Since you're on PC, using cheats or potentially mods can expand the list of games you have available, since you might be able to just ignore certain aspects of a game, like combat, money or resources in general.
The more recent Assassin's Creed games have something called a Discovery Tour, where you can just explore the world, without combat. They are partially meant for educational purposes and can teach about the different regions and history, and offer guided tours. I don't know if there's a real free roam, where you can just do whatever though.
You mentioned buying Goat Simulator, so maybe other of these "Simulator" games might be for you.
I don't know how much you can go into houses, but Farming Simulator could be worth a look. Your kid can probably just explore the map and maybe even try some of the farming.
As someone else mentioned, Slime Rancher might be fun just to explore the world with the cute creatures all around, but there's not really much or any buildings as far as I know (don't know if the sequel has this stuff).
A Short Hike could be worth a look. You're on a mountainous island / national park type deal and your main objective is to get to the peak of the mountain, but you can just explore, do some side quests, solve puzzles, etc. I feel like the screenshots on the Steam Store page for the game look really ugly, since it's so pixelated, but that's just a filter, that you can change in game (from smooth to really pixely).
Donut County (Not adventure, but a very simple and accessible puzzle that spans an entire town)
I haven’t played Stray, but it may be a good fit. I also haven’t played past the opening scene of Firewatch, but if your daughter can manage walking around Skyrim then I think it should be okay.
I searched for indie exploration games. City of Muse came up.
If you're open to dealing with emulation, both the new Zeldas pretty much fit the bill. There's combat but probably less than Skyrim.
Slime Rancher is one I enjoyed for a while that's definitely kid friendly. Supraland didn't really grab me, but in terms of being super tame and having varied stuff to explore it fits again.
If it specifically has to be houses/cities, none of those fit that well. But they have worlds that are varied and interesting.
EDITED: I should play The Witness again. I’ve played it once, mostly completed and loved it. I’m in the middle of the Talos Principle 2 now and want to finish it first. Come to my community and talk about what you didn’t like, OP.
I can say I was put off at first glance by the “realistic” aesthetic, with props like jammers and minigun turrets that have an unnecessarily detailed, grounded look when as a puzzle game, graphics should not be the focus of the experience. A stylised, or minimal, graphical style would put the focus firmly where it belongs - on the puzzles themselves.
Huh, OK. That never crossed my mind while playing TTP / TTP2 but I can see how that would be distracting from the puzzle solving.
Funny thing is, after I finished Witness, I went back to play Braid, the earlier game by the same creator and its look & feel just never worked for me at all. So yeah
Let me add one thing more, that a realistic aesthetic brings with it certain expectations. For example, I don’t question how Security Bots in Bioshock refuel themselves, or fly, or recognise intruders. I don’t ask how come the turrets in Portal never run out of bullets (though it’s answered as a gag in one of the videos). They’re not presented as realistic, and I don’t expect them to be. But when you make the choice to use realistic miniguns in Talos, those questions are going to bubble up to the surface, like “Where’s the ammo box on that thing?” and “Who’s maintaining these on islands in the middle of nowhere?” and “Scratch that, who’s making them?” and “If Elohim (yeah real subtle name there) did all this then why bother with a machine that requires maintenance in the first place instead of a magic pillar of fire or smth?”
Basically I was disappointed by the lack of star variety and the very predictable story. The environments were pretty but I also disliked that the devs put more effort into preventing alternate solutions, those were some of my favorite aspects of the first game.
The stars were 100% the biggest issue though. They were some of the most fun parts of the first game, but in 2 once you solved some of them you pretty much knew how to do the rest, and they became a major chore instead of a puzzle.
The Peppa Pig game is surprisingly open. If you just walk off screen it lets you keep going and you end up in new locations. Hop on the bus and end up in another location. There aren’t many blocks to stop you from going where you feel like going and there’s a variety of activities at each location.
The putt putt line of games. They run on scummvm and my kids love them. Later kings quest, and stardew valley. The lego marvel super heroes on Xbox 360 (I think there’s a pc version) has an entire Manhattan island that they can roam around freely and interact with.
About 10 years ago my steam account was locked for 3 months after bypassing regional pricing. At the time they said it was first and last warning and the only reason they didn’t ban my account was I’d previously got approval to change the steam URL to redirect to a different store region to purchase a game not available on my default store.
The Witcher 3 is just… so god damn boring, it doesn’t help that weapons break too easily, yet the oppurutunities to get gold are so few that you’ll do several sidequests worth of monster genocide, sell EVERYTHING you own, and just barely afford to fix your weapons… It got so bad I had to hack my save to bypass the constant scrunging about for repairs… then I realized the story is so complicated that you NEED to play the other two games to understand what’s going on
I went back and played Witcher 2, and found it to be vastly superior, far more fun, far more immersive, and just an all around better time
I have been warned never to touch Witcher 1
the Netflix series was pretty good, though I only saw the first season
Witcher 1 is a very hardcore RPG designed in the style of the old bygone era of RPG games, so depending on your interest in classic gaming you might not even understand what the fuck the game is even asking of you
Also there is pretty much no handholding so some quests are a removed
My recommendation for Witcher 3 is to not buy weapons, exploration and combat should net you good gear to carry you
I can’t stand Witcher 3 but played Witcher 1 not long ago and I really loved it. It is very oldcore and the controls are a b***h sometimes but it is a really great game with a great story. I hope Witcher 2 is as good too, it is on my next to play list very high.
Witcher 2 is the most underrated entry in the series, and has by far the most interesting story to tell. I’m shocked you find 3’s story complicated as its pretty simplistic in comparison. Yeah it has more characters from the books involved, but the game tells you pretty much everything you need to know about all of them. Overall I enjoyed 3, but as a followup to Witcher 2 its pretty disappointing story-wise. Both games have shit combat, so if you’re not invested in the story/world they aren’t worth playing.
I think the explanations are the problem, it’s overloading me with information… I feel like every cutscene is a wall of text that I’m barely able to follow… Witcher 2 felt like I was learning about the world in a more natural way
I see what you mean and can get down with that. The writing in 2 is in general much tighter then 3. It’s a shame that compared to 3 relatively few people have played it.
Personal opinions aside as an open world RPG by itself Witcher 3 is pretty good, it’s was a breakout success and remains a popular game for good reason. As a follow-up to Witcher 2 though it’s pretty disappointing. Switching over to an open world does the storys pacing and stakes no favors, and it feels like CDPR is limited by following up the book series and trying to utilize its characters. As evidenced by Witcher 2 and the Hearts of Stone expansion for 3, it seems like their writers are much more comfortable writing their own original stories and characters. 3’s main storyline doesn’t introduce anyone nearly as interesting as Letho, Roach, and Iorveth, except for maybe the Baron, who like the others is an original character.
Additionally everything 2 spends time building up for 3 has pretty disappointing payoffs. The Northern Realms politics were a focus for 2, in 3 they are overly simplistic and somewhat nonsensical. Radovid is depicted as a cunning, competent, and ruthless king in 2, but goes blubbering mad off-screen between games. The Wild Hunt is barely a presence in the games storyline despite being it’s namesake and Eredin is a flat and boring antagonist. I understand why Witcher 3 is so popular, but as someone who was a big fan of 2 and was incredibly hyped for it, I found it to be incredibly underwhelming.
Funny, I was told to stay the fuck away from Witcher 2, but played Witcher 1. xD Witcher 1 has some odd controls (from a modern perspective) but an engaging story which actually forced me to stop playing on my first playthrough because I just couldn’t make the choice between pest and cholera. Of course I eventually dipped my toes in Witcher 2, but the 3rd one has spoiled me so damn hard with its fancy graphics, controller support and familiar controls, that it just didn’t click.
I played all three, watched the series and am in the process of reading though the 8 or so books.
The first witcher, as was mentioned, is very old and a little clunky for todays standards but it was great fun. I can neither understand why you liked the 2nd one - which I found bland and forgettable - nor the dislike for the third one, which was like 3 games in one imo.
I guess if you really like walking/riding a horse and have the hardware to crank it up to eleven, the third one is awesome, otherwise probably not.
bin.pol.social
Aktywne