@xantufrog said:
@LuminousAether said:
@xantufrog said:
@R10nu said:
@LuminousAether said:
If it's voice acted but you can skip through it after reading the text, like Fallout 4, that's fine. But if it's acted like it's a movie, like Bioware games and The Witcher 3, that is not fine. That's obnoxious and far, far too time consuming.
Someone didn't play the Witcher 3.
I know, right? Clearly he has no clue. In TW3 you CAN read the dialogue and CAN SKIP whenever you are ready as well, AND there is basically no need to because the "movie" is almost always short as hell even on the rare occasion it isn't broken up by user-guided dialogue options. Not to mention the cinematics are very well done - even if you aren't in love with them, it's hardly like pulling teeth or something to watch Geralt deliver 3 snippy lines and then get back to gameplay.
Play the game before making up some beef about the game that isn't there.
I'm actually playing the game right now, and you're dead wrong. You cannot just skip through the dialogue after reading the subs without missing key bits of story information. It's an obnoxious style of storytelling that they stole from the worst RPG developers of all time, Bioware.
There's no such thing as "very well done cinematics," cinematics are always a negative when it comes to gaming. Passive story delivery is awful. The Witcher 3 is an amazingly casual and simplistic movie game. 2015 alone had two radically superior RPGs, Pillars of Eternity and Fallout 4. Both those games are dramatically deeper and don't have such obnoxiously awful story delivery.
You can't skip through all the text in Planescape without missing important story... here's a "fact" - your OPINION that cinematics suck and are obnoxious and are always negative is an OPINION. They are not objectively bad in this game, they are subjectively bad [to you].
In my opinion, it's laughable holding FO4 up as a superior RPG. In what way? The shallow story that DOESN'T branch based on your decisions like TW3's does? Do you know any of the lore behind the factions and characters you are interacting with in TW3? Did you play TW2? Did you know that your choices matter? Because there is a fraction of any of that depth in FO4. Maybe it's the even worse dialogue segments in FO4 than TW3 has that you like? The dead empty world where only a half dozen NPCs puts up the smallest effort to have a personality? That game is about as casual and easy as they can get!
I love FO4 in its own way, but it's not exactly deep. Pillars of Eternity I will agree with you on in the sense that it is deeper in almost every way than TW3. But IMO the characters are almost entirely less interesting. But it's probably a better "RPG" - TW3 is an action RPG, not a cRPG. But why the hell are you playing RPGs if you're skipping through all the text in Planescape (and I assume Pillars since its text is less compelling than Planescape's) and the cinematics in TW3? Story is, to me, an integral part of the RPG experience.
IMO, one of the biggest shortcomings of TW3 is the characters and story gain a lot of their depth from having played the previous games and knowing on a deeper level who the factions are and why things are going on right now. I imagine without that context it seems a lot more generic ("hey hot witch person who is hiding for some reason, something something king I don't know who he is wants us to do something" - doesn't have the same weight to it)
You are missing the point. Reading is much faster than watching something play out. I don't just skip through the dialogue without reading it, I do read it.
Why would you feel the need to point out what is an opinion and what isn't? Bizarre. Opinions are clearly opinions, do you point out other obvious things? Like you drink water: "boy this is wet!" You see a tree leaf in summer: "dang that's green!"
Story is not the integral part of the RPG experience. Dark Souls is radically superior to The Witcher 3 and barely has a story. Diablo is one of the best RPGs ever made and barely has a story. The single most important element of any RPG is divergent playstyles. That is, can you build your character in a different way and have that character play out completely differently? For Dark Souls? Yes. For Diablo? Absolutely. For Fallout 4? Of course. For Pillars of Eternity? Definitely. For The Witcher 3? No. No matter which tree you focus down, the game still plays the same.
The Witcher 3 is a CRPG. Why wouldn't it be one?
But again, you miss the point, I don't just skip through the text without reading it. I do read it. I hate watching things when I want to play a game. I don't mind reading things. Reading is active. It activates my imagination, it makes me think. Watching something passively just turns off my brain. It's how idiots like their stories told.
The biggest shortcomings of The Witcher 3: horribly boring loot. Laughably casual combat stolen from Assassin's Creed. Huge, crippling problems with overleveling. Story is told in an obnoxious cinematic style. It's a casual movie game. I prefer games with depth. Like Fallout 4, and bringing up story is hilarious. Story has absolutely nothing to do with depth. And that's not an opinion, that's a fact.
Log in to comment