Manveru123

But that's how religion is supposed to work. You have a set of rules and you must abide to them. It's very fluid when it comes to catholics, but check Islam for example. Or traditionalists, like the Amish. There is very little room for interpretation. By saying Jedi are dumb, you're basically saying that religion is dumb. Which is something I personally agree with

And Obsidian tried w the main story of Deadfire? Clearly their focus was graphics, combat, and factions. The main story is dreadful.Factions are main story. A lot of elements discovered via faction quests tie to Eothas' plotline.You dont need to do any faction quests to finish the game. They are optional. So? But they make up a big chunk of the story which makes Deadfire. Journal in divided into 3 categorries: Main threads: Hunt For Eothas, Huana, Principi, Valian Trading Complany, Royal Deadfire Company. Those constitute for the main meat of the game. Yes you can skip majoority of them as it is an RPG. In old RPGs like Fallouts you can skip vast majority of key content if you so wish. Perhaps Obsidian made the mistake of telling the players were to go next, instead of forcing them to use faction quests to explore. Then you have quests - major sidequests, and tasks. I am really tired of people complaining how Deadfire's "main story" is only 5 quests long, while ignoring a pile of high quality content for some weird reason. Don't give players too much freedom or they will get confused, I suppose. Nah I feel like he's right about this part. If a quest is not required to finish the game, it's not part of the main storyline. It's a side quest. Those "people" you mention never really say that the whole story is bad, they only focus on the main quests. Doesn't matter how amazing the side quests are, having a good main story is important. Diablo, however, has pretty much only main story, and it's only an excuse to beat up monster hordes.

Nice bait.

Yes I played them all. And I stand by what I said. 90% of dialogue options is just asking about stuff, like "who are you" and "what is this place". I don't mind when a game skips that. I welcome that, actually. If my character behaves good in one situation and bad in another, he never has an established moral compass, which is not the case with pre-generated toons. And it's not uncommon to do one quest in a good way and another in a bad way for rewards (I killed Drizzt every single time, even when playing as Lawful Good, because I wanted his gear). So yeah, I feel like Geralt is a huge improvement. This is one of the reasons why Witcher 3 is ten times more immersive than any game you mentioned. Yeah, let's talk mechanics in other games, where in each and every one of them you can build a superpowered demigod and beat every encounter in a few seconds. That is sooo much better mechanically right? Of course, you can choose not to play this way.. just as you can choose not to spam two slashes for the whole game. I really don't get what is so special about Neketaka and other similar cities. They are just one big quest hub, that's their only purpose. I don't need to have a conversation with every NPC I come across. Not only that: I can't, because most of them have one, pre-generated line! So you end up - surprise! - talking only to merchants and quest givers anyway. I give credit to Sapkowski for creating the universe. And that's where his contribution stops. I'm not going to worship someone who thinks of me as a lesser being just because I'm a gamer. I have some self-respect left. But to each his own. I played Andromeda and finished it, because I didn't have anything better to do at the time. The game was a stinking piece of **** in every single aspect. Even if I ignore the worst animations I have ever seen in a game made by a big studio (there's tons of memes on the internet, highly recommend), the game had nothing going for it. It was bland. At this point I don't even remember any character's names, yet I could talk a lot about every companion from the original ME trilogy (those were actually good games). Combat? Please, all I had to do was snipe the **** out of everything. This got boring halfway through. It's cool to have a lot of options during character progression, too bad most of them are useless and you never pick them. I feel like those "expectations" you're talking about are yours and yours alone. You're just living in the nostalgic 90s and fail to see that "classic" games are no longer that popular. If someone made Baldur's Gate 3 and made it very well, it wouldn't sell half as good as Witcher, because most things you consider to be assets of these titles are boring AF to the modern gamers. And those are people whose opinions are important, because they are a paying majority. So, to answer a question: yes, Witcher 3 is the current standard for a good, successful RPG title, and every dev studio and their mothers would like to replicate its success. No amount of rambling will change that.

Star Wars is written in a way that pretty much everything can be explained with The Force, because the universe never set any boundaries on what The Force can and cannot do. Quite to opposite actually, we are led to believe that it can do literally anything. So in this case, "because magic" is quite literal. The only time I really thought that it sucks was when Leia did a Jesus in space in the latest movie, that was beyond ridiculous. Other than that, it's fine to me.

Ciri's face is kinda off-putting to me. I don't know why. It just is

He got exactly what he asked for initially. It's not CDPR fault that he was treating gaming as something for the lesser humans.

"Because magic" or "because science" is how every fictional world works. And it's fine, because the movies are supposed to be entertaining, not spend 30 minutes explaining how does an X-Wing fly. Well in the Palps example, Yoda most certainly "did not", so hey, no contradictions here ;p

Note that if you use a one-handed sword without an offhand, it will be wielded with two hands in combat. Wierd, but that's how it works in this game. Honestly for a melee class all you need is standard 1 Monk 2 Paladin and rest Vivisectionist, with any weapon you want (I used the Dueling Blade for flavor). DEX and no armor is clearly better for a character like that, you get a ton of AC from buffs, and later on you will find a 0 AC robes with massive bonuses.

Show us on the doll where did Geralt touch you. Again, you are not playing as a random nobody that you can shape however you want to, you are playing as Geralt, who has a set in stone character and morals. You are not supposed to have a lot of choice in conversations. You say it's bad, me and millions of fans say it's awesome because Geralt is awesome. Sucks to be a hater I guess. Nobody needs to have a **** ton of dialogue choices that end up in the same thing, not to mention that in most crpg, 90% of the dialogue is just asking god damn questions "hey tell me about this place". Most of the dungeons you mentioned are 10% story 90% combat, where the story is mostly at the beginning and at the end. Every single dungeon follows the same principles and the only difference is that the corridors are not the same. In Witcher 3, every dungeon is unique. Thank god (or a game designer) for that. If you want to keep playing the same thing over and over again, well go have fun with that. Andrzej Sapkowski literally said that games are for stupid people. That is, until it turned out that the game made millions; then he was suddenly back with "GIMME MAH MONAYZ!". The fact that game Geralt is similar to novel Geralt is one of the biggest hooks of this game, but it has nothing to do with Sapkowski, who did absolutely nothing with the game itself (in fact, he stated that the game is no canon at all). And then you mention Andromeda, the game that was so horrible that they didn't even bother making any story DLCs for it, because nobody would buy them anyway. Well except for you I guess. Andromeda basically killed Mass Effect. At this point this just looks like pointless rambling.

Sounds like a very interesting conversation. Then you see Galaxy of Heroes and Brave Exvius "Mobile game" no longer means "another Candy Crush ripoff". Every single game was perhaps too much, but consider, if all you need to do is play a role, then suddenly Tony Hawk's Pro Skater is RPG. Football Manager is RPG. Hell, every platformer game ever is RPG. And every point-and-click adventure too.

But only a Sith deals in absolutes

That's because it is. Technically in every single game you "play a role", regardless of its genre.

And Obsidian tried w the main story of Deadfire? Clearly their focus was graphics, combat, and factions. The main story is dreadful. It's clear from my posts that I'm not the biggest fan of Deadfire's main plot, to say the least, but even I can see that a lot more work went into it than in any Diablo game. It's like the post above mine states: they surely did try, just failed to satisfy their players. It happens.

Well RPGs have many sub-genres. I mean Monster Hunter is on this list but I'd not call it an RPG. Yet apparently it is (and has a good chance of winning, too). This is highly confusing, so most of the time I just use cRPG, tRPG, aRPG and jRPG, I can easily slap any game to any of these, but then again I end up with Diablo 3 and Witcher 3 in the same category ._. The D3 fanbase first went ape**** over Real Money Auction House, and then really poor endgame. When it comes to character progression, the game is leagues ahead of D2, and yet most fans seem to consider D2 to be a better game. I'm not really sure why, I never found spamming one button to be a particulary engaging gameplay. The thing with saves is that they're random. You can fail the save or not. Armor gives you actual numerical value that you have to cross. I look at it as RNG vs strategy and greatly prefer the latter, I have enough RNG in mobile games

Wow. And I thought I'm the hater here. Damn, son. Diablo 3 story was horrible, unless you're into Diablo-with-boobs fetish. No game in this series was made with story as its main focus, Blizzard did not even try.

Except that the Jedi Order doesn't have multiple branches, that have differences of opinion on certain matters. Like I said, you're either a Jedi or you're not. Of course you can have your internal struggles but as long as you consider yourself a Jedi and try to live your life according to the code, you're not gray, or pink, or yellow or any other colour.

Oh damn lol You sound like me. Just be aware that this is indeed a Crpg based forum, most members here grew up with Infinity Engine games, but I agree. I think the best characters/stories in games are the ones that show relatability to humanity and relativism to their creative world. The gameplay could be horrible but if you have those things, you have a great game no matter what. Oddly enough, one of my favorite rpg's of all time has a bad storyline, doesn't have any great characters, it's Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen. Just loved a lot if things in that game that made it unique. I know. I'm quite old myself, I grew up with Crystals of Arborea and the rest of Ishar series, Eye of the Beholder.. I've seen it all. I've put hundreds and hundreds of hours in crpg titles. But that doesn't change the fact that I can appreciate other rpg genres if they deserve it, and Witcher 3 in particular, does. I was thinking about trying Dragon's Dogma but the port was made by a company I used to work for, so my fingers are going to smell if I touch it :/ No but seriously, the PS4 version is on my radar. oh I am butthurt... Butthurt that such an amazing game is ruined by silly armor and level progression system. Loved the world, the companions, the more serious note vs the original one. At the end of the game I could barely bring myself to play it though. Also I'm pretty sure that most gamers don't give a damn about sales as long as a game is enjoyable. Character's progression is not the hook for this game tho. I personally dislike most turn-based RPG games because I find combat boring, but DOS2 was surprisingly enjoyable. The characters were extremely well written. I dunno what "most gamers" don't give a damn about, but sales are important to developers. You know, the people who make the games. The player's opinions are only relevant when the game sells like **** and they have to constantly patch it to try and salvage the failure, then give up and sell themselves to a big publisher. Character progression is part of the hook for any rpg. Combat as well. And this game ruins both. And I wouldn't even bother commenting if the game wasn't just brilliant in every other aspect which makes me sad. Anyway, my point is that when I share an opinion it's just that, an opinion. It's not a sports discussion for example to be butthurt for my favorite team losing the game. If I don't like a game I simply ignore it Diablo 3 has **** character progression and I have clocked over 1000 hours in it. While I personally love more complex character creation systems (especially if it allows massive multiclassing, like Pathfinder: Kingmaker), I'm not too mad if the game doesn't have them, as long as everything else is good. As for combat, while it is truly a slugfest from time to time, you have to admit that it's rare for these kind of games to actually use enviroment during battles. I'm on the fence on this one personally. I'm not really disagreeing with you, the difference in opinion is that weak character progression and so/so combat did not ruin the game for me

oh I am butthurt... Butthurt that such an amazing game is ruined by silly armor and level progression system. Loved the world, the companions, the more serious note vs the original one. At the end of the game I could barely bring myself to play it though. Also I'm pretty sure that most gamers don't give a damn about sales as long as a game is enjoyable. Character's progression is not the hook for this game tho. I personally dislike most turn-based RPG games because I find combat boring, but DOS2 was surprisingly enjoyable. The characters were extremely well written. I dunno what "most gamers" don't give a damn about, but sales are important to developers. You know, the people who make the games. The player's opinions are only relevant when the game sells like **** and they have to constantly patch it to try and salvage the failure, then give up and sell themselves to a big publisher.

Not sure if serious, putting Witcher 3 and Underrail in the same basket :D The thing is, Geralt is not a random hobo from Nowhere Town, like most rpg protagonists. He's a clearly defined character. You're not supposed to have many "role playing options". Witchers always use the same type of weapons and have a set fighting style, would you tell a basketball player to start kicking the ball? The combat was diverse enough, and sufficiently challenging on the higher difficulty levels. It's a different kind of RPG, but the praise is well deserved. No other game has such well made characters and world. Yennefer, Triss, Dandelion, Yarpen, those are all very memorable characters. There were also multiple long sidequests during the storyline, too, but it seems you missed them somehow. Have you spent more than 15 minutes on the game? BTW it won the next year too. With a god damn DLC. But it's Baldur's Gate and Pillars that set "standards" :D :D

This. I always found this concept silly. If you don't follow a Jedi Code, you're not a Jedi. Like Yoda said, you do or do not, force users are not Switzerland.

QFT <3

Why don't they give us a class that is actually good in the DLC. OolCat plz.

To be fair, the Jedi you meet as a Sith Warrior are mostly racist zealots.

...love!