I won’t buy this at full price, when Outer World’s two goes on sale at 50% or more off, that is when I will buy it! By then, all the major bugs should be resolved, and new content will be making this game even better. I blame Obsidian Games from not trying to shout down Microsoft and fight them in a Waffle House parking lot over this price.
While the company would love you to buy it at launch for $80, they’re fine if you wait for a (first party) sale.
Look at the first Outer World. At launch sold for $60. Three months post launch, $50. Six months post launch, $40. One year post launch, $30.
If this new game sells the exact same, but starts at $80, they’re ahead. Even if the $80 number scares away a lot of people, they’re ahead. Only if it scares away a shit ton of people will it be a problem.
In a way, I hope it scares enough gamers away that it sends a message. I want there to be repercussions, Nintendo might get away with it (due to fanbase), but other companies need to be curtailed and fast!
Nintendo gets away with it because their games rarely have a discount. An $80 game today will be $80 in a year. After several years you sometimes get a limited discount for their best selling games. A bundle or a voucher can be a small loss leader, usually if you buy one of something you buy another.
The other thing of course is that Nintendo makes absolutely top tier games. The fan base is earned. You can buy a Mario or Zelda game, knowing nothing about it, and it’s going to be good. Pokemon is the obvious exception here, the mainline games are fine, but would be nothing without the brand. (I also won’t forgive them for Super Mario Party, that was a $30 game, not $60.)
I don’t expect $80 games to go away, because as long as someone will pay it, it’s free money. But if sales slump too much in the long run I do see quick discounts, possibly even for Nintendo games.
Nintendo makes pretty good games but nothing about their product is “top tier”. The online experience is terrible, their flagship games suffer from framerate dips, pop-in, and stuttering because they don’t invest in better hardware, and speaking of hardware they went with the same will-break-down-and-drift sticks because they’ve been coasting for ages. Meanwhile they’re suing fan projects into the dirt and growing increasingly out of touch. (Sony and Xbox are hot on their heels, the big three could really do with some outside competition)
Oh I absolutely agree there are plenty of criticisms about the company itself and their other offerings, but the games are absolutely top tier.
Their online is miles behind, games from Smash Bros to Mario Maker to Mario Kart could all be improving with better online, but since they were terrible at online I never used them, but those games were still excellent.
A lower powered system or poorly optimized game has some frame rate dips or stuttering, but never in a way that gameplay was affected. I know people will disagree but I’ve never had an issue with it.
Yes, joycon drift is a real problem. But that’s a hardware problem. We should absolutely give Nintendo shit for hardware problems.
Suing fan projects or being aggressive about YouTube/Twitch take down, all fair. Fuck Nintendo for all that.
But all of that is different from their games being solid. I don’t blame people who choose to emulate their games, they’re awesome games.
I’ll give you that Sony might be competitive, I don’t see Xbox/Microsoft anywhere close. I think Valve and the SteamDeck are probably 4th in the race, but Valve has to actually make a game. They made great games and should continue to do so.
This is what I have a problem with. The fan base WAS earned but now is taken for granted.
You can’t just pretend that online play isn’t important for multiplayer games. It’s a huge knock against the titles you mentioned.
Kirby and the Forgotten Land tries so hard to keep gameplay smooth that any enemies more than like 15 feet away drop to 8fps and it still dips when there’s too many effects on screen. Breath of the Wild simply banishes mobs that get too far away (or just run for too long) to keep the memory functional (and many things don’t even render at the edge of bow range). Super Mario Odyssey also aggressively culls actors and gets a bit sad when you force too much on screen (high up in Metro Kingdom, for example) It might not matter to you but it impacts the game enough for me to notice it.
I simply don’t think that you can trust a Nintendo game to be worth the day 1 cost.
I suppose the reason I’m so forgiving of the online features, is that I don’t use them. They’re a nice little addition for sure, but I do not see them as core to the game.
I think it’s embarrassing that they’re sooooo far behind. Definitely if they’re a thing you’re expecting, it’s going to sour your view of the game.
Performance is a personal thing.You’re not alone, it’s a common complaint, I won’t deny that. I’ve played all three of those games, Kirby, Zelda & Mario but never remember having an issue. I’m sure I did, but it never stuck with me. I remember Arceus looking like an GameCube game. But I also remember completing the Pokedex 100%.
I was burned by Super Mario Party, so that franchise is dead to me. Maybe others will burn me too.
I think the Switch 2 launching with just Mario Kart was a huge mistake. No Mario. No Zelda. I can’t remember the last time that happened. Donkey Kong is coming soon, and it’s supposedly similar to Oddessy… But we’ll have to see. There are great DK games, but he’s no Mario and it’s been a while.
I’ll play the game in like 4-5 years like how I played the first one years later for way cheaper. So cheap I couldn’t be disappointed with the writing and just enjoyed the solid but unremarkable game
Yar har fiddle dee, 80 bucks a game just ain’t for me, yar har fiddle and fat, I’ll just fucking sail the high seas numbnuts publishers, good job trading the 60 bucks I was willing to pay for the 0 you’ll be getting from me now.
And remember kids, if buying isn’t owning, pirating isn’t stealing.
I’ve never read the books, but… It was clear from game 3 that she was going to play an important role in the future. The entire plot of the main campaign in Witcher 3 was about HER powers. The Wild Hunt wanted her, not Geralt.
Plus also she’s awesome anyway. What the fuck is wrong with people? Oh I can’t enjoy my vibeo game with a wahmen as main character, it’ll ruin my mood!
Honestly I’d rather be looking at a cute girl dashing around than an old man, even if I identify more with the latter. Video games are for exploring things. Fantasy worlds, dragons, wraiths… And the biggest problem with suspending disbelief is playing a character who isn’t the same gender as the player? lmao.
Maybe I’m just not enough of a gamer. Only been two and a half decades or so since I first touched a computer and played games.
Tomb Raider is not a woman protagonist game though, at least in the first game they wanted to have Indiana Jones but didn’t got the rights to it. So the developers replaced the assets with a female.
In whole series there is not much that makes her a woman, more like an American gun-maniac guy that looks like a girl.
The first game didn’t have much in the way of story. The focus was on the puzzles and adventuring. I don’t think that makes her less of a woman character. In a video game, the assets are the only difference, anyway. Not that women can’t be rough and adventurous and physical and like guns.
I’ve only played Witcher 3, and I thought it was obvious that it’s Ciri’s story being told from the perspective of the supporting cast, and that is an incredibly cool literary device.
Yeah. I haven’t played 1 much beyond the first 10 minutes, was too janky. 2 was mostly focused on the war, with Geralt being the most important character IMO. In 3 he was no longer THE most important character, but he was a close second - out of a large cast of supporting characters that aided them on the way.
Honestly the longform books take a similar approach, telling several very important people’s stories from the perspective of how their stories intertwined with Geralt’s and later Ciri’s
Plus also she’s awesome anyway. What the fuck is wrong with people? Oh I can’t enjoy my vibeo game with a wahmen as main character, it’ll ruin my mood!
That’s what I don’t understand, like, have people not played the Horizon games? They’re awesome, they’re fun as hell.
The main bullshit complaint I’ve seen about the Horizon games boils down to “Aloy doesn’t make my peepee hard”. There are dudes out there who only want to see women they can goon to.
People like Geralt, they like his brooding attitude. Making. Game about ciri means they don’t get a game with Geralt. And they really want another game with him for some reason.
Cranky brooding swordsman is kinda a one trick pony. It’s brilliant and hilarious to respond to everything no matter how threatening with just a grunt or dismissive comment, but after 3 major games, it’s time for something else
I didn’t played the game or read the books but I think if you are playing a game that is called Witcher and the Witcher himself is missing that is a big issue.
Normally you would get a new game with a new title but big companies want to use the IP and think using a known title is always better than coming up with a new title.
As I said I didn’t played Witcher 3 so dunno if it makes sense, but I wouldn’t be surprised if people are unhappy when their main character is missing in the game.
I guess if they didn’t read the books, watch the show, or play the most popular and most recent game in the series, then it is fairly reasonable for them to be confused as they won’t know shit.
Yeah so others already explained it to you, but I’ll give you a quick summary.
Witcher is kind of a job title, but to get in you pretty much join a cult that gives you mutagens that give you cool powers, but also make you infertile and I believe resistant to STDs (this is why Geralt fucks so much).
Ciri trained with the witchers of the Wolf school. I don’t remember if she went through the mutations or not, but she has elder blood so she’s already more powerful than Geralt. She’s part of an end of the world prophecy. She’s also essentially Geralt’s adoptive daughter.
By the end of Witcher 3, Geralt is getting kind of tired. There’s literally no other Witcher in the universe more deserving to be the next lead than the spacetime manipulating princess who doesn’t even want to inherit her real father’s continent spanning empire because she’d rather be a badass Witcher.
I’m trying to remember the first game I played with a female lead and I think it was portal. And that woman didn’t speak. Strangely the next was transistor and she technically didn’t speak either.
Female protags are rare. They used to be epic loot, but it’s getting better now.
I guess it’s Portal for me too. Then Oblivion with a female character with that golden armor from shivering isles for shiny boobs. I was a horny teen and porn was getting boring lol
She is great in the books. One of the most unique characters in fiction imho. CDProjekt did really well adapting the continuation of her story in the games.
If a game is deemed “woke” by right-wing shitheads, that’s like a seal of approval for me. Now, the game might still suck, but it’s not because of being inclusive and diverse.
If it does “flop”, they undoubtedly would chalk it up to it being inclusive and diverse though. Otherwise they just quickly move on to the next target.
As long as they remake the original Witcher(and maybe the 2nd one too) so i can experience it in a similarly cinematic way to The Witcher 3… I will be happy and excited to see what a Ciri-based game or even trilogy would look like.
Will definitely miss the masculine indulgences of TW3 in the Ciri game though…
If you’re avoiding the first two Witcher games because they’re somehow not cinematic, you’re sorely mistaken.
Both of those games are incredibly atmospheric to the point of mastery. (tbf you have to be able to forgive the character models in the first game and that can be admittedly difficult because HOLY HELL ZOLTAN ARE YOU OKAY)
Definitely not OP, but I wouldn’t mind remasters of the first game to address the wonky controls. Witcher 2 was fine, but trying to go from Witcher 3 back to Witcher 1 for the first time was not a great experience for me.
Yeah. The controls, the fighting. Even with all the patches and community stuff laid on top, it was a bit too uncomfortable to actually play through for me.
The second one was brilliant. And to this day, despite me having almost 200 hours in Witcher 3, the only Witcher game I’ve actually finished. I think second’s format was perfect. 3 is just too open and beautiful, I get lost in wandering around too easily.
They are remaking the first game, but I don’t know if there are enough details about it yet to know how extensive the overhaul will be. The second game doesn’t need one.
The second one might benefit from a remaster by the time 4 comes out, as some of the models are a bit too XBox360 era, with the strangely wide shoulders and oversized arm muscles of the time
Ciri has a relationship with a woman in the books, so I’m not sure you will miss what I assume you’re referring to as “the masculine indulgences” as much as you think you will.
On the other hand, CDPR retconned a shedload of that book so we shall see.
I’m a Borderlands fan, but it absolutely isn’t even in the same universe of quality as BG3. Borderlands is dumb, pretty shitty and lost quality with each game. It’s mindless fun, like B movie popcorn flicks.
I would absolutely disagree. Fun, maybe. Mindless fun? No. I’m fine with games that are mindless fun, but it isn’t what all games should strive for. I personally much prefer games that require your focus and consideration.
Mindless fun is cheap and easy. Making a game that sits in people minds for years is difficult and takes effort, but is much more rewarding. BG3, for example, is anything but mindless, which is why it’s been able to still be in conversations for so long after it released. How much do people talk about Call of Duty, even though it sells like crazy?
i hear talk about call of duty all the time, and especially in its heyday it was talked about pretty much everywhere. meanwhile i only hear BG3 talked about online or from my brother who’s currently playing it. so i think you just proved your own self wrong there. CoD and borderlands are 2 game franchises that are already talked about a lot. hell just look at this own post, its about borderlands
People talk about playing CoD. They don’t discuss the game really, and also this is being discussed because it’s news, and also because they’re being greedy and stupid. Again, it isn’t the game being discussed.
BG3 people talk about the story, the writing, the gameplay, etc. They talk about how the game is something actually made for players, to be enjoyed, not by business people to make money. They talk about the game.
Saying “do you want to play CoD tonight” is different than discussing why the gameplay of CoD is good/new/innovative/whatever.
I actually did see people discuss the campaign of the new CoD (or maybe the one before) because it was actually fairly unique for them. Other than that, the only time I hear about CoD is people talking about how much money it makes, how bad the skins are, or things like that. It holds almost no relevance in game discussion circles because everything they did well has been innovated on since then.
People talked about how smooth and responsive CoD 4 was, because it was innovating. People don’t talk about the mechanics of whatever the latest CoD is, because it’s not doing anything worth copying.
I also see posts about it often on !games, although admittedly I don’t pay attention to the usernames of the people who make those posts, or the usernames of the people commenting. But I’d doubt the comments are all just @Cethin talking to themselves ;)
Eh, I wouldn’t say even mindless fun is easy, from what I hear game dev is hard and a lot of effort and hard work can still end up in something unfun. Probably not your intention but I don’t want to devalue the efforts of people who probably want to make something to help other people enjoy a bit, that I probably don’t have the skill to make myself.
I’m a hobbyist game dev, and I have friends in the industry, and yeah it hard to make anything at all. I meant more that it’s easy to conceptualize mindless fun. Implementing either is just as hard really.
But that type of fun is something I can get from many other games, making borderlands way less desirable if it’s $80. On the other hand if larian says that their next game is $80, I already know that I won’t find that type of experience anywhere else and I might just splurge.
what game would you consider “not pure dogshit”? seriously, what games? give me a list, because if an acclaimed franchise that was widely praised and birthed a literal genre is considered dogshit, then what isnt dogshit?
gamesradar.com
Aktywne