Everyone kind of likes the game because it has enough money to be a competent game.
It's still exactly as bland as any given ubisoft game from what the reviews say.
The difference being those games didn't trade on hot button issues like transphobia to fucking market their 7/10 paste.
The rate at which Ubisoft runs on nOt PoLiTiCaL to market their games tells me that if they finally hit the point where they think they can do that and get away with it, they would.
are you kidding? using hot button issues to market middling experiences is literally ubisoft's entire corporate model
True, I guess the difference is that I've never had anyone try to pretend it's anything but "well maybe if it's the 1 in 10 ubi game that does anything with the material" and I didn't have to suffer through it for multiple years with them sponsoring a cis cosplayer to play their trans 'exploitative marketing' brand and call trans critiques mentally ill.
Everyone kind of likes the game because it has enough money to be a competent game.
It's still exactly as bland as any given ubisoft game from what the reviews say.
The difference being those games didn't trade on hot button issues like transphobia to fucking market their 7/10 paste.
The rate at which Ubisoft runs on nOt PoLiTiCaL to market their games tells me that if they finally hit the point where they think they can do that and get away with it, they would.
They did try to make BLM the main antagonist in their shitty Tom Clancy mobile game
I really liked Wasteland 3 and eagerly await the DLC so I have an excuse to play it again. Carrion was really cool and found a way to make me feel both a horrible terrifying abomination and terrified animal on the run. Pathfinder: Kingmaker had a official turn-based mode that is way better that the real-time with pause of the original release.
I forgot Ooblets came out this year, did that turn out any good?
+1
Options
PiptheFairFrequently not in boats.Registered Userregular
calling witcher 3 mediocre is certainly a take
I understand being mad about pretty much everything CDPR is, but come on
I understand being mad about pretty much everything CDPR is, but come on
Yes the game whose gameplay was a bad rpg version of assassins creed combat before ass creed broke itself doing that feels mediocre to play.
I've literally tried getting into that game like five times and it's always stopped by the fact that for every passable combat and neat bit of dialogue there's a bunch of tripe rpg stuff in the way.
I really liked Wasteland 3 and eagerly await the DLC so I have an excuse to play it again. Carrion was really cool and found a way to make me feel both a horrible terrifying abomination and terrified animal on the run. Pathfinder: Kingmaker had a official turn-based mode that is way better that the real-time with pause of the original release.
I forgot Ooblets came out this year, did that turn out any good?
Ooblets was fun and charming and really pleasantly laid-back (none of the time pressures of Stardew, for instance)
The EA build was certainly early, though. I ran through most of what was there in like eight hours. But they were eight hours well-spent.
0
Options
pyromaniac221this just might bean interestin YTRegistered Userregular
I understand being mad about pretty much everything CDPR is, but come on
I think if someone plays witcher 3 and doesn't like it, or likes it but not enough to finish it, that's a perfectly reasonable experience to have. it's got rough spots, not everything is successful, the combat is pretty one-note and the writing is pretty uneven, especially in the main quest.
I don't know how you can reasonably argue that it is "mediocre", a term which necessarily attempts to position it in the middle of its contemporaries. it's way, way more successful at what it's trying to do than any of the stuff one might compare it to.
Shorty on
+13
Options
MrMonroepassed outon the floor nowRegistered Userregular
Horizon Zero Dawn got a pc release this year so i'm saying Horizon Zero Dawn again.
HZD might have held my attention better if I had not just played RDR2, (which dropped in December of last year and is therefore technically ineligible) because RDR2 did, um, literally everything much much better.
that can't be true, RDR2 didn't have any robot dinosaurs that I can recall
that's what mods are for
0
Options
PiptheFairFrequently not in boats.Registered Userregular
realistic robot tyrannosaurus vulva texture pack
+2
Options
Ubikoh pete, that's later. maybe we'll be dead by thenRegistered Userregular
RDR2 had the thing that Gamespot Cyberpunk review mentioned for me - there was a distinct disconnect between my side-quest Arthur and my main-quest Arthur, especially by the end
in HZD, i felt like i was playing the same Aloy throughout
+1
Options
BroloBroseidonLord of the BroceanRegistered Userregular
I really liked Wasteland 3 and eagerly await the DLC so I have an excuse to play it again. Carrion was really cool and found a way to make me feel both a horrible terrifying abomination and terrified animal on the run. Pathfinder: Kingmaker had a official turn-based mode that is way better that the real-time with pause of the original release.
I forgot Ooblets came out this year, did that turn out any good?
Ooblets was fun and charming and really pleasantly laid-back (none of the time pressures of Stardew, for instance)
The EA build was certainly early, though. I ran through most of what was there in like eight hours. But they were eight hours well-spent.
yeah I like ooblets a lot but it's pretty content light in early access
they are adding some more stuff in the winter update
RDR2 had the thing that Gamespot Cyberpunk review mentioned for me - there was a distinct disconnect between my side-quest Arthur and my main-quest Arthur, especially by the end
in HZD, i felt like i was playing the same Aloy throughout
It was somewhat justified in RDR2, in that being near Dutch and his bullshit canonically made Arthur a worse person.
0
Options
PiptheFairFrequently not in boats.Registered Userregular
anyway, Alpha Protocol is actually the GoTY again, I'm sorry to say
+3
Options
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
no for real though RDR 2 did have way higher production values across the board than HZD but I thought the ranged combat in HZD was way more dynamic and exciting and the writing in the main plot was roughly in the same tier
If you think it's mediocre, that's fine. Insinuating that anyone who doesn't agree with you just doesn't understand why it's bad it something else.
So you would say I don't understand why it's good?
No, I would say things can't be good or bad. People can enjoy or dislike aspects of something, but quality isn't an unassailable aspect of it.
You can say it's bad, I can say it's good, we're both wrong because it simply is.
So weirdly dragging down me expressing an opinion as fact is just weird then?
Because this happens literally every time I talk about 'big' games that are very boring.
And I figured I'd check it's not just a weird autistic misunderstanding where people who *like* the game can call it objectively rad as fuck and people who dislike the game get critiqued for not couching it in disclaimers.
Because honestly, even barring communications issues, that'd be fucking weird as a standard.
saying "hey this game sucks and if you think it's good you just don't understand" raises my hackles a bit.
My friend is working on a roguelike game you can play if you want to. (It has free demo)
+6
Options
PiptheFairFrequently not in boats.Registered Userregular
edited December 2020
"actually this popular game is bad and nobody can see it but me" is incredibly bland twitter-level clout chasing
not liking a thing is fine, taking issue with the games content or raising moral objections to offensive shit in it is good, but fart sniffing is just gonna put people on edge
saying "hey this game sucks and if you think it's good you just don't understand" raises my hackles a bit.
Yes, you don't understand.
I literally do not care if this 'raises your hackles'. If you wanna take me talking about how frustrated a dumb rpg made me as objective fact to get pissy over then get mad.
If this seems unfair then consider how piss annoying that mediocre rpg is when infinite people hold it up as the best in the genre or whatever forever, all the time and present it in the same objective tone.
I think that compared to either other visual storytelling mediums or other text based mediums, you could safely call the witcher 3 mediocre in terms of its writing.
Compared to just flat out, other video games, especially big budget video games, the writing and editing are like, head and shoulders above the competition.
"actually this popular game is bad and nobody can see it but me" is incredibly bland twitter-level clout chasing
not liking a thing is fine, taking issue with the games content or raising moral objections to offensive shit in it is good, but fart sniffing is just gonna put people on edge
No where did I say I was unique in not liking the ass creed knock off with the hot grey haired dude.
I think that compared to either other visual storytelling mediums or other text based mediums, you could safely call the witcher 3 mediocre in terms of its writing.
Compared to just flat out, other video games, especially big budget video games, the writing and editing are like, head and shoulders above the competition.
I understand being mad about pretty much everything CDPR is, but come on
I think if someone plays witcher 3 and doesn't like it, or likes it but not enough to finish it, that's a perfectly reasonable experience to have. it's got rough spots, not everything is successful, the combat is pretty one-note and the writing is pretty uneven, especially in the main quest.
I don't know how you can reasonably argue that it is "mediocre", a term which necessarily attempts to position it in the middle of its contemporaries. it's way, way more successful at what it's trying to do than any of the stuff one might compare it to.
I would actually say TW3's combat is mediocre to bad because it mostly came across as bland open world slashslashdodge swordplay but with enemies arbitrarily breaking out of your default combo at different # of hits. I'm not sure I can think of a major open world RPG with combat I liked less, since games with more boring versions of the combat were less frustrating and games with more complex versions of the combat were engaging.
Posts
The rate at which Ubisoft runs on nOt PoLiTiCaL to market their games tells me that if they finally hit the point where they think they can do that and get away with it, they would.
True, I guess the difference is that I've never had anyone try to pretend it's anything but "well maybe if it's the 1 in 10 ubi game that does anything with the material" and I didn't have to suffer through it for multiple years with them sponsoring a cis cosplayer to play their trans 'exploitative marketing' brand and call trans critiques mentally ill.
They did try to make BLM the main antagonist in their shitty Tom Clancy mobile game
Except now it's going to come with an added layer of me being too fucking snowflakey because they wrote transphobic garbage to appeal to cis dudes.
Carrion was really cool and found a way to make me feel both a horrible terrifying abomination and terrified animal on the run.
Pathfinder: Kingmaker had a official turn-based mode that is way better that the real-time with pause of the original release.
I forgot Ooblets came out this year, did that turn out any good?
I understand being mad about pretty much everything CDPR is, but come on
and i don't care how long that game takes to beat i guarantee it will take even longer to become good at puyo puyo
http://www.audioentropy.com/
Yes the game whose gameplay was a bad rpg version of assassins creed combat before ass creed broke itself doing that feels mediocre to play.
I've literally tried getting into that game like five times and it's always stopped by the fact that for every passable combat and neat bit of dialogue there's a bunch of tripe rpg stuff in the way.
Ooblets was fun and charming and really pleasantly laid-back (none of the time pressures of Stardew, for instance)
The EA build was certainly early, though. I ran through most of what was there in like eight hours. But they were eight hours well-spent.
Mandatory Puyo Puyo shitposting:
So you would say I don't understand why it's good?
I think if someone plays witcher 3 and doesn't like it, or likes it but not enough to finish it, that's a perfectly reasonable experience to have. it's got rough spots, not everything is successful, the combat is pretty one-note and the writing is pretty uneven, especially in the main quest.
I don't know how you can reasonably argue that it is "mediocre", a term which necessarily attempts to position it in the middle of its contemporaries. it's way, way more successful at what it's trying to do than any of the stuff one might compare it to.
HZD might have held my attention better if I had not just played RDR2, (which dropped in December of last year and is therefore technically ineligible) because RDR2 did, um, literally everything much much better.
that's what mods are for
in HZD, i felt like i was playing the same Aloy throughout
yeah I like ooblets a lot but it's pretty content light in early access
they are adding some more stuff in the winter update
No, I would say things can't be good or bad. People can enjoy or dislike aspects of something, but quality isn't an unassailable aspect of it.
You can say it's bad, I can say it's good, we're both wrong because it simply is.
It was somewhat justified in RDR2, in that being near Dutch and his bullshit canonically made Arthur a worse person.
So weirdly dragging down me expressing an opinion as fact is just weird then?
Because this happens literally every time I talk about 'big' games that are very boring.
And I figured I'd check it's not just a weird autistic misunderstanding where people who *like* the game can call it objectively rad as fuck and people who dislike the game get critiqued for not couching it in disclaimers.
Because honestly, even barring communications issues, that'd be fucking weird as a standard.
saying "hey this game sucks and if you think it's good you just don't understand" raises my hackles a bit.
not liking a thing is fine, taking issue with the games content or raising moral objections to offensive shit in it is good, but fart sniffing is just gonna put people on edge
Yes, you don't understand.
I literally do not care if this 'raises your hackles'. If you wanna take me talking about how frustrated a dumb rpg made me as objective fact to get pissy over then get mad.
If this seems unfair then consider how piss annoying that mediocre rpg is when infinite people hold it up as the best in the genre or whatever forever, all the time and present it in the same objective tone.
You'll live.
Compared to just flat out, other video games, especially big budget video games, the writing and editing are like, head and shoulders above the competition.
Writing in video games is bad.
No where did I say I was unique in not liking the ass creed knock off with the hot grey haired dude.
Some real 'guy leaning over you at a party demanding you debate him' energy here.
yyyyyuuuuuuuuuppppppppppp
I would actually say TW3's combat is mediocre to bad because it mostly came across as bland open world slashslashdodge swordplay but with enemies arbitrarily breaking out of your default combo at different # of hits. I'm not sure I can think of a major open world RPG with combat I liked less, since games with more boring versions of the combat were less frustrating and games with more complex versions of the combat were engaging.