Yeah, don’t get too hyped up. It’s really just a pretty average open world RPG. Playing Gwent is probably the best part, and even that isn’t nearly as good as Pazaak.
they actually sorted that out pretty nicely with updates. the pace is quite even since they published the next-Gen rework. the problem with being under-leveled still persists though.
No not use any DLC equipment. While the combat in the game is far from perfect, using the viper gear (I think that’s what it’s called) ruins it further.
When I still had a Gamepass description I streamed the second one to my phone and played it with PS4 Controller during a class. Worst way to play it, but loved every second of it. I can’t wait either for the full release
In the first region in the midst of the first small village two neighbors are arguing. They are not giving a quest, they just talk to each other and listening gives such an insight in how war can turn people against each other that have been living peacfully and been friends for years.
Do the side quests and take your time with the dialogue. Some of these stories are impactful, mostly sad and worth your time. If you are told that you should talk to people to find out more about your contract, do it. Some of these quests can be done with only talking to one person but you want to get the information from everyone and especially their side of the story.
Do not look up the outcome of decisions. Make your decisions and live with them at least at your first playthrough. Most decisions have impact and seeing the outcome unfold makes this game special and yes often there is no “good choice” - that’s war for you.
Last: Buy every Gwent card you can get your hands on and play with everyone you can. If you can’t win just come back later with better cards and obliterate them - it will feel goooood!
The DLC’s are a must.
Try out difficulty settings - there is a sweet spot for most people somewhere but what it will be for you no one can know, but it would be a shame if you play through the game not having found the difficulty that fits you best because you “always play on <insert difficulty>”.
Have fun, I wish I could play this game for the first time again.
And in general: Dodge monsters, parry humanoids. Many of the monsters have attacks that are too large or erratic to reliably parry, but you can abuse the hell out of the I-frames from dodging. But soldiers go down much faster when you parry them.
I would say it’s entirely up to you. Though, experience with games like Gothic 3 (don’t even start without the Community Patch and a visual glitch fix dor trees and the sea) led me to mod first, personally. If you dig a bit deeper, there are LOD fixes (buildings from distance) for Whiterun, for example. Btw, the bumpmapping shader of reshade works especially nice for Witcher 3’ roads.
Mods make this game better. I didn’t like inventory management and the equipment repair mechanics in this game, so I modded those things out. Fall damage also sucks, so I modded that as well, Geralt is a witcher, he should be able to stick a landing from 10m up.
If I remember correctly, there’s an upgrade you can put on the pens for like a music box or something to “calm” them down.
Otherwise, I think I just merged the quantum’s with saber slimes and put them in their own pen and area off to the side with chicken coops so they wouldn’t wander too far when they got hungry. Just make sure to keep their food stocked and they’ll be fine.
I love seeing these posts each day as I browse all. I got a steam deck not long ago and I love that you seem to play something different almost every day, you’ve given me some great suggestions 🙂
Getting loaded up on water bottles in my inventory. To then have a game crash after finally getting to my ship and leaving the planet. Trying to login again and spawning in prison.
Yup. We’ve gone beyond realism and any sane level of graphical fidelity. In a game about fighting, exploring, and trading in space. I still think when they release the game they’re going to be in for a surprise when reviewers rake them over the coals for having survival game mechanics. That’s fine on a multiplayer survival game, but if the new extraction shooter is anything to go by, reviewers are done with that stuff getting added to other games. (It has a mechanic where if you run out of water you lose everything. You can only realistically have a couple days of water. So F to that Disney vacation, Daddy has to login to farm water.)
I feel like games have gotten less realistic in recent years. Like we had destructible terrain on the PS2 with red faction and games today still don’t really do it.
It feels like old cartoons(Tom & Jerry/Looney Toons era) where they drew the background as a muted static cell and only freshly animated things that moved. Objects in games are either entirely real, or just a painting on a texture. We’re still at “if I can touch it, it’s probably important. Otherwise ignore it”.
I still blame the advent of graphics. Look at final fantasy: up until 10, everything was simple graphics for the most part and storytelling was key. Then graphics began to explode and everything became about the visuals. One of the more modern Final Fantasy, 13, was basically a 30 hour tutorial in the beginning. Just stuck on rails getting cutscenes after cutscene. The same thing happened with other games around that time(roughly when the ps2 launched). Now everything is raytracing this, lighting that, dynamic shadows this.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s all very cool. But it feels like the AAA focus went towards graphics and it’s taken the Indie scene (and Nintendo, love them or hate them), to keep pumping out creative and "just fun to play’ games.
ETA: To be clear, I’m referring to the ratio of games. I know AAA masterpieces still exist. But games like Crysis used to be the exception, not the norm. Bleeding edge, test your hardware games used to be more rare and now almost every new AAA game is a hard drive, ram hogging behemoth for the sake of its graphics.
Meanwhile I still play Mount & Blade: Warband. The graphics hold up today, but it’s not like they’re good. But the game is just so damn good they mean absolutely nothing.
Edit: I should also mention I’m young, I’m sure somebody would point out that Warband isn’t old compared to a lot of games, but in my eyes 2010 (which was 14 years ago, that makes my young ass feel old too) is an old game, although I’m going to be honest, I totally thought it was from like 2006
I think your point stands well. You’re playing an older game despite less fancy graphics because the gameplay itself is engaging. 2010 counts as “old” in my book. Anything previous generation and beyond definitely isn’t “modern”.
I agree. FF is an interesting example though. It was always very much about the visuals, even when isometric. But it wasn’t just about the visuals as it seems to be now. The story has gotten less and less coherent over time.
I actually really enjoyed 13, but this new stuff is awful. If I wanted an action RPG, there are better places for that.
Final fantasy changed some core gameplay elements that, unfortunately for me, took them away from games I wanted to play.
I like turn based combat. I liked relatively straight forward leveling and character/weapon progressions. I liked essentially a single gimmicky system like materia. Or the card games in 8.
I hate the full action battles all the time now. It feels like the game is much more intense and twitchy. It ruins the pace of the story for me. It used to be something I would read my way through, explore at my own pace, take a journey. Stories aren’t always fast action, and that’s what I feel like the more modern battle system make the game feel like.
Unfortunately if you have walls today that get destroyed like Red Faction, you would get people complaining that it’s lazy and looks weird. But to get a wall to break with the standards we have now takes an exponential amount more processing power because not only do you need the walls to break “realistically” but it also has to render the super nice graphics on each little piece of that wall break.
That’s actually exactly what I was going to add on to my post but decided against it. I assumed OP was talking about AAA games since those are the topic of this post. There’s plenty of indie games that have less worse graphics with breakable walls.
I counter with all the realism hype about Arma 3. Players were literally talking about the grass and moon cycles. Meanwhile the actual combat simulation part was worse than a game cooked up by the US Army Recruiting command.
I swear if a wall didn’t break exactly right they would have written a 20 page dissertation on it and mailed it directly to the lead graphics artist.
Their existence doesn’t negate the people who enjoyed Minecraft. You basically said “the people who bought a hyper realistic sim expected hyper realism”. Yes, a tautology is a tautology.
Again, plenty of people find non hyper realistic graphics satisfying. An entire Indie catalogue proves this. Games like Lethal Company or Among Us or Terraria or Stardew Valley are huge hits with pixel graphics or graphics from 1995.
Your argument is boiling down to “well someone will complain, so might as well not even try”. It’s very cynical and defeatist. Acting like hype against Arma means no one else enjoyed anything. You take too much from other people’s opinions. Enjoy what you enjoy. Stop basing your opinions on what others on the Internet say.
That’s not it at all. You were talking about immersion and I’m just pointing out that some people see the environment as more important than the core gameplay mechanics. That doesn’t invalidate people who enjoy Minecraft. And yeah the problem is big game companies are listening to those gamers who are basically the squeaky wheel.
The issue with something like destructible terrain is that if your one and only goal is graphical fidelity, the only thing the AAA companies care about, then it actually becomes a massive resource hog. You’ll need to have artists render each photorealistic way that a piece of a scene could turn to debris. It’s the kinda thing that sounds simple, but could take a team of artists months or even years to accomplish.
If you look at an incredible game like Teardown which really delivers on full destructibility, you can see that they’re using voxels and the game looks a little blocky. It’s the kinda thing you can easily ignore with good art direction though, which Teardown has. The problem is that you need talented directors to conceptualize that, and most of the talent in the Western games industry is being wasted by corps that want to treat developers like single-use plastics and trash them once the current project is out.
lemmy.world
Najstarsze