Fenixp

Well the reason I mentioned the two was that Dragon's Dogma tramples Dragon Age in combat, world design and exploration departments whereas Witcher 3 destroys it in storytelling. If you're the kind of player that primarily looks for either of the two, I think you're quite likely to prefer them to DA: I - and I'd say majority of players do play RPGs either primarily for story or primarily for combat and character development. You could argue that Dragon Age: Inquisition is a good middle ground, but my experience was that it did neither of these aspects very well + screwed up other things all by its own. That's not to say DA: I is a bad game per se and I'm sure some players will find things to like so much that they'll prefer it to the two I mentioned, but in my eyes, DA: I was made pretty much obsolete within a year of release. If it focused more on the story I might have finished it purely to wrap up the trilogy, it... Didn't really tho, so ... Eh.

Yeah I still don't think Dragon Age Inquisition has much of a place in a world where Witcher 3 and Dragon's Dogma exist. Darkest Dungeon is such a ballsy game. It's a game specifically designed to depress player, to make him feel powerless and to put him into situations which are out of his control - but not often enough to break him and let him put the game down soon, oooh no, Darkest Dungeon'll work on you for dozens of hours before you feel utterly drained, get up, and uninstall the game, because depression and nervous strain is not exactly what we play videogames for, right? But then you remember Darkest Dungeon, install it and go through the motions yet again, knowing all too well what awaits you. Designing a game specifically for players to give up on it out of sheer desperation and frustration, yet making it just satisfying and engaging enough to keep player intrigued for dozens of hours is one of the bravest design decisions I've seen lately - and I both applaud and hate Red Hook for it, because those are exactly emotions I'd say a Lovecraftian game should strive to inspire. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu3GHeVaLew

That's fine as long as your general opinion's positively aligned with Satan's

As I said, Steam reviews alone don't actually mean much - just that the game works and does what it advertises to, more or less. Which alone serves as a good filter to start research by, say, opening Youtube and watching gameplay videos.

All I usually have to do is check the reviews. If it's mixed or lower, I don't even take a look at such a game. When a whole bunch of people actually like something though, I have a tendency of looking further into it - naturally, that doesn't mean it's not a POS and I tend to automatically skip anything Early Access, Multiplayer-only and Survival, but all in all, I found some cool games that way. Well, Westerado. And I didn't really like it very much. ... Eh, it can work's what I'm saying. Alternatively, just ignore Steam and watch GOG releases.

Yeah, I can definitely see where you're coming from. When it comes to lore and storytelling, Dishonored 2 certainly was a step back from the original. I was mostly loving the gameplay changes and improvements in level design, but Karnaca just didn't have feeling of an actual place as strong as Dunwall did (it's still leagues above what most games have to offer tho)

I get Mankind Divided, had the same feeling, but why Dishonored 2?

Apparently, the best horror game on Steam is called "The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt - Expansion Pass"

So um... I found a fish and grabbed the fish and then I jumped with the fish and found a thing and did a thing with the thing and then there was this absolutely gorgeous bunch of things that I had to go and explore, which lead me to more ... Things that made ... Water flow under ... Water using ... Things. I'm not entirely sure what the hell was happening, but I'm very happy about it and y'all should play Abzu.

How do you need to read more to want to play it? How?

I gave up on Wings of Liberty after like first 5 missions, dialogues I perceived as rather terrible among the reasons of why. But I might give it another shot based on space whale cthulhus.

First I hear that Baldur's Gate was tactical and now that Wings of Liberty had good dialogue. Does Western world consider Czech Republic inferior and we therefore get inferior versions of games or something? What is happening?

The only issue I've really run into in the original Metro game was that I had to hire a sherpa (who famously don't need a gas mask and survive in the worst conditions) to carry the filters for me. He kept messing up the stealth sections, but I could use him as a meat shield when people started firing in my general direction (sherpas also never die.) Then again, I suppose not everybody can be as amazing at videogames as I am, eh? Seriously tho, I think the only section I've had issues with navigation was the nazi apartment building on the surface because there were some ... Bits where I got lost easily. But exploring just a little bit usually lead to more filters in that game. Or sudden death.

You have to be really, really, really bad at it for that to happen tho, so I think congratulations are in order. At any rate, those games are fantastic, especially when played at one of the Ranger difficulties (removing UI more or less completely)

What kind of blasphemy is this!? This is an RPG! If there's any elfroot, you're going to need that elfroot and therefore, such elfroot needs to be elfrooted... Err, gathered.

I don't really believe any of the story was actually cut, I think it went more along the lines of developers realizing some time around the start of 2016 that they should also fill those environments with some plot or something

Meh, it's worth it just for the Prague and the Bank mission.

So I got gifted Battlefield 1. I played the prologue and the airborne mini-campaign and both were... Pretty amazing, actually. As far as rollercoaster rides go, this one had extremely well directed cinematics, shockingly open levels with functional stealth, great voice acting and fun set pieces. I'd say that if you actually enjoy campaigns of the various modern warfare games (and I'd like to point out that I don't particularly), this one's a safe bet. If you don't - I suppose it depends on how do you like dem cinematic experiences. It won't make my GOTY certainly, but visuals are stunning, sound design is incredible, it performs extremely well and I'm just having fun. Kinda mindless, and what's happening on the screen is rather ridiculous, but it's fun nonetheless.

I did a slightly more detailed write-up, and as an attention whore that I am, I'll post it here too, so that you can get to have 2 lists by Fenixp! This one's... Not necessarily 2016 tho. They're mostly identical, but eh... Dishonored 2 The detail, the atmosphere, the sheer amount of options presented to you organically with no disruption - it's why I love the first game and it's why I love the second one. It's pretty much improved version of Dishonored 1. However, it loses points for lack of originality, and in spite of slightly worse level design, worse gameplay and worse... Things in genearal, Dishonored 1 still feels like a better game. The tone was darker and Dunwall was a fair bit more interesting than Karnaca. Not to mention Dishonored's the innovative one whereas Dishonored 2 is pretty much the same thing. DOOM For soundtrack by Mick "God" Gordon and some of the best FPS core gameplay look I've ever seen in my life. While it does get a bit samey towards the end and level design seems to decline just a little bit, going from vast levels filled with exploration towards progression from one arena to the next, I've still had (and am still having) absolutely insane amounts of fun with DOOM. It works doubly when I'm angry about something and need to vent. Witcher 3: Blood and Wine A fantastic DLC for an already fantastic base game. It enters parts of the original books that I wanted to see digitized for ages, and does so with grace and respect that I've come to expect of CD: Project. Sure, Witcher books are still not exactly material that's necessarily worthy of transferring to other media as they're not that great either, but with what they had, CDP:R did a fantastic job. It also gets bonus points for getting many things the original W3 screwed up right. Dying Light Oh it's just the best zombie game I have ever played. Finally somebody went in and thought "Well, zombie flicks are not really about killing hundreds of zombies for the most part, are they?" and made a game focused much more on running, driving, jumping and sliding across one big city and massive country-side. Add to that pretty much the most satisfying character progression mechanics that I've seen in years where pretty much each and every new skill unlocked means new gameplay options as opposed to boring stat increase and you get a damn good package. 8-bit Multiverse A classical RTS in the style of the original Command and Conquer by former Westwood with soundtrack by Frank Klepacki. Some of the most fun I've had while playing a new RTS in ages, if I don't count Homeworld: Remastered as 'new' that is. And when the three games are joined (Armies, Hordes and Invaders), you get a wonderfully fun RTS with 6 factions where evil necromancers can battle space marines. It's fast-paced, reasonably simple, with fantastic music and so, whenever I just feel like having fun with an RTS, I play one of the 8-bit Armies, Hordes or Invaders for 20 minutes and them I'm happy with my life.

I don't have much of a preference, really, as at the end of the day, it depends on how any single game implements its character progression. From experience I'd say class-based systems work better for party-based RPGs to differentiate characters (you then don't have to cheat like Tyranny with companion-specific trees :-P) and classless for character or action-based games. The two games with the best character progression that I've seen in recent memory was Pillars of Eternity for combining classes with great flexibility and Dying Light, yes not much of an RPG, where each and every skill you picked felt like a significant addition as opposed to a lame percetual bonus.

Well I'm not really complaining about it because I realize that I'm an old fart who's far too used to everything being visually extremely distinctive on a screen. This is actually not the first game I've had that issue with, I think the first one I've noticed the same problem with was Skyrim, and it's probably highly subjective. In fact I'm glad I've met somebody who opted to voice the complaint as I kinda felt like I'm just insane :-P

I never said you should? You don't have to care about anything I write, really. I quite literally said that majority of developers implement it rather badly? And specifically pointed out Obsidian as a developer who also implemented it rather badly? Besides, coding for unity being hard is kinda bollocks. And then I ended my post by saying that even in spite of this, I still find RTwP more natural than TB, which should tell you just how unnatural TB feels to me. I really enjoy combat in PoE significantly more than in most other RPGs I have ever played. I'm quite baffled on what are we talking about here, really :D

The graphics are extremely busy, everything moves constantly and everything sort of feels... Mingled together, often to the point where I find it difficult to focus on details. I found that playing the game sitting with my face in my screen actually helped mitigate that somewhat, but not entirely.

Well because RTwP really is a lot more difficult to implement than TB, and most devs can't really do it right (including Obsidian, sadly). To really make it work, you need visible order queues, you need estimated times of execution to achieve proper sequencing etc. etc. - I think thus far only RTwP combat in UFO: Aftershock worked to my satisfaction. I'll still take RTwP over TB tho as it feels significantly more natural to me.