyrim plays better as a game, but Morrowind's setting, factions, and story are so much better.

Still playing Witcher 3.

To my surprise, I'm getting fatigued with it.

I've played it around 100 hours all in all, but I have to say it doesn't quite work as an open world game like I expected.

The story and quests are great, but the exploration is weak, which I didn't expect. There are almost no dungeons or "unique" locations that stand out - and you never find anything terribly interesting when you finally come across something while free-roaming. Usually, it's just another bunch of weak-ass relics and crafting stuff.

I have to agree with the people who sneer a bit at the "detective mode" - because it's all too streamlined and requires absolutely no thought or investment on the part of the player. It's really unfortunate, because it could have worked with fewer obvious hand-holding moments.

Loot is indeed underwhelming and it's having a greater impact than I originally thought, because I think the treasure hunt gear is too superior - and there's no actual exploration involved. You just go to a marker and loot it. Without the treasure maps, it would have been better - even if the world is probably too big and mostly "samey" looking, so you'd have to rely on luck to find these items.

I'm playing on Death March - and I'm finding it mostly appropriate in terms of combat challenge. It started out slightly rough - but at level 20, I'm no longer having much difficulty with anything. The bestiary took away some of the tactical challenge, as it tells you which sign to use. However, I have experienced a few fights where I could get creative on my own, which is always nice when it works.

Anyway, I'll likely finish it - but I have to say the game just isn't as good as I thought it would be. It's too big for its own good, and it's just not working too well as an open world game.

Skyrim walks all over it when it comes to exploration and freeform gameplay.

In terms of story, it obviously ranks very high - though there are a few awkward moments involving questionable voice actors and inconsistent dialogue.

In some ways, it feels more like the first Witcher than the second, as I think there's a lot of running back and forth between quest givers - going through the motions.

Witcher 2 felt a lot more tight and focused - where this seems padded.

Anyway, I'm leaning towards an 8.5 rating, simply because it's so technically accomplished and a fantastic story experience. But I can't go higher than that - and when it comes to freeform exploration gameplay, I'd much rather be playing a PB or Bethesda game.

I'm not surprised, as the same happened to me. It IS a little too big for it's own good. Skellege in particular gets pointless for exploration, since the rewards and locales are numerous but mostly all the same for all the little islands. I'd just focus on the big isles.

But, the story and writing is pretty damn good most of the time. If you got the bad ending though, I imagine it could be a real downer. Control freaks are punished in this game.

My feeling exactly in that its way too big for its own good as well. As I mentioned in another thread, the huge world actually distract from the awesome story (best in any game I have ever played). I also wished the world was small so that the story feels more tight as well.

The world is very pretty and lot of thought and love has went into it but after a while scenery on its own can go so far. I did also felt that exploring isn't really rewarded like in PB games.

I'm not sure I understand you D'artagnan, what exactly about Skyrim stood out when it comes to exploration?
Rewarding and hand placed loot? Unique quests you discover with their own mini story line? Secret locations with great atmosphere? Intuitive discovery without quest markers? Danger of exploration?

I recently started playing Antharion. Pretty fun little game. It's quirky, has a cool art style and has some nice character building, exploration and fun combat. It's a winner thus far.

I've uploaded a few episodes of gameplay footage on my YouTube channel. Feel free to check it out and see what you think of the game.

DArtagnan said:

Skyrim walks all over it when it comes to exploration and freeform gameplay.

Click to expand...

Freeform gameplay maybe but exploration? The same frigging dungeons, the same frigging ruins, the same frigging forts, the same frigging "radiant" quests. Your copy of Skyrim must have been different than mine. Or, maybe, you are just easily pleased.

I do agree that the initial excitement of exploration in Skyrim and Oblivion gave way pretty quickly, once the reality of generic repetition and levelled enemies/loot kicked in.

zahratustra said:

Freeform gameplay maybe but exploration? The same frigging dungeons, the same frigging ruins, the same frigging forts, the same frigging "radiant" quests. Your copy of Skyrim must have been different than mine. Or, maybe, you are just easily pleased.

Click to expand...

It's true that there aren't infinite assets in Skyrim (even if there's more dungeon variety than any other game - in my experience - though I've only played some thousands of games), but in my copy almost all dungeons had unique elements, including location specific journals and NPCs. In Witcher 3, not only are there almost no dungeons at all, the few that exist look even more alike than those in Skyrim.

Perhaps more importantly, the Skyrim compass system meant that you actually had a chance of coming upon something interesting through free roaming. Witcher 3 system of using magically appearing symbols after looking at a notice board turned out to be one of the worst open world features I've seen. Coupled with the kindergarten detective mode, they effectively ruined almost any sense of natural exploration and discovery. The UI customisation didn't help either, as the game just wasn't prepared for a minimal UI experience.

Also, while Skyrim loot is far from perfect, it's still a lot more interesting than Witcher 3 loot. To me, that is.

But I'm not saying these things to provoke blood boiling. Just stating an opinion, nothing more.

Skyrim has a bunch of serious flaws as well, including crappy balance and middling writing.

Definitely the superior exploration experience, though.

I also forgot to mention that I think it was a terrible design decision to make enemies and combat so prevalent, while making the XP rewards for winning fights miniscule. The only challenge in the game is combat, and yet the quests are what will make you progress, regardless of whether combat is involved or not.

Absurd respawn rates coupled with minimal XP for combat is a very strange design approach.

It's like they wanted you to avoid exploring and just stick to quests. Makes no sense for an open world game. Not to me, at any rate.

DArtagnan said:

I also forgot to mention that I think it was a terrible design decision to make enemies and combat so prevalent, while making the XP rewards for winning fights miniscule. The only challenge in the game is combat, and yet the quests are what will make you progress, regardless of whether combat is involved or not.

Absurd respawn rates coupled with minimal XP for combat is a very strange design approach.

It's like they wanted you to avoid exploring and just sticking to quests.

Click to expand...

I honestly never fight in the Witcher for xp. That's just a side-effect, so it had no negative effect that it was so little. I was surprised at first, but forgot all about that. For me the fighting is so fun and engaging that I didn't pay attention. I love some of the combat design decision they took. Mainly that they have roll and dodge moves separately. And I'm surprised at how well dodge works. It never got in my way, but never felt overpowered.

And I don't mean to make this a Witcher vs Skyrim, as I'm sure no one does, but I just hate the combat systems in any TES games. Skyrim is marginally better, but still bad. And I think it's simply because it's first person. Very hard to convey what you can easily do in third person.

danutz_plusplus said:

I honestly never fight in the Witcher for xp. That's just a side-effect, so it had no negative effect that it was so little. I was surprised at first, but forgot all about that. For me the fighting is so fun and engaging that I didn't pay attention. I love some of the combat design decision they took. Mainly that they have roll and dodge moves separately. And I'm surprised at how well dodge works. It never got in my way, but never felt overpowered.

And I don't mean to make this a Witcher vs Skyrim, as I'm sure no one does, but I just hate the combat systems in any TES games. Skyrim is marginally better, but still bad. And I think it's simply because it's first person. Very hard to convey what you can easily do in third person.

Click to expand...

If you want to be a stealth based archer, Witcher 3 isn't that great

That said, I'm not saying Skyrim is the better game at all. Just that TES and the PB games are better for exploration and freeform gameplay.

Well, I do think Skyrim is better but that's entirely subjective and down to me loving exactly that kind of gameplay experience.

Witcher 3 is much better in terms of story and writing.

I'll agree with some of your points, but I would say they're on equal level when it comes to exploration...not bad, but not great either.
Witcher does a much better job at conveying stories and building atmosphere through the environments, which also never feel like separate zones from the world unlike those draughr hack&slash dungeons.
On the rewarding loot, they're on the same level...they both require overhauls.
It's a shame...this could have been one of the best exploration games yet made, but stupid design decisions like artificial difficulty, too low experience for combat encounters, and hand holding through map markers and "recommended" quest levels, is what brings it down. I really have no idea how these things made it into the game...Gothic I came out fourteen years ago and handled these things without problems.
What I would like to see more in exploration games is more "environmental puzzles" that send you on a search where you have to pay attention to details in your surroundings...sort of like that scene in Hobbit, when Bilbo finds the keyhole in the mountain.

BoboTheMighty said:

I'm not sure I understand you D'artagnan, what exactly about Skyrim stood out when it comes to exploration?
Rewarding and hand placed loot? Unique quests you discover with their own mini story line? Secret locations with great atmosphere? Intuitive discovery without quest markers? Danger of exploration?

Click to expand...

Skyrim has freeform exploration in abundance - and even if the locations show up on your compass when you're near them, you can still go out in the wild and have a decent shot at finding something unique. I'm not sure how the compass takes that away.

To me, that's exactly what makes exploration appealing.

I've never really understood the complaints people make about Skyrim dungeons being the same repetitive dungeon over and over.

Of all the games I've played, and let's just say I've played more than most, it's the one game that has had the most variety when it comes to dungeons.

Yes, there's a limited amount of assets of which dungeons are composed - meaning you will see visual repetition - and more the longer you play.

How could anyone realistically expect otherwise? The game has literally hundreds of dungeons. Are people expecting them ALL to look unique and feel unique? That's ludicrous.

In any case, I think Skyrim has a massive amount of unique content when it comes to dungeon exploration. Even when you feel like you've explored a similar fort just moments ago, you can still expect to find location specific journals or other story-oriented content. The layouts are almost all unique, very much unlike Oblivion and Morrowind.

The game had 8 dungeon-specific designers working around the clock to create unique dungeons - where Oblivion had just one.

What other game has more variety and unique content when it comes to dungeons? I'm really curious.

BoboTheMighty said:

I'll agree with some of your points, but I would say they're on equal level when it comes to exploration…not bad, but not great either.
Witcher does a much better job at conveying stories and building atmosphere through the environments, which also never feel like separate zones from the world unlike those draughr hack&slash dungeons.
On the rewarding loot, they're on the same level…they both require overhauls.
It's a shame…this could have been one of the best exploration games yet made, but stupid design decisions like artificial difficulty, too low experience for combat encounters, and hand holding through map markers and "recommended" quest levels, is what brings it down. I really have no idea how these things made it into the game…Gothic I came out fourteen years ago and handled these things without problems.
What I would like to see more in exploration games is more "environmental puzzles" that send you on a search where you have to pay attention to details in your surroundings…sort of like that scene in Hobbit, when Bilbo finds the keyhole in the mountain.

Click to expand...

I think they're very far from equal in terms of exploration, but that's ok.

Witcher 3 has a number of regions separated by loading screens, where Skyrim is one massive landscape with loading screens for smaller locations. So, I'd say they're about even on that score.

But I'd say Skyrim has much more interaction and it also has objects existing in the actual world - complete with working physics. That's a lot harder to accomplish in an open world environment without area division, because of the data involved when storing a precise location for each object. Witcher 3 just has a "pile" of objects with generic images in place of the actual objects. Feels fake in comparison, in my opinion.

I agree that Gotic was fantastic - but it was also much, much smaller in terms of scope.

I also agree that I'd love to have more puzzles and riddles - both of a much more challenging nature than we're used to seeing in these modern AAA games.

DArtagnan said:

Skyrim has freeform exploration in abundance - and even if the locations show up on your compass when you're near them, you can still go out in the wild and have a decent shot at finding something unique. I'm not sure how the compass takes that away.

Click to expand...

We most definitely haven't played the same game. "when you're near them"? Surely you mean miles from them? You don't remember people complaining exactly about that?

DArtagnan said:

I've never really understood the complaints people make about Skyrim dungeons being the same repetitive dungeon over and over.

Click to expand...

Hookay… how do you square this sentence
"Of all the games I've played, and let's just say I've played more than most, it's the one game that has had the most variety when it comes to dungeons."
with this
"Yes, there's a limited amount of assets of which dungeons are composed - meaning you will see visual repetition - and more the longer you play.
"? Just after how many times does the similar dungeon inhabited by similar mobs and filled with similar loot stops being "varied"? For me, after about 5 or 6. For you, apparently much, much longer.

DArtagnan said:

Even when you feel like you've explored a similar fort just moments ago, you can still expect to find location specific journals or other story-oriented content. The layouts are almost all unique, very much unlike Oblivion and Morrowind.

Click to expand...

Ahhh! So that's what you call "unique"! That you go W-N-N instead of N-N-W and, lo and behold, there is a book (or some papers) with a different story! I got you now!

DArtagnan said:

The game had 8 dungeon-specific designers working around the clock to create unique dungeons - where Oblivion had just one.

Click to expand...

And what's is this suppose to prove? That even a large number of devs doesn't guarantee a quality of the product?

DArtagnan said:

What other game has more variety and unique content when it comes to dungeons? I'm really curious.

Click to expand...

So, basically, you didn't like TW3 because it didn't have dungeons. Why didn't you say earlier that you are strictly a dungeon kind of a guy?

zahratustra said:

We most definitely haven't played the same game. "when you're near them"? Surely you mean miles from them? You don't remember people complaining exactly about that?

Click to expand...

Miles? Sure

Why exaggerate like that?

Hookay… how do you square this sentence
"Of all the games I've played, and let's just say I've played more than most, it's the one game that has had the most variety when it comes to dungeons."
with this
"Yes, there's a limited amount of assets of which dungeons are composed - meaning you will see visual repetition - and more the longer you play.
"? Just after how many times does the similar dungeon inhabited by similar mobs and filled with similar loot stops being "varied"? For me, after about 5 or 6. For you, apparently much, much longer.

Click to expand...

Sure, for some people - similar assets used when designing dungeons means the dungeons are identical.

To me, it means they look similar - but the content is key.

Ahhh! So that's what you call "unique"! That you go W-N-N instead of N-N-W and, lo and behold, there is a book (or some papers) with a different story! I got you now!

Click to expand...

Emotionally invested in this a bit, are we?

But yes, different stories during exploration means something to me - that's true.

And what's is this suppose to prove? That even a large number of devs doesn't guarantee a quality of the product?

Click to expand...

Did I mention proof? I'm just pointing out that there were eight times the people working on the topic we're discussing. Which is dungeon variety. If you think eight times the people don't really mean anything in terms of that - then I guess we see things very differently indeed.

So, basically, you didn't like TW3 because it didn't have dungeons. Why didn't you say so earlier?

Click to expand...

Can we get past this hurt-feelings stage where you're not actually reading - just reacting?

I said I'm leaning towards 8.5 for Witcher 3.

In what world is that disliking it?

Take a deep breath and read this:

I'm talking about the exploration aspect of Witcher 3 and Skyrim - and I'm pointing out why I prefer Skyrim when it comes to exploration, and in particular when it comes to dungeons.

Is it really that big a deal to you?

You think Witcher 3 is better than Skyrim when it comes to exploration and that's cool. I don't have a problem with that.

When it comes to creating immersive, organic environments that present a certain theme or atmosphere( war for instance), they're leagues apart. It's not a matter of loading screens…I don't remember anyone raising a riot with the release of Dragonborn DLC in Skyrim, or Point Lookout in Fallout III.
I think it's safe to say that Witcher wins on macro, Skyrim on micro level in world design. Also Geralt has a lot more freedom when it comes to movement…jumping on ledges, over fences, diving in, sailing, using Aard or other signs on objects etc, etc…Skyrim was a lot more restrictive there.
This is more of an adventure game, with it's own "predetermined pace"…more comparable to RDR… seems like you went in expecting something at least a bit closer to sandbox.

BoboTheMighty said:

When it comes to creating immersive, organic environments that present a certain theme or atmosphere( war for instance), they're leagues apart. It's not a matter of loading screens…I don't remember anyone raising a riot with the release of Dragonborn DLC in Skyrim, or Point Lookout in Fallout III.
I think it's safe to say that Witcher wins on macro, Skyrim on micro level in world design. Also Geralt has a lot more freedom when it comes to movement…jumping on ledges, over fences, diving in, sailing, using Aard or other signs on objects etc, etc…Skyrim was a lot more restrictive there.
This is more of an adventure game, with it's own "predetermined pace"…more comparable to RDR… seems like you went in expecting something at least a bit closer to sandbox.

Click to expand...

I don't really think it's safe to say much of anything in terms of what we're discussing. Skyrim was a much larger hit, but that doesn't prove anything in that way.

I don't believe I've even mentioned organic environments or atmosphere, for instance.

I don't know what you mean by macro or why you think that's important or relevant to the discussion at hand.

I'm talking about exploration and freeform gameplay, and I've been very clear about why I think Skyrim wins in that way.

As for my expectations, I went in expecting a strong open world game - as that's how Witcher 3 was advertised - and I'm left disappointed.

I really had no expectations in terms of sandbox gameplay, and I don't see how it relates to the topic at hand.

I wouldn't want to play either game if I was looking for sandbox gameplay.

As for freedom of movement or magic effects - I don't think there's a clear winner. Skyrim would win when it comes to physics or object manipulation - but I think Witcher 3 is more fluid and flexible in terms of climbing and jumping.

Anyway, I don't know if people want to turn this into Skyrim vs Witcher 3 - but that's certainly not my intention.

I smell a lot of emotional investment - and that's cool, but it doesn't really relate to my point.

How about you guys create a separate thread for that discussion? And it would be nice if a mod could move the last 16-17 posts. I hate when this thread gets derailed by debates.