Btw, I saw some posters here still use the slur “cunt”.
It’s my understanding that depending on which country you’re from (eg Australia or UK) this slur might not carry a sexist connotation in the mainstream culture, so I don’t think any of you used it with the intent of being sexist.
Nevertheless, in the feminist circles I belong to, uskng a word that describes the genitalia of AFAB as a slur carries a sexist charge whether it was the intent or not. So we try to create new slur reflexes for ourselves and tend to use other words that do not carry an offensive charge towards a discriminated category.
Please do not take this as a personal attack or an attempt to tell you how to speak, I just think we can do better as a community if everyone spots the stuff they are the more sensitive to and explains to the others why they see a problem.
**On-topic.**Elon, please get lost in outer space in one of your stupid rockets.
While I don’t disagree with the general argument you’re presenting, you must be pretty deep in those feminist circles to assume that you can just use an abbreviation like AFAB in casual conversation, and expect people to just understand what you’re talking about.
And I should actually not have used this description, because vulvas are not exclusive to people Assigned Female At Birth, as another commenter pointed out.
Speaking from a feminstic but also Australian position, I think it’s kinda problematic to outright ban language internationally when the connotation of concern is specific to one culture. We use that word pretty liberally here, and it isn’t done so with remotely the same definition; instead, it is typically used interchangeably with “dickhead” and “arsehole”. Whilst I definitely support your efforts, I don’t think this is the right way to go about it, as it’s a very clear use of American exceptionalism when Americans, taken as a part of the world, make up a minority of people on the Internet.
ON TOPIC:
Yeahhhh, Elon both frightens and disgusts me. What a selfish twat.
No more using the word dick either guys! Oh wait while we’re on it no more saying anything offensive guys, G rated at all times wouldn’t want to accidentally offend anyone.
Words have meanings and their acceptance by society changes over time.
I’m middle of the road on the topic.
To me though, “dick” and “cunt” are perfectly effective words that I employ as needed.
My major problem is that our culture and history are interwoven with language. An attack on offensive language could very well, maybe unintentionally, disconnect us further from our culture and history. Not all of that history and culture is great, but even then, we need to stay connected so that we can continue to learn from it for as many generations as possible.
We live in a world where we’ve been trading in culture for convenience. Now we have some burning books and attacking change. On the other side, we have others who are attacking anything remotely offensive to them, attempting to banish it. The casualty of this war will be the little we have left of our cultural traditions.
If the word is used regularly in British and Australian language, it’s cultural imperialism for Americans to ask us to stop using it because they’ve decided it’s offensive.
I wasn’t talking about cunt. I don’t think that is considered hateful, even in the US. The person I was replying to was making a very generalized statement
I don’t really know, to be honest. But the way culture and language are intertwined, and how unnerving it is for people to be asked to adjust their lexicon, it concerns the heck out of me. Not book banning and burning levels of concerned, but in the same direction.
I dunno, I think we gain a better understanding of culture and history when we take a look at these words, their history and why they are hurtful, and decide to stop using them. Once you see things from the point of view of the people that have been called these things, it opens you up to be more empathetic.
Oh trust me, I’ve been called plenty of things, and have hurt for a great deal of my life as a result. I’ve also said awful things, and hurt even more for that.
I just think that separating people from parts of their language is more akin to a cultural lobotomy than anything else. Taking aspects of language from someone who does not truly understand why, will surely be jarring, and lead to negative reactions more often than not. I don’t think this is going to have a long term positive effect, unless we take the slow road of working to understand each other, and truly embrace all diversity. If we condemn those who hurt us, it only acts to drive more of a wedge through our society.
Telling someone that their actions which are fundamental to their being are hurtful to you, and they need to change, is in fact hurtful to them. It’s not their fault how they were raised, and how their experiences have shaped them, no matter how horrible someone might be. But if we embrace the diversity they add to society, and support them where we can, they just might come to see it for themselves, and strive to be better.
Only the individual can decide to change themself for the better. And even then, it’s a life long journey, and often only minimal changes are possible. So, we should be celebrating the efforts they put forth, not condemning them for the things they don’t have the capacity to change.
Taking aspects of language from someone who does not truly understand why,
That is why you tell them why. “Hey, did you know that word is from the eugenics movement?” or “Hey here is why what you just said is racist.” Saying that is akin to getting a part of your brain cut out is super extreme.
Telling someone that their actions which are fundamental to their being are hurtful to you, and they need to change, is in fact hurtful to them.
If using harmful words is fundamental to your being, you have a lot of other things to work on. Saying that you can’t tell someone that they hurt you because it hurts them is some real victim blaming BS.
It’s not their fault how they were raised, and how their experiences have shaped them, no matter how horrible someone might be.
I never said it was, but they need to know what they do is harmful before they can start to unpack that.
But if we embrace the diversity they add to society,
Only the individual can decide to change themself for the better.
Very true, but the first step is knowing you need to change.
And even then, it’s a life long journey,
Yup, and long journeys start with a single step.
and often only minimal changes are possible.
I would say sometimes, but what I find more true with the people I know, is that once the dam is broken, they start to look at the other things in their life that they can be better in and a cascade effect happens.
So, we should be celebrating the efforts they put forth, not condemning them for the things they don’t have the capacity to change.
I think this is where the meat of the rub lies. Telling someone what they are doing is hurtful is not a condemnation. People tend to take it that way and get defensive, but even the best of us has some gaps in their knowledge. Especially in colonized parts of the world. Being made aware of them is not an insult. It means someone cares enough to bring it to your attention and thinks that you don’t actually want to say harmful things, and they believe you want to be better.
Sorry for the wall of text, but there was a lot to unravel there.
Off-topic only, has nothing to do with the content related to CP2077 and the muskrat
So, based on some comments here, it looks like I came across as trying to ban language, to forbid words, to restrict your free speech.
As stated in my original post, this was and still is not my intention. I have not attacked personally the persones using “cunt”, nor have I said no one should say that.
I just shared a reflexion, because that’s why I sign up on social media platforms.
I am happy that some people felt safe enough in this community to explain why they think my views are incorrect, I actually learned some things thanks to you.
I’m not trying to ban the “cunt” word from language - and if I was, it would be so laughable to think I could have that kind of influence.
I just believe that the words we use have an effect on people. And I think it’s worth it to sometimes pause and wonder which words we are using and if we can use better ones.
I’m not going to engage further on this topic in this channel, it’s probably not the most appropriate space.
So, serious question: why is “dick” okay and “cunt” is not? The former is much more common than the latter, both as an insult and (especially) as a reference to genitalia. While “cunt” is generally seen (in the US) as a more severely insulting word, it’s also rarely used in reference to genitalia (in my experience as a cis male).
Language isn’t logical, it’s not governed by firm rules. It is, because that’s how it developed over time. In 10, 20 or 50 years, this might change entirely.
Increasing complexity, tighter deadlines, demand for highwr profit margins, decrease in education quality. Theres a lot of reasons and not all of them are necessarily bad. Its good that we can simulate what we can. I think the profit motive is just starting to show its ruinous powers as shareholders demand more and more.
I played it on a dated PC (980ti) a few days after release, maybe a week. I didn’t understand the problem either. The gaming community is extremely fickle and loves to hive mind dump on things.
Sony did that bacuse they’ve skirted laws about refunds in some parts of the world for years and CDPR inadvertently highlighted that. MS, Valve and GOG left the game up and issued refunds when requested as that should be a normal part of doing business.
Or… your experience was different from that of others. I had some weird glitches in a boss fight early on which made it difficult or impossible to progress. The person you responded to said it was a mess for them, yet it wasn’t for you. We all saw different things.
And yet, any Bethseda game has the same or worse kind of “game breaking” bugs, and gets away with it from a community backlash perspective.
I never had a bug in CP77 that broke progression. I had one boss get stuck in an elevator that made him trivial to kill.
In skyrim, I had to search up console commands to reset main quest lines that were otherwise completely broken, and commands to restore companions forever lost. And those were common experiences.
My point is that the community reaction was completely overblown when compared to other, very comparable, open world games. CP77 certainly had bugs and areas of improvement. But listening to the community, you’d think the whole thing was a dumpster fire, which it simply wasn’t. And my response was to someone who didn’t play it at release, saying that their opinion of the game being a dumsterfire was “correct”, without any frame of reference besides the community backlash.
the issue was that they marketed it like a RPG (where the source material comes from), which it simply isn't - it's GTA with a skill system and limited choices. I admit that i was disappointed, but the game itself is good and got a lot better with this patch.
I played it on Seriex X at launch and it was fine. Few graphical or animation issues here and there you expect in a big open world game but perfectky playable.
The issue was that there were multiple huge problems with the game spread across various platforms that created a big shit storm of negativity.
It was straight up broken for many console players.
Some PC players had performance issues.
For those who had no issues actually running it (like me), the game still had floaty controls and weightless guns. NPCs and vehicles that popped in and out at odd times. Dialog that clipped or played over each other. Completely broken police/wanted system. Confusing and largely ineffectual skill tree.
Once you got beyond those issues with game polish, then you were dealing with it not really being the deep scifi RPG they promised, but more of a shooter with RPG elements.
So you’ve got potential issues from multiple angles, and it just all compounded on itself. For me, I just got bored of dealing with it after like 10 hours. It was janky and that combined with it being nothing like what they hyped it up as just sorta killed it for me even though it ran with no issues.
With that said, I played for an hour or two after the update and my first impressions are a ton better and it seems like they have really fixed a lot of things. I’m excited to come back to it.
Very nice summary, thanks. I just recently started CP77, about 30 hours in now. I will stick with 1.63 for this playthrough.
My notes: The story and writing seems mostly excellent and unique (but not near the magic and masterpiece of Witcher 3.) Feeling that development was chaotic (pieces cut, rearranged, “montage” with Jackie was jarring.). World seems quite empty, few “layers” (soulless, unpolished). Car controls are not great, very “floaty” and strange. Literally zero encounters with NCPD yet (lol?). Reminds of Deus Ex, but leaning more action FPS. Bugs still apparent (floating cars, missing items), but nothing game-breaking. Graphics underwhelming (city environment especially, characters better, mostly “very high” settings, but admittedly no HDR or ray-tracing).
Would rate 4 out of 5 for now, but a 3 is possible (hopefully not).
That’s an interesting comparison to Deus Ex. I hadn’t thought of that but I agree. It’s definitely got that feel, it’s just much more shallow. Good call.
Right? It’s not like it’s even the type of game you need to play on release. If you can live without always needing the new shiny thing, you have a better experience for half the price or less.
Of course, it does rely on the people who need the new shiny thing to fund the game and beta test all the bugs, but still…
Unfortunately, it’s also here again with 2.0 so far. I started playing the game in 1.3, so this is the most buggy I’ve ever seen it. Vertex explosions, jumpy character animations, skills not working correctly, incorrect sound effects being played.
This is indeed the new normal, and I shouldn’t expect Phantom Liberty to run smoothly next week either. If took months after the recent big Witcher 3 update for it to play okay on mid-spec systems.
I think I was happier when I still catching up on games from a couple generations ago. Now that I’ve done that, I keep running into this stuff. 😕
Yup, I re-downloaded and started a new campaign this week, and I’m a little disappointed. All the prompts are controller prompts, I can’t rebind several of the actions, I can’t crouch or dodge, the game crashed 5 times in 2 hours last night, the FPS takes a dip sometimes between ‘scenes’ in the story, DLSS kept resetting when I was benchmarking, etc.
On the plus, the game still looks amazing, the story is still S-tier in my opinion, Judy is still Judy (I simp for Judy like it’s going out of style and you can’t stop me), the driving combat is a good addition, and the cop fights are good. I don’t regret downloading it right now, but I will be putting it down for a couple of weeks, and hopefully they’ll fix some of the nagging bugs
Starfield is currently a 4-5/10 game and by the time Modders will be done with it, probably a 9/10 game (10/10 if someone mods the whole main story out of the game).
But that's not what modders should be wasting their time on. They shouldn't be fixing the game.
Besides, the changes and oversimplifications Bethesda has made to the engine and the extraordinary announcement that the modkit will take a year to be released, will vastly delay the amount and quality of mods that will be released for the game.
Baldur's Gate was a 7/10 game on release, mostly due to the issues with Act 3. But they took all of a few weeks to fix the vast majority of major issues and bring the game upto 9/10. Every patch and hotfix they released fixed thousands of small and large issues.
Meanwhile Bethesda announced updates right after the game released, fixed like 4 progression breaking bugs and nothing else.
10 days after announcing they were working on bugfixes and patches, not a goddamn peep, not a single thing fixed beyond those 4 small fixes.
It's straight up disgusting how these corporations operate.
All of their games have their mod kits release about that long after the game comes out, so while I can understand the timeline seeming excessive, and I might agree, it's less extraordinary, and more predictably ordinary.
And your 5/10 is my 7/10, so tastes will vary. I think a lot of what makes Starfield problematic is inherent to its design and the growing pain of them moving formats to space and not simply a bug issue, though the bugs are absolutely there, so making your personal rating of it a supposed effect of its bugginess is, I don't think, completely accurate, but your point still stands.
I am waiting for more paid skins to be tossed in the game. I wonder if the mod tools will somehow try and block weapon skins so it stays an only paid feature.
I first learned the wisdom of waiting until after the bulk of the bug-squashing was done before expecting to play a reasonably stable game with Oblivion, 17 years ago.
Granted that Cyberpunk 2077 was a particularly egregious example of the problem, but still...
It’s weird - when I played at launch, I had precisely one bug that impacted my gameplay. Other than that, the game ran pretty smooth and was a joy to play.
Now mind you, I was playing on a PC with a Xeon, 64GB of RAM, and an RTX 2080ti. Nothing ram badly on that system three years ago. Nowadays the older CPU, slower RAM and admittedly older GPU without all the newest bells and whistles (DLSS Framegen I’m looking at you) can’t quite measure up to the latest titles.
Cyberpunk, at launch, was great. For me. Specifically for me. I loved it and still do. But this article hits a point for me that I’ve been struggling to find reason to write about without feeling like I’m ignoring people who primarily play on consoles or can’t afford a nice PC. Regardless…
Man it fuckin’ sucks how you can spend a huge amount of money on a new GPU and then four months later a new one comes out that blows it out of the water. New hardware is so much better and - because all the game devs are using that hardware to design their games both on and for - systems like mine that are still fairly new can’t run the latest games at high settings anymore.
It used to be that if you ponied up the money for a high-end rig, you could expect decent performance for years to come. But I guess blowing a grand on a GPU these days just means you’ll be doing it again in a year or something, instead of the decade or so before.
I’m not saying my PC is bad. Most of what I play runs excellently. But when I spend a grand on just a GPU I expect that GPU to run the newest games at high settings for a long time. Jedi Survivor, Starfield, both run like crap on my system. Never mind the 2TB NVMe drive everything’s installed on.
I had a similar "it's great I don't get what people are talking about" experience, only I was running it on lesser hardware than yours: 4GB GTX 970, 12-core i7-5820k, 32GB ram. I ran into a handful of bugs that were funny but not really disruptive (e.g. some dude's corpse floating behind a car as I was on the highway) and otherwise had a blast.
Nonetheless, it didn't really feel finished, y'know? That part wore on me, and I think is what undermined my enjoyment the most. It really was released too early.
Ran it on a 980ti, i7 4770k, 32GB ram at release. It certainly struggled at parts, but overall decent experience. And that was a pretty outdated rig at that point.
People just threw a tantrum. There were fewer serious bugs than Skyrim, which got all around glowing reviews. People have claimed the hype was why their expectations were so high, but as someone who wasn’t even planning on playing it for a couple years until it was gifted to me, it was a decent game that had some areas of obvious improvement. Definitely a worthy first attempt at a GTA kind of game, and its a damn shame the gaming community chose it to be the meme pinata for the year.
Nonetheless, it didn’t really feel finished, y’know? That part wore on me, and I think is what undermined my enjoyment the most. It really was released too early.
The performance issues seem to be what every article and blog post focuses on because it’s the easy thing to talk about, but I think this right here is what the actual biggest issue was and the real reason people shat on the game.
I didn’t hate it by any means. And I, like you, ran it without issue. I just sort of lost interest because it was janky and super unpolished. Like I was playing an early access game. It wasn’t big bugs as in the game breaking and not running. It was just lots of little annoyance that felt unfinished or half conceived, or like they didn’t undergo full play testing.
The massive performance issues experienced by some just compounded those issues that existed even when it did run perfectly well.
This was totally out for me. It ran ok on my setup, but it was a shit game. It randomly generated traffic when you turned your back. AI for NPCs was often barely functional. Numerous build options seemed either broken or just untested. Itemization was boring and poorly balanced. Vehicles handled like crap in a game with a car collecting activity. The crime system was so undeveloped it felt like it was a joke from the Devs with police spawning in a bowl of rice to bust a cap.
Anyways, I played about 20 hours and realized the game wasn’t finished or feature complete, and absolutely wasn’t what had been advertised. I refunded, but I’m watching feedback now and may buy again if the game is closer to it’s original sales pitch.
My experience with people who have played Cyberpunk is being told that if I don’t expect it to be the game they advertised it was going to be, that its great.
If I remember correctly, it got hyped as the procedural generation not following the usual formulaic approach, where ‘new’ species are created by just propping tusk C onto body shape F etc…
Hype is literally the only thing you miss out on by not playing games on release. If you get used to existing 3 years behind the release schedule, your gaming experience is vastly improved.
One of the few games I don't regret buying before release was Baldur's Gate 3 but that's an anomaly. Most games I'm happy to wait a year or more when it's in better shape.
Even with BG3, act 3 of the game is in much better shape than it launched with.
And their history of making "definitive" editions is looming a year or two down the road.
Oddly, as is their gameplay style of act 3 being the buggiest and least directed along with artificial difficulty of grouping the party in a tight clump via cutscene before the hard fights.
Still an utterly fantastic game despite those minor gripes.
Any game that has to release endings in patches means it wasn’t released as a complete product. BG3 is great, but it is so hypocritical that other games get dragged through mud for bad launches, but BG3 is getting nothing but praise despite releasing incomplete and full of bugs. I can forgive some stuff, but this hypocrisy and inconsistentcy in the gaming community bothers me to no end.
It’s funny that you mention Baldur’s Gate 3 because the game is blatantly unfinished. Act 1&2 are pretty much 9-10/10 but Act 3 is like a 6/10 at best. I’m surprised it gets a pass where Cyberpunk didn’t because in my experience they are equally as buggy. Because of my beefy PC and the scope of the games I think Cyberpunk may have even had less bugs than I’ve had in BG3. And I played it on release.
In BG3 I have quests breaking, characters not showing up where they should, continuity issues, obvious cut content, etc. I just gave up halfway through Act 3 and started a new playthrough instead because I adore the first half of the game and it makes the latter half that much more disappointing by contrast.
I agree. I have had major show-stopping bugs with main story quests in Act 3 and more crashes on the PS5 than I have experienced in any game by a huge margin. I love the game but it has been buggier than CP2077 for me as well.
You get "Larianed" a lot in BG3 just like you did in DOS2, plenty of inconsistencies, annoying pathing and quirks that make you wonder if they even played their own game before releasing it. But to put it in the same vein as cyberpunk 2077 is kind of disgusting. CDPR completely lied about the product, it barely ran on most PCs and didn't even function on consoles.
BG3 while far from perfect, is much more of a game than cp2077 will probably ever be and Larian are firing out patches left and right at the moment while CDPR are still forbidding reviewers to even use their own game footage.
Baldurs Gate 3 will go down as one of the greats. Cyberpunk 2077 will be forgotton about.
I am talking strictly on the basis of bugs/incompleteness not the overall quality/scope of the games. But also “it barely ran on PCs” neither did Act 3. I have a 7950X and I still drop down to 40fps in some places even after the patches. People with say a 3600X were barely scraping 30. If we’re talking about the trend of games being unfinished or buggy on launch then BG3 deserves to be called out for the same.
On just bugs I still disagree that it's anywhere near cp2077, but yeah there is a trend of games being buggy on launch and that defo has to be called out, especially when it's bugs that most people come across that are not even niche or very specific. Performance in act 3 still has a long way to go yeah, luckily it's not a fast paced game or a... shooter, so it's not the end of the world, but not very pleasant either.
I'm surprised I don't hear more people talk about this, maybe because they seemed to strategically handle bugs and content more thoroughly in the early game so that a lot of players would gush about that and be more forgiving by the time they got to act 3, along with everyone who didn't even make it that far and only praised it online instead.
Starfield gets dragged through the mud for both deserved and undeserved reasons, almost universally without nuance, and BG3 gets blanket praise and acclaim, almost universally without nuance, and then I see this comment thread where there are apparently some serious issues grouped within a specific portion of the game and I'm not sure if that's better or not.
Part of it is the game just being so huge. Most people aren’t even going to hit Act 3 until 50-60 hours in which is already much longer than most other games. So you’ve already formed your opinion of the game by the time you hit the less polished part.
And to be fair, those first 50-60 hours are pretty great. (Minus some gripes with things like pathing and inventory management) If the game just straight up ended with Act 2 I would be completely satisfied. I didn’t even mention this because I wanted to focus on the bugs but even narrative, pacing, and quest design in Act 3 is just so rough compared to the other two. It almost feels like a different game or a different developer. The quality drop is that drastic IMO.
I am worried that other studios might look at this and realize they can just front-load the best content and all the polish in the first section and neglect the rest to fix later. It sets a bad precedent.
Indeed, that's the worry. It sometimes seems like AAA game development is learning just how far you can push the average gamer and still get good word of mouth online by way of leaving choice aspects incomplete and compromised
MMOs have been front loading the best content since at least Conan. Remember that one, the first zone had amazing quests and voice acting that the rest of the game didn't.
Cyberpunk for me was not as buggy as for my friends. I find that a lot of the games I play on release aren't as buggy for whatever reason. It could be my AMD setup. It could be that I'm on Linux and use Proton or sheer goddamn luck. Callisto Protocol was fine for me but I've seen so many videos of the game running terribly and some crazy bugs.
The biggest problem with Cyberpunk was the performance. It ran horribly. The bugs were just the icing. My issues with Cyberpunk was that it felt hollow and lifeless. I loved everything about it but it just didn't feel like it had a soul.
My PC wasn't as beefy as it is now when Cyberpunk released so I felt that pain. I'm still on Act 1 on BG3 (because I insist on exploring everywhere) but I see that it has a huge amount of polish put into it. It makes sense that the earlier parts got more attention because that's what the majority of the players will experience. At the rate I'm going, Act 3 will be in great shape.
I agree completely. I’m even very forgiving when it comes to bugs and performance - especially when it’s a studio I trust will address them - but the huge swaths of obviously cut content combined with the way the story wraps up really gets to me and left me massively disappointed. I too still love the game for the gameplay and Act 1 and 2, but it really didn’t stick the landing in my opinion.
Even just things like the reactivity of your companions stands out; in Act 1 you could barely sneeze without everyone at camp chiming in with a comment about what just happened while in Act 3 you’ll do massively impactful things in both main story and companion quests and be greeted by the standard “Well met” or “hello soldier” at camp.
And that’s not getting into whatever scraps of the stated 17k different endings actually ended up not getting cut or the sorry state or the epilogues. Not even all companions get one!
Baldur’s Gate 3 is great at story and choices, which I think is where a lot of praise comes from. But it has a lot of really questionable issues with smaller mechanics.
The one I’m hating the most is how NPCs react to many summons and wild shape. Having a wild shaped party member makes most NPCs run away screaming, which is very painful in the NPC heavy areas of act 3 and basically discouraged you from even using wild shape or summon elemental, even though those are both incredibly powerful. You can dismiss the summon/wild shape, but it uses resources, so it sucks to do so. People have reported the bug for months but it doesn’t seem on the devs radar (they purposefully made NPCs run away – it’s a “feature”).
And just the other day, I discovered weirdness with warlock spell slots. Something about having used an elixer that gives me an extra spell slot (and then having consumed the spell slot) was preventing me from casting certain warlock spells (I think those of the spell slot’s level) because it claimed it needed that spell slot, even though I had higher level warlock spell slots. So a bunch of my spells couldn’t be used! When I searched, I found many reports about similar issues when people multi classed.
I maybe be wrong but I think they just fixed the NPCs running away in the latest patch. One of the patch notes is, “NPCs will no longer run away from anything but the Dark Urge Slayer form to improve interactivity and flow.” I’m not sure if that is referring to Dark Urge only or if that means they exclusively run away from that one form and now all other summons are fair game. But I haven’t had time to jump back into the game to try it yet.
There is actually a quest where you need to escort an NPC and when we got to the boss the NPC cowers in fear and tries to run away. But because I had an elemental summoned he would run towards the boss and instantly die. At first I just thought that was how it was supposed to be but after defeating the boss 3 times I thought it was way too hard to keep the NPC alive and it didn’t really make any sense for him to run straight in after dialogue saying he doesn’t want to go in there. The quest/dialogue also acted like he was still alive so it’s as if the developers never even planned for the possibility of him dying in that area. On my 4th attempt I moved the elemental in front of the door and sure enough he ran the opposite direction and stood in the corner he was supposed to, safe from the fight.
Yes! Can confirm it’s fixed. It’s great and revitalized my interest in using certain characters. I had almost sworn off some characters because of the bug and now they’re back on the menu.
Druids are insane. Owlbear does utter bonkers damage. Far beyond what I could do with any other character (I can’t tell if that means I built my other classes wrong). Only downside is that druids feel super limited. Usually to just melee attacks with no items and most equipment doesn’t even do anything (there’s little reason to ever purposefully revert to your original form, since you’d just eat a wild shape charge).
I love BG3, but agree that it deserves some criticism for act 3 bugginess. Just remember Bethesda basically forced them to release a month early when they announced starfield was coming out on the same weekend.
Hard to disagree with the article, it seems it’s safer to wait at least a few weeks or months to play a new game because there are often things to be fixed after launch. Many games have multiple ambitious and complex systems that need to be tuned post launch. Combine this with high expectations/hype that marketing teams foster and you have a recipe for regret and disappointment on day 1 experiences
After they lied that their first major DLC will be free. I’m happy to wait till Phantom Liberty is 50% off or more. Not going to forget it’s launch. Review embargoes. Last gen performance. B roll footage forced into reviews to hide all the bugs.
@CyberpunkGame Will the game have Free dlc like your big brother @witchergame?
They released a bonus pack for free, so I’m not sure why it was complaining. They were never going to release a massive DLC like phantom liberty for free.
I bought it for less than that from a pawn shop during the peak hate. I remember the pawn guy being like “that ones got real bad reviews” and I said “I’ll try any game for $14”.
I tucked it away for a year or so and then loved it.
pcgamer.com
Gorące