# The Best Single Player PC RPG Games of the Last 10-ish Years



## dirtyferret (Mar 27, 2019)

With the best Single Player FPS games poll doing so well and with clear winners in Doom, Metro, Bioshock, and Wolfenstein I've decided to make my best PC single player RPG poll.  You can vote for as many games as you like.

A few caveats;
* I can only list ten choices (which makes it fun and difficult to narrow down)
*Games & expansions by the same developer between 2008-2018 are used for the list and count as one game.  So DA and NW2 count with their expansions but mods and different developer expansions don't count (KOTOR 2 restore mod and Beamdog's BA Siege expansion).
*The list is my personal opinion along with other lists on sites like PC Gamer, along with Meta-critic Professional and fan reviews.  
*A few favorites like Fallout 3 & 4, Alpha Protocol, lost out to better versions in their series, mixed reviews, or better offerings from their developer.
*No MMORPGs; so no WoW, Guild Wars, ESO, etc.,

Enjoy, discuss, rant about missing games, and maybe you will find a game you haven't played but will enjoy down the line.


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 27, 2019)

My top 3 is represented. Sweet! 

(Divinity OS2, ME2 and TW3)


----------



## GoldenX (Mar 27, 2019)

RPCS3.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Mar 27, 2019)

The Witcher 3, FNV/ME2and Skyrim are my top 3 on the list (TW3 would be there list or no list), and for me ME2 and FNV are tied.

To spur some conversation, several other games are completely worthy of the list.  I will name the very underrated Alpha Protocol.


----------



## dirtyferret (Mar 27, 2019)

rtwjunkie said:


> The Witcher 3, FNV/ME2and Skyrim are my top 3 on the list



Is that a NOLA triple?


----------



## rtwjunkie (Mar 27, 2019)

dirtyferret said:


> Is that a NOLA triple?


 I couldn’t decide.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Mar 27, 2019)

500 hrs of tw3,not bored for a second
HoS was the best storyline I ever played.


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 27, 2019)

In all fairness ME2 has a unique quality to it that I haven't seen in ANY RPG elsewhere. The game isn't really an RPG in the mechanics-side of things, its more or less just a samey third person actiongame with some stuff to unlock and progress. But there is no real stat game or anything, not even 'a thin one' like The Witcher 3 has it. ME2's strength is its cast, narrative, voicing and setting. And what makes that so incredibly strong to me, is the fact that you spend the whole game actually putting together that same cast of awesome characters. And again, its not even their specialty or abilities that matter because the game is super easy, but rather just their presence on your ship, and in your missions. Their oneliners and their flavor text, and the dilemma's they present.

Definitely one for the books. If you put the scope of ME2 in perspective of the whole trilogy its probably the least interesting entry in the trilogy, but when you judge it as a game on its own, even though it entirely picks up from part 1, it becomes a masterpiece.


----------



## xkm1948 (Mar 27, 2019)

My pick is not there: NieR Automata


----------



## The N (Mar 27, 2019)

Only Skyrim V that I played. So I guess it is the one.


----------



## dirtyferret (Mar 27, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> In all fairness ME2 has a unique quality to it that I haven't seen in ANY RPG elsewhere.



It's a sci-fi version of the dirty dozen (or filthy 13 if you prefer the book). What sticks out to me is Bioware finally dropped the whole specter thing.  They had been banging the drum of a special soldier since they got to play with Jedis in KOTOR.  Mist monks, Wardens, Spectors, their beginning stories started to all be the same.  ME2 hits the ground running and doesn't stop until the end.


----------



## AsRock (Mar 27, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> My top 3 is represented. Sweet!
> 
> (Divinity OS2, ME2 and TW3)



No love for Divinity OS1 ?.  AI is much better in the 1st one.

Kinda loved ME but they seemed to improve some thing and mess up some thing else that was good in one of the other(s).


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Mar 27, 2019)

First Pillars, then DA:O, then Fallout for me.

Pillars was the best classic RPG I've played in many, many years.


----------



## biffzinker (Mar 27, 2019)

yakk said:


> Pillars was the best classic RPG I've played in many, many years.


I should get back to playing it, got distracted playing another game.


----------



## Rahnak (Mar 27, 2019)

Oof.. This is a tough category. My top 3 from the list are The Witcher 3, Divinity Original Sin 2 and Mass Effect 2. Very honorable mention to Skyrim for being the single player game I dumped the most hours into. But it's very similar and inferior to TW3.


----------



## biffzinker (Mar 27, 2019)

Rahnak said:


> But it's very similar and inferior to TW3.


Skyrim most certainly doesn't measure up to TW3 but that's stating the obvious.

I must of played a different version of Dragon Age: Origins 
Dragon Age: Inquisition because it didn't do anything for me.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Mar 27, 2019)

I voted for the 4 highest, got good taste i guess


----------



## 64K (Mar 27, 2019)

I'm probably going to catch some flack for saying this but Skyrim was overrated. The best ES game was Morrowind and a close runner up was Oblivion.

Yes, I know neither were in the list.


----------



## Rahnak (Mar 27, 2019)

biffzinker said:


> Skyrim most certainly doesn't measure up to TW3 but that's stating the obvious.
> 
> I must of played a different version of Dragon Age: Origins because it didn't do anything for me.



Yep, honorable mention for being my most played.

I enjoyed the story and characters of DA:O the most. Combat was good too. The next games in the series were disappointing though.


----------



## biffzinker (Mar 27, 2019)

Rahnak said:


> I enjoyed the story and characters of DA:O the most. Combat was good too. The next games in the series were disappointing though.


I had the wrong Dragon Age game in mind it was Dragon Age: Inquisition I didn't like.


----------



## Rahnak (Mar 27, 2019)

64K said:


> I'm probably going to catch some flack for saying this but Skyrim was overrated. The best ES game was Morrowind and a close runner up was Oblivion.


I know you're not alone in that. Personally I didn't like Oblivion. Morrowind I didn't really play enough to have an opinion. I thought about getting the recent freebie from Bethesda, but it's an old game and I've already have a lot to play as it is.



biffzinker said:


> I had the wrong Dragon Age game in mind it was Dragon Age: Inquisition I didn't like.


Yeah, not a big fan of that one either. It was only alright.


----------



## 64K (Mar 27, 2019)

biffzinker said:


> I had the wrong Dragon Age game in mind it was Dragon Age: Inquisition I didn't like.



Every Dragon Age game just keep getting worse after Origins.


----------



## TheOne (Mar 27, 2019)

TW3, ME2&3, FONV, DA:O.


----------



## moproblems99 (Mar 27, 2019)

Wow, Skyrim was trash compared to TW3.  It wasn't even better than Morrowind that came 8 years before it.


----------



## GoldenX (Mar 27, 2019)

The problem I have with TW3 is the hand holding. The game marks the way all the time, almost makes it a lineal game.

Another silent vote for Nier Automata.


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 27, 2019)

AsRock said:


> No love for Divinity OS1 ?.  AI is much better in the 1st one.
> 
> Kinda loved ME but they seemed to improve some thing and mess up some thing else that was good in one of the other(s).



I liked OS1, but it was also... I don't know. It felt a bit too indie and some sequences were just horrible to play. OS2 felt like AAA goodness, while still being original and improving on part 1 with new tricks.


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Mar 27, 2019)

biffzinker said:


> I should get back to playing it, got distracted playing another game.



It's worth it IMO, fun to play & relax to a good story.


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 27, 2019)

64K said:


> I'm probably going to catch some flack for saying this but Skyrim was overrated. The best ES game was Morrowind and a close runner up was Oblivion.
> 
> Yes, I know neither were in the list.



I agree completely. I finished Morrowind, Oblivion's main questlines, but Skyrims... tough as old boots. I also didn't quite like the whole setting and world compared to the others. Not quite as exotic. And on top of that, the engine, a graphics update but still the same crap underneath while killing most of the interesting skills and builds. Combat is utterly boring and what you can actually do is pretty limited. No spellcrafting, for example...


----------



## moproblems99 (Mar 27, 2019)

GoldenX said:


> The problem I have with TW3 is the hand holding.



I don't disagree with you on that.


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 27, 2019)

moproblems99 said:


> I don't disagree with you on that.



Yeah its pretty brainless a game, really. I think the strength of TW3 is the immersion. In that sense I much prefer the actual gameplay that for example, Divinity offers. It truly invites you to get creative, not just in controlled moments, but at every step of the way. And its still a controlled environment of sorts, every outcome makes some sort of sense.


----------



## Wattery Fowls (Mar 27, 2019)

Ive been playing a new vegas mod known as New California and i just think its great that this game still has the support it has and they are still to finish the mod (story is good though).


----------



## moproblems99 (Mar 27, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> I agree completely. I finished Morrowind, Oblivion's main questlines, but Skyrims... tough as old boots.



My biggest problem was that it sounded like the story was written has a seven year old's school assignment asking what kind of super hero they would be.  I felt like I knew everything that was going to happen before it happened.  Morrowind was my favorite game ever until TW3.



Vayra86 said:


> I think the strength of TW3 is the immersion.



When I was in the middle of the story, I felt like I could call up Triss or Zoltan and ask if they wanted to go get toasted and crack some skulls.  They had absolute fantastic story telling which has ruined nearly every other game I have played. since.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Mar 28, 2019)

64K said:


> I'm probably going to catch some flack for saying this but Skyrim was overrated. The best ES game was Morrowind and a close runner up was Oblivion.
> 
> Yes, I know neither were in the list.





moproblems99 said:


> Wow, Skyrim was trash compared to TW3.  It wasn't even better than Morrowind that came 8 years before it.





Vayra86 said:


> I agree completely. I finished Morrowind, Oblivion's main questlines, but Skyrims... tough as old boots. I also didn't quite like the whole setting and world compared to the others. Not quite as exotic. And on top of that, the engine, a graphics update but still the same crap underneath while killing most of the interesting skills and builds. Combat is utterly boring and what you can actually do is pretty limited. No spellcrafting, for example...



In the meantime despite modding up Morrowind to be more modern, after trying the ancient game engine and mechanics without mods, it just feels like an exercise in clumsiness, like going to work at a soul-sucking job.  Oblivion I loved, played about 500 hours back in the disc-based days.

Skyrim meanwhile is fully modded up.  I have full graphics mods, and the max number of mods (255) perfectly balanced and stable.  I have dozens of extra dungeons, 4 new world areas, additional towns, castles and an appropriate amount of npc’s of all types to fill the world that Bethesda didn’t think needed any people.  Mods affecting behavior and speech.  Dozens of quests weapons and crafting plus the king of all mods, the most realistic npc ever probably in a game: Inigo. 

In short, I can’t help but feel you all have shortchanged yourselves and missed out on the experience it can be.  It’s given me 1,089 hours so far.


----------



## biffzinker (Mar 28, 2019)

rtwjunkie said:


> In the meantime despite modding up Morrowind to be more modern, after trying the ancient game engine and mechanics without mods, it just feels like an exercise in clumsiness,


There is Skywind to look forward to when it's done.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elder_Scrolls_Renewal_Project#Skywind


----------



## rtwjunkie (Mar 28, 2019)

biffzinker said:


> There is Skywind to look forward to when it's done.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elder_Scrolls_Renewal_Project#Skywind


You’re right! I AM looking forward to it! If they EVER finish.


----------



## moproblems99 (Mar 28, 2019)

rtwjunkie said:


> In the meantime despite modding up Morrowind to be more modern, after trying the ancient game engine and mechanics without mods, it just feels like an exercise in clumsiness, like going to work at a soul-sucking job.  Oblivion I loved, played about 500 hours back in the disc-based days.
> 
> Skyrim meanwhile is fully modded up.  I have full graphics mods, and the max number of mods (255) perfectly balanced and stable.  I have dozens of extra dungeons, 4 new world areas, additional towns, castles and an appropriate amount of npc’s of all types to fill the world that Bethesda didn’t think needed any people.  Mods affecting behavior and speech.  Dozens of quests weapons and crafting plus the king of all mods, the most realistic npc ever probably in a game: Inigo.
> 
> In short, I can’t help but feel you all have shortchanged yourselves and missed out on the experience it can be.  It’s given me 1,089 hours so far.



I have been waiting for Skywind but I think Start Citizen will be in beta before that happens.

Keep in mind, my feelings from Morrowind are when it was cutting edge.  I tried playing it a year or so ago and even with mods I couldn't get the graphics where I wanted them, unsurprisingly.  I probably put 200hr or so in Skyrim so it isn't like I didn't play it and enjoy it at the time.  It just doesn't hold candles to TW3.  I was also REALLY excited about TES6 but that all flew out the window when they announced their development plans.

I bought ESO: Morrowind too and jsut couldn't get into it either.  Not as a solo player.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Mar 28, 2019)

moproblems99 said:


> I have been waiting for Skywind but I think Start Citizen will be in beta before that happens.


LOL! Yeah, it’s beginning to feel that way.


----------



## moproblems99 (Mar 28, 2019)

rtwjunkie said:


> LOL! Yeah, it’s beginning to feel that way.



I was all set to contribute on the project but I have enough trouble sitting down to read so I didn't want to be a scapegoat for delaying the project


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 28, 2019)

rtwjunkie said:


> In the meantime despite modding up Morrowind to be more modern, after trying the ancient game engine and mechanics without mods, it just feels like an exercise in clumsiness, like going to work at a soul-sucking job.  Oblivion I loved, played about 500 hours back in the disc-based days.
> 
> Skyrim meanwhile is fully modded up.  I have full graphics mods, and the max number of mods (255) perfectly balanced and stable.  I have dozens of extra dungeons, 4 new world areas, additional towns, castles and an appropriate amount of npc’s of all types to fill the world that Bethesda didn’t think needed any people.  Mods affecting behavior and speech.  Dozens of quests weapons and crafting plus the king of all mods, the most realistic npc ever probably in a game: Inigo.
> 
> In short, I can’t help but feel you all have shortchanged yourselves and missed out on the experience it can be.  It’s given me 1,089 hours so far.



I've tried it many times, reinstalling Skyrim, scouring Nexusmods for a crapload of mods, spending an evening sorting it all out... and then getting bored in the game after a few hours. I _want_ to lose myself in the world, but it just doesn't appeal to me. At the same time, I clocked over 600 hours in ESO...


----------



## AsRock (Mar 28, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Yeah its pretty brainless a game, really. I think the strength of TW3 is the immersion. In that sense I much prefer the actual gameplay that for example, Divinity offers. It truly invites you to get creative, not just in controlled moments, but at every step of the way. And its still a controlled environment of sorts, every outcome makes some sort of sense.



The part that helped TW3 was the fact that you could always walk in to some thing way more powerful than your self, keeping you more alert.



Vayra86 said:


> I liked OS1, but it was also... I don't know. It felt a bit too indie and some sequences were just horrible to play. OS2 felt like AAA goodness, while still being original and improving on part 1 with new tricks.



The ai in OS2 were bs half the time doing shit like spamming.  but i have not played it for a good while now and did notice a few patches since i last played it so maybe they made it better since then.


----------



## bbmarley (Mar 28, 2019)

Rage, GTA V,  Bioshock not on the list


----------



## siluro818 (Mar 28, 2019)

The Witcher 3 & Skyrim are classics for a reason, so can't ignore those. But the best are Divinity & Dark Souls - and by a large margin at that. These games achieved things previously thought unthinkable. Or at least their original releases did. Which begs the question - why put DS3 in and not the first Dark Souls which is the far superior title? You put ME2 instead of ME3...


----------



## EntropyZ (Mar 28, 2019)

Skyrim>Dark Souls 3>Mass Effect 2

Diablo 3 didn't hold a candle to Diablo II, the only improvement was graphics and quality of life things, in fact I think you got less content overall. I never played TW3 and any FO:NV playthrough with mods starts and ends tragically when the game keeps crashing, although I would say story/quest-side FO:NV smashes Skyrim completely, even Oblivion quests were funnier and had more thought put into them, I could still enjoy the game as janky as it was. I think they were taking Skyrim way too serious and didn't experiment as much.


----------



## Metroid (Mar 28, 2019)

no borderlands in that list? Strange.

Fallout new vegas and skyrim are my top games in your list. I myself like more old jrpg's, jrpg's nowadays are very different.


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 28, 2019)

bbmarley said:


> Rage, GTA V,  Bioshock not on the list



Minesweeper and Patience also missing. Are you aware of what RPG means?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Mar 28, 2019)

rtwjunkie said:


> I will name the very underrated Alpha Protocol.


And my disappointment that it isn't listed but it is more of an action RPG than a traditional RPG.


The Witcher 3...It's a good game but I struggle to call it the best.  One thing that comes to mind is how useless the crossbow is.  It's only purpose, really, is to bring flying enemies to the ground.  Also saw bugs aplenty especially associated with water.  I'm not a real fan of fantasy games because they tend to rehash the same concepts over and over.  I found that true to be true of Witcher 3 but the Heart of Stone expansion did really stand out for its writing--it was almost...poetic.  Music is excellent.  Bringing in Percival to add some authentic Polish flare was a stroke of genius.  There really isn't enough of symphonic cultural movements and Witcher 3 has one of them.  A Celtic Link is the only other that comes to mind.  I think I would name Witcher 2 over Witcher 3 simply because it has so little filler and so much main narrative.  That's a perpetual price of open-world games that Witcher 2 struck a good balance on.

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim...Also a good game but I struggle to call it the best.  The game is so buggy without the unofficial patch, and the autogen'd quests suck.  I think the main problem I have with Skyrim is the world is too big for its own good (just like Fallout 3/NV/4).  Get too far off the beaten path and everything feels samey.  The autogen'd quests amplify the sameiness instead of masking it.  The main story, like Witcher 3, is quite meh, but like Witcher 3, Dawnguard stood out to be for writing.  It's not as good as Heart of Stone but it was a diamond in the rough, I thought.

Divinity: Original Sin 2...Haven't played but will eventually.  I really liked Divinity: Original Sin.  The co-op take on story-driven RPGs was novel.

Pillars of Eternity...Haven't played and...don't really want to.  Not sure why.

Dragon Age: Origins...This game is actually very, very, very tempting to say it was the best. I replayed it so many times and every time, found stuff I missed before.  Yeah...it's samey RPG fantasy material but this game has the immersion factor that most others on this list don't have.  Pretty much everything about it is memorable for me and the only bad thing I really have to say about it is how bad the loading times got in the mines.  It has so many plot twists and they all matter in their own way.

Dark Souls...Never played and never will.

Neverwinter Nights 2...A game released in 2006, seriously?

Mass Effect 2...Mass Effect 2 was the worst of the trilogy so...hell no.

Diablo III...I can't stand dungeon crawlers.

Fallout: New Vegas...Probably still the best Fallout game to date but like Witcher 3 and Skyrim, I struggle to call it the "best" RPG.


There's three games not mentioned that my brain is sticking on: Shadowrun: Dragonfall (Shadowrun: Hong Kong deserves honorable mention...Duncan is so grating) and Seven: The Days Long Gone (on sale now for $18).


----------



## 64K (Mar 28, 2019)

bbmarley said:


> Rage, GTA V,  Bioshock not on the list



GTA V was an action adventure game. Bioshock and Rage were First Person Shooters.


----------



## moproblems99 (Mar 28, 2019)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Heart of Stone expansion did really stand out for its writing--it was almost...poetic.



I loved the Heart of Stone.


----------



## droopyRO (Mar 28, 2019)

Deus Ex: Human Revolution i would add that to the list. Witcher 3, Mass Effect, Dragon Age Origins, NWN 2 i sunk hundreds of hours in this games.


----------



## Fizban (Mar 28, 2019)

Diablo III either shouldn't be in the list, or Path of Exile should be.

I'd be fine with neither being listed as ARPG's aren't really "RPG's" in the technical sense, but of the two I'd definitely consider Path of Exile to be the superior ARPG.



moproblems99 said:


> Wow, Skyrim was trash compared to TW3.  It wasn't even better than Morrowind that came 8 years before it.



Terrible mindset. Games don't need to be better than predecessors to be good.

Almost no game ever has been better than Morrowind, it doesn't make 99.9% of games trash.



Vayra86 said:


> I liked OS1, but it was also... I don't know. It felt a bit too indie and some sequences were just horrible to play. OS2 felt like AAA goodness, while still being original and improving on part 1 with new tricks.



OS 2 is still a very Indie feeling game. I like the game, I am not saying it is bad - but it has flaws I'd consider unacceptable in a game that had a larger budget.

Its tooltip damage for numerous skills is just flat out wrong. Slowdown Arrow and Knockdown Arrow for example show absolute bogus damage, to get your real damage you have to take what is displayed and divide by your warfare bonus. Similarly the infusion skills show what benefit you'd get if you had 0 in summoning rather than what you get with your actual summoning.

If you need 3 pyro to memorize a spell and you have three, and remove a piece of gear that gave +1, and replace it with a different piece of gear that also gives +1, it un-memorizes spells that required 3 pyro.

Its inventory management is terrible.

There's just a lot of small gripes with the game that I am happy to tolerate because the game has a 2-3 million dollar budget, but that I'd consider completely unacceptable if it had a proper AAA budget.


----------



## Ahhzz (Mar 28, 2019)

I'd choose Grim Dawn over D3 all day, I'm afraid.... But, that's why we have such variety available


----------



## Fizban (Mar 28, 2019)

I think I'd pick POE over Grim Dawn, but I do definitely concur that I'd pick Grim Dawn over D3.

D2 was a great game, D3 just wasn't, and still isn't. It's better than it was at launch, but it's still not the king of the genre that D2 was at during its prime.


----------



## Ahhzz (Mar 28, 2019)

Fizban said:


> I think I'd pick POE over Grim Dawn, but I do definitely concur that I'd pick Grim Dawn over D3.
> 
> D2 was a great game, D3 just wasn't, and still isn't. It's better than it was at launch, but it's still not the king of the genre that D2 was at during its prime.


I'm a Grim Dawn over PoE, but that may be because I've played PoE for so long, and Grim Dawn is newer heheh. I think we can definitely agree that we'd select both over D3


----------



## dirtyferret (Mar 28, 2019)

siluro818 said:


> ...Which begs the question - why put DS3 in and not the first Dark Souls which is the far superior title? You put ME2 instead of ME3...



So Dark Souls was one of the harder choices among the three.  DS3 made the top list for techradar, gameradar, and PC gamer while DS1 made the list for PC Gamer also as well as PC GamesN.  I also took into account user reviews on metacritic for the games & expansions and DS3 seemed to get the nod by a hair.



Metroid said:


> no borderlands in that list? Strange.



It was on the FPS list and did OK in results (as was Bioshock as someone else asked about it)
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...-years-post-crysis.253900/page-5#post-4018210


----------



## mouacyk (Mar 28, 2019)

Kingdom Come Deliverance


----------



## dirtyferret (Mar 28, 2019)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Neverwinter Nights 2...A game released in 2006, seriously?



Storm of Zehir came out in 2008 and Mysteries of Westgate in 2009 and those are just two of its many expansions (so timeline wise it makes the list).  It's also made several top RPG lists and sells well on GoG to this day.  I'm slightly surprised you like DA but don't like NW2 since they are somewhat similar and only separated by three years.  NW2 is also one of the few good single player D&D games released within the last few years and it would be weird to have a PC RPG list without a D&D game.


----------



## Rahnak (Mar 28, 2019)

Fizban said:


> OS 2 is still a very Indie feeling game. I like the game, I am not saying it is bad - but it has flaws I'd consider unacceptable in a game that had a larger budget.
> 
> Its tooltip damage for numerous skills is just flat out wrong. Slowdown Arrow and Knockdown Arrow for example show absolute bogus damage, to get your real damage you have to take what is displayed and divide by your warfare bonus. Similarly the infusion skills show what benefit you'd get if you had 0 in summoning rather than what you get with your actual summoning.
> 
> ...



Gotta disagree with you on that one. DOS2 feels very much like an AAA title to me. Now sure, you can nitpick here and there, but you can do that for pretty much every AAA title out there. The sheer attention to detail to the world of DOS2 is for me, what makes it AAA. If you're willing to look for it and experiment, you'll find little details everywhere.

From your list, I'd say only the tooltips are a bummer, although it didn't really bother me. Inventory was completely fine for me. I mean, if you want bad inventory management in AAA games look no further than Skyrim. Needs a mod just for that.


----------



## Fizban (Mar 28, 2019)

The inventory management in D: OS 2 is much worse than Skyrim IMO for one key reason. You have a party. Not being able to multi-select multiple items at once and send them all to a specific character at once is a major pain.

D: OS 2 is a good game, but it's not even got 1/10th of the budget of the games that are actually AAA. AAA isn't  measurement of quality, it's a measurement of budget. Larian did a great job with the budget they had, but they still made due with a tiny budget, and it shows in a lot of ways. Higher budget games tend to have a lot more cutscenes, more unique voice-actors and character models, they typically have more time and money spent on QA and balance-testing, etc..

D: OS 2's attribute system is quite bad. There's only one proper way to spec a character. Max int, finesse, or strength, then raise wits. Con is garbage. Initiative is poorly designed. There's a long list of gripes with the game that I feel a larger budget could have solved. None of these things make it a bad game, I've played it for 700+ hours, but I absolutely think the game could have been greatly improved with a larger budget.


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 28, 2019)

Fizban said:


> Diablo III either shouldn't be in the list, or Path of Exile should be.
> 
> I'd be fine with neither being listed as ARPG's aren't really "RPG's" in the technical sense, but of the two I'd definitely consider Path of Exile to be the superior ARPG.
> 
> ...



Funny because some of these things aren't actually 'gripes'. They are mechanics. The fact that spells get unmemorized for example is a gameplay mechanic as you can drain stats and as a result of that, clear out somebody's arsenal. You can also equip different gear with different skill bonuses that would eliminate your memorization. And changing gear obviously means there is a moment where your score falls, need to take something off before you can put something new on...

Tooltip damage being wrong, yes. But you seem to forget that all damage is influenced by resistances as well, so tooltip damage has very little value in the greater scheme of things. It will never display correct numbers, this also ties into the freedom aspect; it just shows the base damage and again, _skill points are also flexible and can change in combat. _I get your point here though, but the actual 'gripe' underneath I deem to be very limited. Definitely a 'nice to have' but nothing more than that. And, there are actually numerous triple A games that are even worse in their tooltip info  up to the point of simply not saying anything other than 'Strike with your sword, it may hurt a bit'.

Inventory management was horrible in OS1, I think OS2 improved quite a lot. Perfect, no... but I do still think it does better than many other complex RPGs, that often present metric tons of items to either take or drop from your bags with no real rhyme or reason to it. In OS2 you can feel pretty confident about keeping or not keeping stuff and not missing out.

I think you need to go back and play a game like Baldur's Gate for a few hours, so you get an impression what 'AAA' RPGs did in their glory days. It was _far worse than this. _Or better yet try other recent AAA RPGs, even The Witcher has many of the gripes you mention here, including faulty damage display, lacking tooltips and 'hidden' stats and mechanics.

@FordGT90Concept you managed to really surprise me once again with your preferences  But I do think OS2 is your cup of tea, just don't play it on normal difficulty, I'm sure you can straight up jump into a harder one. And... if you like difficulty, I cannot really understand why Dark Souls isn't on your bucket list?


----------



## Partaypooper (Mar 28, 2019)

Ya know, as generic as it may have been, I really enjoyed Kingdom of Armalur: Reckoning. It really scratched my itch for another Fable-like game

Put quite a few hours in it when it first came out and still go back and visit it to this day


----------



## Ahhzz (Mar 28, 2019)

Partaypooper said:


> Ya know, as generic as it may have been, I really enjoyed Kingdom of Armalur: Reckoning. It really scratched my itch for another Fable-like game
> 
> Put quite a few hours in it when it first came out and still go back and visit it to this day


Oh, I loved it until multiple bugs caused me to start screaming at the screen....  Still can't believe no one was able to manage community patches for the silly thing...
I was in the beta for the newest Fable before it died.... SO ticked off we didn't even get going.


----------



## Partaypooper (Mar 28, 2019)

Man I wish that was case, I would love the for it get the community treatment like the ES games. The only bug I really hated was the 4k bug where it broke a lot the quest screens and didn't display any of the text. Made some of the quests kinda difficult

Making me want to go back and play again


----------



## Fizban (Mar 28, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Funny because some of these things aren't actually 'gripes'. They are mechanics. The fact that spells get unmemorized for example is a gameplay mechanic as you can drain stats and as a result of that, clear out somebody's arsenal. You can also equip different gear with different skill bonuses that would eliminate your memorization. And changing gear obviously means there is a moment where your score falls, need to take something off before you can put something new on...



If you replace one piece of gear, with another that also satisfies the spells requirements, it shouldn't be unmemorized. I'm not talking about removing your helmet, and then putting another one on. I'm talking about grabbing one and directly replacing the other with it. It's very simple to check for memorization requirements after the swap rather than checking during the brief moment that you technically have no helmet equipped.

As for Baldurs Gate, etc. I've played all of those. They had QOL issues too, but over time the expected standards in many regards have increased.

Hidden stats are also fine. I have more issue with a game that pretends to be transparent and lies to you than one that just outrights hides information. Many games don't tell you what damage a spell does - I'm cool with that. I'm less cool with a game telling me that an attack does 772 - 885 damage when it really does 454-521.

And no, I'm not forgetting resistances. They don't matter in this context. The skills I named do physical damage, there is no physical resistance in the game, it isn't a thing.

Witcher 3 did lots of things wrong, but they were mostly gameplay and combat-related. In that game that didn't matter that much as what made the game great was never its combat. D: OS 2 on the other hand is mostly a standout game due to its combat. Its story isn't fantastic IMO, D: OS 2 is a great game because of the creativity its combat system allows. If the combat system is the primary thing going for a game it makes sense to me to more harshly judge its combat system. ie. I think Witcher 3 is better than Dark Sous 3. That said, I think Dark Souls 3 has significantly better combat mechanics.

Witcher 3 isn't great because of its combat, it's great in spite of it, as such I pay less attention to the faults of its combat system than I do when critiquing games that shine as a result of their combat.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Mar 28, 2019)

Fizban said:


> Witcher 3 isn't great because of its combat, it's great in spite of it,


Indeed!  The story and lore and interwoven quests and rich world are what make the game great, despite the less than satisfying combat.


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 28, 2019)

Fizban said:


> If you replace one piece of gear, with another that also satisfies the spells requirements, it shouldn't be unmemorized. I'm not talking about removing your helmet, and then putting another one on. I'm talking about grabbing one and directly replacing the other with it. It's very simple to check for memorization requirements after the swap rather than checking during the brief moment that you technically have no helmet equipped.
> 
> As for Baldurs Gate, etc. I've played all of those. They had QOL issues too, but over time the expected standards in many regards have increased.
> 
> ...



I can get into that. But one more example for tooltips: Diablo 3. 95% of the game is about damage and the best youll get is ultra vague percentages in tooltips...

Speaking of which... this one actually does apply too and should be in place of D3.... and just now got its 2nd expansion too

GRIM DAWN


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1110965898704125952


----------



## biffzinker (Mar 28, 2019)

Partaypooper said:


> Ya know, as generic as it may have been, I really enjoyed Kingdom of Armalur: Reckoning. It really scratched my itch for another Fable-like game
> 
> Put quite a few hours in it when it first came out and still go back and visit it to this day


Sounds familiar, this game? I have wanted to go back for a second play through.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Mar 28, 2019)

biffzinker said:


> Sounds familiar, this game? I have wanted to go back for a second play through.
> View attachment 119742
> View attachment 119744


Ok, I’m going to have to try this out. I admit I never tried it.


----------



## Ahhzz (Mar 28, 2019)

rtwjunkie said:


> Ok, I’m going to have to try this out. I admit I never tried it.


Gotta warn you, there may be some bugs that jump all over your play. Best recommendation is save early, save often   If you can get past them, or get around without hitting any serious ones, I really enjoyed the game


----------



## biffzinker (Mar 28, 2019)

Ahhzz said:


> Gotta warn you, there may be some bugs that jump all over your play. Best recommendation is save early, save often   If you can get past them, or get around without hitting any serious ones, I really enjoyed the game


Have to say for me I don't remember running into any bugs or glitches. Maybe I did though and I'm not remembering. Game is from 2011 so it's been awhile.


----------



## TheOne (Mar 28, 2019)

rtwjunkie said:


> despite the less than satisfying combat.



Quen, fast strike, fast strike, dodge, fast strike, fast strike, dodge, repeat.


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 28, 2019)

rtwjunkie said:


> Ok, I’m going to have to try this out. I admit I never tried it.



Go into it thinking you are playing an MMO with no friends  Its grindy, but has nice combat and big open maps to explore.



TheOne said:


> Quen, fast strike, fast strike, dodge, fast strike, fast strike, dodge, repeat.



Yeah, for me it was mostly Quen abuse too. Probably the coolest skill the game has.


----------



## Fizban (Mar 28, 2019)

I liked Kingdoms of Amalur. I don't recall it being particularly buggy either. Certainly much less buggy than Bethesda's games.


----------



## moproblems99 (Mar 28, 2019)

Fizban said:


> I liked Kingdoms of Amalur. I don't recall it being particularly buggy either. Certainly much less buggy than Bethesda's games.



It has been a while since I played it but if I recall, it started out slow and then I really enjoyed it.



Vayra86 said:


> Yeah, for me it was mostly Quen abuse too. Probably the coolest skill the game has.



Quen?  What was that?

*I didn't use that shiedly thing that made you nearly invincible.  Really.  I didn't.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Mar 29, 2019)

Quen was an absolute must on the hardest difficulty but it also felt like cheat mode to use.


Kingdom of Amalur: Reckoning is a fantastic traditional RPG game.  Beat it twice a long time ago.  Very long with a lot of variety.  I like their twist on the portrayal of elves.


----------



## vectoravtech (Mar 29, 2019)

This steam game looks good, HYPERCHARGE: Unboxed too bad itd not on itch.io


----------



## AsRock (Mar 29, 2019)

mouacyk said:


> Kingdom Come Deliverance



As good as that game actually is, they recently pissed me off and just stopped playing.  Fixing bugs is one thing but they changed the rules how the game works, like for example not being able to ride your horse if you are carrying to much and just made it a pain in the ass to play and make money to play the game.


----------



## vectoravtech (Mar 29, 2019)

AsRock said:


> As good as that game actually is, they recently pissed me off and just stopped playing.  Fixing bugs is one thing but they changed the rules how the game works, like for example not being able to ride your horse if you are carrying to much and just made it a pain in the ass to play and make money to play the game.


oh, I hope they start making other games real like this. I havnt owned that game yet btw


----------



## aliovalio (Mar 29, 2019)

The Witcher, just because even a card game within a game was able to be made into a real standalone game... like, the thought put into making The Witcher 3 goes way beyond my comprehension, and it's nothing but awesome!

If you want to find out more about the Gwent game and its new expansion, here's my Blog Post.

Hope you'll enjoy it!

Cheers & Have a Good One!


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Mar 29, 2019)

Ahhzz said:


> I'd choose Grim Dawn over D3 all day, I'm afraid.... But, that's why we have such variety available



I have Grim Dawn, I like it very much.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Mar 30, 2019)

neverwinter nights  > 2 in many ways save for companion character development but really I think mask of the betrayer was peak on story/immersion and character development

really though if we're going back that far you have to bring in kotor1 and 2

had a hard time getting into the witcher series. Have yet to be able to complete a play through of 1. So I've never played 2 and thus not 3.

odds are getting worse I ever will.


will never play dark souls, keyboard and mouse only please.


dragon age origins is epic

I put ME2, Fallout NV and Skyrim on the same level

I get ME2 doesn't have the immersion or story of the first, but the many endings and replay-ability are awesome.


----------



## dirtyferret (Mar 30, 2019)

yogurt_21 said:


> neverwinter nights  > 2 in many ways save for companion character development but really I think mask of the betrayer was peak on story/immersion and character development
> 
> really though if we're going back that far you have to bring in kotor1 and 2
> 
> ...



Reread (or just read) the initial post and you will see why Kotor I and II are not included but NW 2 is.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Mar 30, 2019)

dirtyferret said:


> Reread (or just read) the initial post and you will see why Kotor I and II are not included but NW 2 is.





> With the best Single Player FPS games poll doing so well and with clear winners in Doom, Metro, Bioshock, and Wolfenstein I've decided to make my best PC single player RPG poll. You can vote for as many games as you like.
> 
> A few caveats;
> * I can only list ten choices (which makes it fun and difficult to narrow down)
> ...



no idea what you thought you wrote there but no there is zero explanation as to why kotor was not included, a mod mention in a phrase that limits itself to a decade span many years after these games came out explains nothing at all.

but to Ford's point you did seem to be only including the past decade or so. (which is why he found the inclusion of NWN2 odd)


----------



## dirtyferret (Mar 31, 2019)

yogurt_21 said:


> no idea what you thought you wrote there but no there is zero explanation as to why kotor was not included, a mod mention in a phrase that limits itself to a decade span many years after these games came out explains nothing at all.
> 
> but to Ford's point you did seem to be only including the past decade or so. (which is why he found the inclusion of NWN2 odd)


Second caveat is the 100% explanation.  I'm sorry basic math and reading comprehension is difficult for you.


----------



## Fizban (Mar 31, 2019)

KOTOR II is 2 years older than NWN 2, and 5 years older than NWN's final DLC. Seems pretty obvious why it wasn't included.


----------



## Vario (Mar 31, 2019)

I rated Skyrim the best.  Its not a great RPG but it was the most fun for me.  For me it was an FPS with swords, arrows, and spells.  A lot of things about the game irritated me but I still had the most fun.  I think the exploration and general goofiness that the player can get away with is what made it fun.  One highlight was abusing the ritual stone to raise massive undead hordes.  I love sandbox games.  Also, I know this is single player discussion ... but I had a blast playing Skyrim Together Coop mod with some buddies even though it crashed a lot.  I also liked FO4 but played that as a shooter as well, barely used VATs and leveled up the shooting skills.


----------



## Fizban (Mar 31, 2019)

I liked Skyrim a lot, but Witcher 3 is definitely my favorite game of those listed. It's not even close.  What is close for me is New Vegas vs Skyrim. I prefer the setting of Skyrim, but the writing of New Vegas.


----------



## Apocalypsee (Mar 31, 2019)

I've voted few days ago but I never gave my opinion about it. The one and only game I voted is *The Witcher 3*. Mind you, I never played Witcher 1 and 2 before playing the 3. My cousin who love Skyrim give big praise to this game, keeps telling me to play this game and after a few years of its release I only played it last year (I think).

For me this game is the benchmark for all new games. It incorporate the _best_ of visual, plus the _great story_ and _atmosphere_ with _music_ that completes the package of this game. Earlier games like Skyrim and Fallout New Vegas might have good story and atmosphere and music, but it pales in comparison to this game in terms of (stock) graphics (and to some extend physics). IMO this game is _the peak_ of what visual quality and story could ever come. Looking at how current trend of gaming, I don't think any other game will make me felt like this again. Perhaps they could make it again with Cyberpunk 2077? Time will tell...I don't like the setting of Cyberpunk, but I don't like the settings of Witcher too (at first) so I could be wrong.

It took me a couple of weeks to truly understands the game mechanics (silver sword for monster, steel for humans, signs, parry, equipment upgrades, etc.) but once that took off I'm really hooked to this game. Heck I played it for 3 straight months without touching any other games. After finishing the main game I started Blood and Wine and then stopped till this day. Why? Because I know if I finished the game I will feel very empty knowing I may never experienced anything like this again. Same like I felt when finishing the main game.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Mar 31, 2019)

Fizban said:


> KOTOR II is 2 years older than NWN 2, and 5 years older than NWN's final DLC. Seems pretty obvious why it wasn't included.


I have mixed feelings about KOTOR II.  Namely, I beat it, and I remember hardly any of it.  The story...felt...disjointed...

KOTOR was a better game because it wasn't disjointed.  Problem is, combat in it sucked.  It was like hybrid turn-based.  Bioware really didn't get RPG combat right until Dragon Age: Origins.


I still don't know what RPG is my favorite and I think the reason for that is because RPG in itself is too broad of a category.  It needs an extra field to narrow it down like sci-fi, fantasy, action, first person, third person, or adventure.


----------



## Apocalypsee (Mar 31, 2019)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I have mixed feelings about KOTOR II.  Namely, I beat it, and I remember hardly any of it.  The story...felt...disjointed...
> 
> KOTOR was a better game because it wasn't disjointed.  Problem is, combat in it sucked.  It was like hybrid turn-based.  Bioware really didn't get RPG combat right until Dragon Age: Origins.


KOTOR II was rushed and incomplete, but now there is restoration content mod for it. I finished it yesterday (with the restored content) and I'd say they restored the game well. I still need to replay it again since I dont get all the companion quest plus their full story.


----------



## Fizban (Mar 31, 2019)

Apocalypsee said:


> I've voted few days ago but I never gave my opinion about it. The one and only game I voted is *The Witcher 3*. Mind you, I never played Witcher 1 and 2 before playing the 3. My cousin who love Skyrim give big praise to this game, keeps telling me to play this game and after a few years of its release I only played it last year (I think).
> 
> For me this game is the benchmark for all new games. It incorporate the _best_ of visual, plus the _great story_ and _atmosphere_ with _music_ that completes the package of this game. Earlier games like Skyrim and Fallout New Vegas might have good story and atmosphere and music, but it pales in comparison to this game in terms of (stock) graphics (and to some extend physics). IMO this game is _the peak_ of what visual quality and story could ever come. Looking at how current trend of gaming, I don't think any other game will make me felt like this again. Perhaps they could make it again with Cyberpunk 2077? Time will tell...I don't like the setting of Cyberpunk, but I don't like the settings of Witcher too (at first) so I could be wrong.
> 
> It took me a couple of weeks to truly understands the game mechanics (silver sword for monster, steel for humans, signs, parry, equipment upgrades, etc.) but once that took off I'm really hooked to this game. Heck I played it for 3 straight months without touching any other games. After finishing the main game I started Blood and Wine and then stopped till this day. Why? Because I know if I finished the game I will feel very empty knowing I may never experienced anything like this again. Same like I felt when finishing the main game.




It's a great game, but you seem to be overestimating its graphics. It's four years newer than Skyrim, and five years newer than New Vegas. Comparing its graphics to theirs is obviously going to look favorably upon it. Comparing it to more recent games like Far Cry 5 however shows how much graphics have come in the past four years since its release. It's not even close to the best looking game out. It was at launch, and Cyberpunk 2077 likely will be when it launches, but four years is a long time to think graphical fidelity hasn't improved as a whole across the entire industry. In another four years the games of today will look noticeably dated as well.


----------



## Apocalypsee (Apr 1, 2019)

Fizban said:


> It's a great game, but you seem to be overestimating its graphics. It's four years newer than Skyrim, and five years newer than New Vegas. Comparing its graphics to theirs is obviously going to look favorably upon it. Comparing it to more recent games like Far Cry 5 however shows how much graphics have come in the past four years since its release. It's not even close to the best looking game out. It was at launch, and Cyberpunk 2077 likely will be when it launches, but four years is a long time to think graphical fidelity hasn't improved as a whole across the entire industry. In another four years the games of today will look noticeably dated as well.


Far Cry 5 or New Dawn don't look better than Witcher 3. IMO graphics has become stagnant this past few years, that is why nvidia has moved to new things like RTRT to improve things a bit.


----------



## Fizban (Apr 1, 2019)

I don't even find it close. Far Cry 5 looks night and day superior to Witcher 3 IMO.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 1, 2019)

Fizban said:


> I don't even find it close. Far Cry 5 looks night and day superior to Witcher 3 IMO.



Far cry 5 looks sick, better than new dawn, which is a bit garish, needs a tad less color.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Apr 1, 2019)

Apocalypsee said:


> Far Cry 5 or New Dawn don't look better than Witcher 3. IMO graphics has become stagnant this past few years, that is why nvidia has moved to new things like RTRT to improve things a bit.





Fizban said:


> I don't even find it close. Far Cry 5 looks night and day superior to Witcher 3 IMO.





tigger said:


> Far cry 5 looks sick, better than new dawn, which is a bit garish, needs a tad less color.



I don’t think you can compare them. They are different implementations of different engines.  Each is suited to portraying their own worlds properly. I for one couldn’t imagine TW3 with different graphics.  It is gorgeous for when it was made, and even as graphics move on, it is perfect for the setting and conveying the feel of that world.


----------



## Fizban (Apr 1, 2019)

I think you can argue Witcher 3 has better aesthetics, because that's more about art style, and is fairly subjective. But as far as which is more realistic, I just really don't see how it can even be argued that Witcher 3 looks more realistic. It is undoubtedly a better game, but that's not at all the same as being superior graphically.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Apr 1, 2019)

Fizban said:


> I think you can argue Witcher 3 has better aesthetics, because that's more about art style, and is fairly subjective. But as far as which is more realistic, I just really don't see how it can even be argued that Witcher 3 looks more realistic. It is undoubtedly a better game, but that's not at all the same as being superior graphically.


Again, as I just said, it’s not a competition for realism. It’s about the graphics conveying the setting OF THAT GAME, no matter the game.

There are other newer games that could be argued to look worse now, but they are perfect for the game they are implemented in.  The Occupation comes to mind.


----------



## Fizban (Apr 1, 2019)

That doesn't make sense to me. That just seems like a way to defend a game with inferior graphics. Clouds look like clouds. Water looks like water. Humans look like humans. You don't get to decide clouds look different in the Witcher's setting to argue that them looking less realistic doesn't mean they look inferior. Both games were aiming for photo-realism in their environments, one just succeeded more than the other.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Apr 1, 2019)

Fizban said:


> Both games were aiming for photo-realism in their environments, one just succeeded more than the other.


Says who? You’ve got the inside scoop on every game team for every game ever made?  I’ll make it even easier for you.  Far Cry 5 and TW3 were both games you intimately know the dev’s goals and priorities because you were there?

Take a look at and play The Occupation. Hell, I’ll even BUY it for you. The graphics are perfectly suited to conveying a world FEEL.  You then might see what I’m talking about.

Graphics is not about about realism. Consider them to be as much of a role as npc’s and the story in conveying a world feel.

Contrary to what you want to believe, every design team’s goal is NOT to make photorealism.


----------



## Fizban (Apr 1, 2019)

I didn't say every games goal was photorealism. That's a strawman argument. I said it was specifically in those two games. Nothing about them is intentionally cartoony.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Apr 1, 2019)

Fizban said:


> I didn't say every games goal was photorealism. That's a strawman argument. I said it was specifically in those two games. Nothing about them is intentionally cartoony.


So let me get this straight: for you, the only options are photorealistic and cartoonish?  No room anywhere for anything in between huh? Wow!


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 1, 2019)

Fizban said:


> I didn't say every games goal was photorealism. That's a strawman argument. I said it was specifically in those two games. Nothing about them is intentionally cartoony.



Neither game is about photorealism. The Witcher gives you all sorts of fantasy creatures and spells. Far Cry 5 also uses 'magical' properties to enhance the experience.  They both do not resemble realism at all, they convey an artistic direction that is either helped by, or limited by the engine, and often both. In Far Cry New Dawn you can see that taken to extremes but really, Far Cry 5 also contains many utterly goofy things and realistic it sure as hell is not. The engine is also not very good at weather and lighting indoors, and it barely has any physics applied on its environment. The Witcher 3 takes weather influences to a whole other level and uses it well to create the atmosphere the game is known for. Far Cry has none of that. 90% of the time is sunshine and when it rains, its convincingly unimpressive. I'd go as far as to say that even Skyrim nails the weather effects and outdoor feel better.

From a technical point of view The Witcher 3 did some novel things, or at least stacked several technologies to great effect. Far Cry's engine is same old, reskinned and upscaled content. We've seen it before and its not impressive apart from being good at giving us open worlds.

I mean...

this - not a single tree looks the same, they bend along the wind direction and the physics are just right, notice the flag as well. Then, take note of the wild variety of different assets/objects you see here and the reflection quality, but also the definition that is still there in the sky.






Or this - 109781001 100% similar trees casting blurry reflections over a low quality water surface (because of LOD) with no influence from wind anywhere (odd.. still water should cast sharper reflections, right?). Its absolutely sterile and the long distance view is nothing more than a silhouette because apparently, sunset means fog. Far Cry is given way too much credit for its graphics. We're still looking at Far Cry 3 in that sense, with some minor tweaks.






Heck, even Ubisoft knows it can do much better than this... here's Wildlands on AnvilNext, hi draw distance, bye fog  -note how the valleys are filled with a haze as well.


----------



## kurosagi01 (Apr 1, 2019)

Mass Effect 2 or Dark Souls for me, both thoroughly enjoyed and struggled to stop playing.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 1, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Neither game is about photorealism. The Witcher gives you all sorts of fantasy creatures and spells. Far Cry 5 also uses 'magical' properties to enhance the experience.  They both do not resemble realism at all, they convey an artistic direction that is either helped by, or limited by the engine, and often both. In Far Cry New Dawn you can see that taken to extremes but really, Far Cry 5 also contains many utterly goofy things and realistic it sure as hell is not. The engine is also not very good at weather and lighting indoors, and it barely has any physics applied on its environment. The Witcher 3 takes weather influences to a whole other level and uses it well to create the atmosphere the game is known for. Far Cry has none of that. 90% of the time is sunshine and when it rains, its convincingly unimpressive. I'd go as far as to say that even Skyrim nails the weather effects and outdoor feel better.
> 
> From a technical point of view The Witcher 3 did some novel things, or at least stacked several technologies to great effect. Far Cry's engine is same old, reskinned and upscaled content. We've seen it before and its not impressive apart from being good at giving us open worlds.
> 
> ...



To me it seems like one person prefers x game and one y, so you defend the game you prefer more. imo they both look great, who cares if it's not photo realistic


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 1, 2019)

tigger said:


> To me it seems like one person prefers x game and one y, so you defend the game you prefer more. imo they both look great, who cares if it's not photo realistic



I'm trying to move away from preference and into engines and technologies used, and how they work to improve the overall look&feel. I totally get how it works though; once you're immersed in a game its easy to think it looks better than everything else. Its how our mind works. We really don't need super advanced graphics to get the right impression; our brain is great at filling in the blanks. If you go back to the early days we played hideous looking games where 'grass' was a flat surface with a green color and we knew it was grass, it felt like we walked over it because that is what the game intended it to be.

I think putting those screens side by side makes it very clear that there is a quality difference between all three, and I'd still say the first screenshot is by far the most impressive. It has so many things going on, and while both other screens are also largely _static in the game itself_, (the Far Cry sunset, best you'll get is some ripple moving in the water there) the Witcher has most of the image _in motion_ because of extensive cloth and vegetation physics.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 1, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> I'm trying to move away from preference and into engines and technologies used, and how they work to improve the overall look&feel.



So i guess the story or anything does not matter then, just how it looks and feels?


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 1, 2019)

tigger said:


> So i guess the story or anything does not matter then, just how it looks and feels?



Huh? No, the discussion was on graphics and whether one or the other looks better, or is better at approaching photorealism. My point is that not a single engine really gets photorealism right, but they do have an artistic direction - and that art is generally closely tied to the rest of the game. Of course story / lore / world building matters. A good engine is one that can support that illusion in the best possible way. For me personally, I don't see how Far Cry's engine does a great job at that, it feels a bit easy and cheap in some ways, its limited (and reduced! Far Cry 2 had better fire simulation, it even got influenced by wind!) physics and interaction is pretty painful sometimes and detracts from the game. An engine is also more than just graphics, it directly influences the gameplay too.

An example. Compare the horse riding of TW3 with driving cars in Far Cry. Geralt's horse handily avoids all those branches and trees as you gallop through the forest and stops you when you're about to jump off a cliff or crash into a wall. In Far Cry, they had to add an autopilot to make it somewhat feasible and not feel like you've had a bottle of wodka behind the wheel. And note: they only implemented that in the game _after people complained about it. _You tell me how it helps immersion to have a Tesla Autopilot feature in a crappy old Jeep. Its a cheap solution for an engine-related problem.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 1, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Huh? No, the discussion was on graphics and whether one or the other looks better, or is better at approaching photorealism. My point is that not a single engine really gets photorealism right, but they do have an artistic direction - and that art is generally closely tied to the rest of the game. Of course story / lore / world building matters. A good engine is one that can support that illusion in the best possible way. For me personally, I don't see how Far Cry's engine does a great job at that, it feels a bit easy and cheap in some ways, its limited (and reduced! Far Cry 2 had better fire simulation, it even got influenced by wind!) physics and interaction is pretty painful sometimes and detracts from the game. An engine is also more than just graphics, it directly influences the gameplay too.
> 
> An example. Compare the horse riding of TW3 with driving cars in Far Cry. Geralt's horse handily avoids all those branches and trees as you gallop through the forest and stops you when you're about to jump off a cliff or crash into a wall. In Far Cry, they had to add an autopilot to make it somewhat feasible and not feel like you've had a bottle of wodka behind the wheel. And note: they only implemented that in the game _after people complained about it. _You tell me how it helps immersion to have a Tesla Autopilot feature in a crappy old Jeep. Its a cheap solution for an engine-related problem.



I get it, you prefer the witcher 3 over far cry 5. Also this thread was about the best RPG game, not about the witcher 3 over far cry 5


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 1, 2019)

Fizban said:


> It's a great game, but you seem to be overestimating its graphics. It's four years newer than Skyrim, and five years newer than New Vegas. Comparing its graphics to theirs is obviously going to look favorably upon it. Comparing it to more recent games like Far Cry 5 however shows how much graphics have come in the past four years since its release. It's not even close to the best looking game out. It was at launch, and Cyberpunk 2077 likely will be when it launches, but four years is a long time to think graphical fidelity hasn't improved as a whole across the entire industry. In another four years the games of today will look noticeably dated as well.





Fizban said:


> I don't even find it close. Far Cry 5 looks night and day superior to Witcher 3 IMO.





tigger said:


> I get it, you prefer the witcher 3 over far cry 5. Also this thread was about the best RPG game, not about the witcher 3 over far cry 5



Scroll back a page, I didn't bring it up... I'm just shooting holes in the theory that Far Cry 5 somehow 'came a long way' from TW3's quality level. There is just no possible way you can maintain that, it has nothing to do with preference. Technically you're comparing an engine that is forked from CryEngine 1 and currently _far behind_ the actual CryEngine in development, it is handicapped for its mandatory console ports since Far Cry 2/3 and has iterated from there. CDPR produced theirs in-house specifically for TW3 and its far more recent, and as I pointed out (and tried to make visible here, again its not a pissing contest but a way to take note of things), has far more advanced weather and physics systems. And then I haven't even touched on how it is also much better at doing lots of NPCs, take a stroll through Novigrad. In Far Cry 5 the largest crowds you'll get are in cutscenes or as the same inanimate masses we've seen since Assassin's Creed 1.

You either want to see that or you don't, and your preference is your own, but objectively saying FC5 'looks better'... I'd say look again.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 1, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Scroll back a page, I didn't bring it up... I'm just shooting holes in the theory that Far Cry 5 somehow 'came a long way' from TW3's quality level. There is just no possible way you can maintain that, it has nothing to do with preference. Technically you're comparing an engine that is forked from CryEngine 1 and currently _far behind_ the actual CryEngine in development, it is handicapped for its mandatory console ports since Far Cry 2/3 and has iterated from there. CDPR produced theirs in-house specifically for TW3 and its far more recent, and as I pointed out (and tried to make visible here, again its not a pissing contest but a way to take note of things), has far more advanced weather and physics systems. And then I haven't even touched on how it is also much better at doing lots of NPCs, take a stroll through Novigrad. In Far Cry 5 the largest crowds you'll get are in cutscenes or as the same inanimate masses we've seen since Assassin's Creed 1.
> 
> You either want to see that or you don't, and your preference is your own, but objectively saying FC5 'looks better'... I'd say look again.



I never said far cry 5 looks better, you are the one for the last few posts saying it does not. I said far cry 5 looks good. I have not even played TW3 so am completely ambivalent about it.
You can stop defending TW3, if in your onion you think it is better, I think you have got your point across now.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Apr 1, 2019)

tigger said:


> So i guess the story or anything does not matter then, just how it looks and feels?


No, no, no.  What he is saying in more depth is what I did.  That the graphics is as much a player in setting the game’s FEEL and atmosphere as the writing, pacing and mechanics.  The graphics are literally suited to each game in setting the mood.  

To compare different games is just not the point.  TW3 for instance would not feel the same way if it had something as realistic as say the picture in the new Maxon R20 demo.  All games convey their world commensurate with their game’s artistic direction and setting.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Apr 1, 2019)

rtwjunkie said:


> No, no, no.  What he is saying in more depth is what I did.  That the graphics is as much a player in setting the game’s FEEL and atmosphere as the writing, pacing and mechanics.  The graphics are literally suited to each game in setting the mood.
> 
> To compare different games is just not the point.  TW3 for instance would not feel the same way if it had something as realistic as say the picture in the new Maxon R20 demo.  All games convey their world commensurate with their game’s artistic direction and setting.



I understand that. I also understand He prefers TW3 over Far Cry 5.


----------



## Apocalypsee (Apr 1, 2019)

I don't know why this thread has veered about graphics now, the thread about best RPG in recent years. I mentioned graphics because it just one of the criteria of why I chose Witcher 3 as the best. Like rtwjunkie said I can't imagine playing Witcher 3 with another graphics engine (heck if its about graphics I can't even play Metro2033 Redux because the graphics engine change from the original). And thanks vayra86 for pointing what Witcher 3 graphics strength.


----------



## AsRock (Apr 1, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> I'm trying to move away from preference and into engines and technologies used, and how they work to improve the overall look&feel. I totally get how it works though; once you're immersed in a game its easy to think it looks better than everything else. Its how our mind works. We really don't need super advanced graphics to get the right impression; our brain is great at filling in the blanks. If you go back to the early days we played hideous looking games where 'grass' was a flat surface with a green color and we knew it was grass, it felt like we walked over it because that is what the game intended it to be.
> 
> I think putting those screens side by side makes it very clear that there is a quality difference between all three, and I'd still say the first screenshot is by far the most impressive. It has so many things going on, and while both other screens are also largely _static in the game itself_, (the Far Cry sunset, best you'll get is some ripple moving in the water there) the Witcher has most of the image _in motion_ because of extensive cloth and vegetation physics.



Needed imagination back then and i believe people are not training their brains to have it these days.  Like what kind of  imagination was need before like with the Atari games or even those hand held controlers that took a shit load of batteries and plugged right in to the TV.

Or not even , https://www.gamesdatabase.org/game/sinclair-zx-spectrum/gunship

People are just getting more lazy. they want every thing done for them.


----------



## Vario (Apr 1, 2019)

AsRock said:


> Needed imagination back then and i believe people are not training their brains to have it these days.  Like what kind of  imagination was need before like with the Atari games or even those hand held controlers that took a shit load of batteries and plugged right in to the TV.
> 
> Or not even , https://www.gamesdatabase.org/game/sinclair-zx-spectrum/gunship
> 
> People are just getting more lazy. they want every thing done for them.


Somehow my mind made Betrayal at Krondor look amazing and Thief the Dark Project photorealistic.  Then years later, I look at it and it is brutally ugly.  The ravages of time.


----------



## AsRock (Apr 1, 2019)

Vario said:


> Somehow my mind made Betrayal at Krondor look amazing and Thief the Dark Project photorealistic.  Then years later, I look at it and it is brutally ugly.  The ravages of time.




True but that's new expectations, and not always for the better. I could say the same about the original Ghost Recon and look how UBI messed that up so many times now, Wildlands is alright but still not the GR and all UBI had to do was to graphically enhance the graphics so yes it's not always the user and just wants some thing new.  But these company's keep failing mostly due to their wanting to sell a new game ever year.

Far Cry is a good example to it's been getting their ( not sure about the last ) but they will never give the options available that were in GR in these newer games.

So yeah it's not always the user but we are the ones expecting better, 1/2 dozen the user and 1/2 dozen of the company at fault ?. One thing for sure UBI know what we want but we will never get it as it's not good for sales later as they are stuck thinking in the box and not like other company's like Frontier Developments with games like Elite Dangerous.

But then their is always some one unhappy. I have known people hate NWN1 and loved NWN2 and still today think they are crazy.  And people think  i am crazy for enjoying TW1 ( same game engine as NWN1 ) way more than TW2, well as long as you got the blood patch .


----------



## metalfiber (Apr 13, 2019)

AsRock said:


> https://www.gamesdatabase.org/game/sinclair-zx-spectrum/gunship



Thanks for the link AsRock. My favorite system of old was the Coleco Vision. Didn't have to wait on dad to take me to Aladdin's Castle to get to play a real arcade game any longer. I even had the Atari 2600 adapter for it. The down fall of that system was the power adapters. I had to get a new one about every 6 months and after so many years they quit making them or i would still have it. 

Y'all got me messed up. I was here for something else on page 1 and when i got to page 5 ......oh yeah, I like just about every RPG except Dark Souls. After an hour of taking 3 steps and dying, i was over Dark Souls forever.


----------



## AsRock (Apr 13, 2019)

metalfiber said:


> Thanks for the link AsRock. My favorite system of old was the Coleco Vision. Didn't have to wait on dad to take me to Aladdin's Castle to get to play a real arcade game any longer. I even had the Atari 2600 adapter for it. The down fall of that system was the power adapters. I had to get a new one about every 6 months and after so many years they quit making them or i would still have it.
> 
> Y'all got me messed up. I was here for something else on page 1 and when i got to page 5 ......oh yeah, I like just about every RPG except Dark Souls. After an hour of taking 3 steps and dying, i was over Dark Souls forever.



Hehe i had the paddles for the 2600, how ever being from the UK i don't believe that system was available.

Well Arcade wise my most loved ones were Missile command and Gauntlet which both were some thing i couldn't ever play enough. In fact if i was in the place to do so i would buy them, wife be pissed but meh.  One being the use of a ball movement and the other being 4 player.

http://www.arcadedivision.com/classicgame12/shooting/missile-command.html

As for gauntlet my wise would out right kill me, if i had the money to throw at it i would in a heart beat.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Working-Gauntlet-Arcade-Game-4-player-/183760430159

Been tempted in buying R-Type on steam as that's a good classic.


----------



## metalfiber (Apr 14, 2019)

AsRock said:


> As for gauntlet my wise would out right kill me, if i had the money to throw at it i would in a heart beat.



"my wise"?....i guess that would be an example of a freudian slip. 

Back to RPGs, Throw in the 2 newest Assassin's Creed games. I think they would qualify as RPGs.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Apr 14, 2019)

metalfiber said:


> Back to RPGs, Throw in the 2 newest Assassin's Creed games. I think they would qualify as RPGs.


They do, definitely.


----------



## AsRock (Apr 14, 2019)

metalfiber said:


> "my wise"?....i guess that would be an example of a freudian slip.
> 
> Back to RPGs, Throw in the 2 newest Assassin's Creed games. I think they would qualify as RPGs.




How funny i totally missed wife out


----------



## Flogger23m (Apr 14, 2019)

I played three of those games, Mass Effect 2, Fallout New Vegas and Witcher 3. There is absolutely no comparison between those three in terms of quality, Mass Effect 2 is the winner by far.

But ME2 was fairly dumbed down from ME1. I think ME1 should have been in that list. Story was much better. ME2 did have much better combat but the story was a big step down and the weapons became too simple. ME3 retained the combat and made perfect weapon customizing and they felt different enough to be worth using.

New Vegas was good but the combat sucked, the engine sucked, the quality sucked, invisible walls sucked, the UI and weapon selection was utter trash, and well, a lot sucked. But it still had a nice open world feel and you felt like you could choose a different path in the story even if the only real difference was the cut scene at the end. The exploration was good though and really what the core of Fallout is. I wish they'd add more quality control, FO4 style combat with NV style story and diolgue options for FO5.

Witcher 3? Quality issues, pacing issues, story issues, far too long, ending was utter gibberish and nonsense, combat was very lack luster. It did have nice voice acting but too much time was spent on pointless conversations and side tracking that had little to do with the story. Spending 9-12 hours listening to a generic "I beat my wife and kids I'm a drunk" story line to progress the main story was just painful. Especially when the story really just ended up being "find this girl, then immediately find this other girl. Now the bad guys are super-duper evil Elves on another planet. Beat them in a pointless fight at the end was spout some gibberish dialogue". A long journey that you simply can't care about.

Still a decent game but it isn't up there with the quality of  the Mass Effect games.

I'm Geralt of Rivia, and I'm stuck in a tree. 



http://imgur.com/TvA13PK


----------



## rtwjunkie (Apr 14, 2019)

Flogger23m said:


> I played three of those games, Mass Effect 2, Fallout New Vegas and Witcher 3. There is absolutely no comparison between those three in terms of quality, Mass Effect 2 is the winner by far.
> 
> But ME2 was fairly dumbed down from ME1. I think ME1 should have been in that list. Story was much better. ME2 did have much better combat but the story was a big step down and the weapons became too simple. ME3 retained the combat and made perfect weapon customizing and they felt different enough to be worth using.
> 
> ...


I have to wonder if we played any of the same games. Wow.  Literally every single point of yours I had the exact opposite. 

Nearly everyone thinks story was better in ME2.  It was very encompassing and vast, getting the player invested in gettin the gang together.

FONV is considered by the vast, overwhelming majority to be the best of the new Fallouts, mostly because it wasn’t made by Bethesda. 

As to TW3, the whole point of it was being in an epic tale that millions do care about. Pacing, length, story and quests all combine to make it the RPG example for all others to emulate.  Obviously, you dont enjoy getting your money’s worth or you’d not complain it was too long.  Frankly, it could have been longer.  If you make choices as Geralt would, the ending doesnt even suck.  To complain about the story tells me you are not familiar with Witcher lore.  Combat is really the only weakness. It could be better but doesn’t suck.

I’m thinking RPG’s just aren’t your thing, and that’s ok.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 14, 2019)

rtwjunkie said:


> Nearly everyone thinks story was better in ME2.  It was very encompassing and vast, getting the player invested in gettin the gang together.


This author pretty much summed up my feelings about Mass Effect 2 (Flogger23m would likely concur): https://thenocturnalrambler.blogspot.com/2017/08/mass-effect-2-sucks.html


> In the absence of an actual story with plot points, developments, twists, or rising action, the thing you're supposed to care about is the game's wealth of characters -- getting to know them and helping them solve their problems. Except much like the story, most of the time I felt myself not actually caring about any of them.





Flogger23m said:


> New Vegas was good but the combat sucked, the engine sucked, the quality sucked, invisible walls sucked, the UI and weapon selection was utter trash, and well, a lot sucked. But it still had a nice open world feel and you felt like you could choose a different path in the story even if the only real difference was the cut scene at the end. The exploration was good though and really what the core of Fallout is. I wish they'd add more quality control, FO4 style combat with NV style story and diolgue options for FO5.


I'd say FNV is the best Fallout has to offer to date, but I concur, it's not the best RPG.



Flogger23m said:


> Witcher 3? Quality issues, pacing issues, story issues, far too long, ending was utter gibberish and nonsense, combat was very lack luster. It did have nice voice acting but too much time was spent on pointless conversations and side tracking that had little to do with the story. Spending 9-12 hours listening to a generic "I beat my wife and kids I'm a drunk" story line to progress the main story was just painful. Especially when the story really just ended up being "find this girl, then immediately find this other girl. Now the bad guys are super-duper evil Elves on another planet. Beat them in a pointless fight at the end was spout some gibberish dialogue". A long journey that you simply can't care about.


I generally agree which is why I can't rush to calling it the best RPG.  It's a great game but it is also marred by flaws.  That's why I pointed at Heart of Stone as the standout.  By the time you play it, you have most of the grind out of the way so you can focus on the story.  The story, I thought was novel, and I loved how it tied back into the mysterious character you run into at the very beginning of the game.  I also liked how they never really explained the nature of him, but that mysteriousness remains satisfying.  Bringing back Shani was a stroke of genius too.  They hit all of the right notes on Heart of Stone.  One beacon of light doesn't make the best RPG and, for that matter, it's not even RPG mechanics that made Heart of Stone good.


----------



## HD64G (Apr 14, 2019)

I have played 4 of those, I like most TW3 by far. I like ME3 muchly also, even the ending is logical for the lore. Divinity OS2 should be one of the best from what I have read around the web also. DAO is also great since my brother played it and was totally in fond of it. I put Deus Ex Human Revolution in my list of the best RPGs I have played. NWN2 is a great one also for its moddable nature and its great story in some fo its expansions.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Apr 15, 2019)

I rarely find a game that I don’t enjoy to some degree because I let myself escape to the world of the game and just enjoy it.  If I approached every game as a reviewer does and not as a gamer I would probably stop gaming.


----------



## 64K (Apr 15, 2019)

rtwjunkie said:


> I rarely find a game that I don’t enjoy to some degree because I let myself escape to the world of the game and just enjoy it.  If I approached every game as a reviewer does and not as a gamer I would probably stop gaming.



That's what gaming is to me in a nutshell. It's escaping reality for a couple of hours each day. Some people do it with TV Shows/ Movies/ Books etc. I've been gaming off and on since 1980 and I don't regret any of the time I spent gaming. If I run across a turd-game (seldom happens) Then I just quit it and I might put it on my list of possible to play games when I have more time.


----------



## Leothelesser (Apr 15, 2019)

Grim Dawn  TW3


----------



## c2DDragon (Apr 15, 2019)

I voted Skyrim because I'm a huge fan of Morrowind and I could get this good feeling I didn't have in Oblivion (I only liked the Sheogorath DLC).
The Witcher 3 is a fantastic game but I don't feel like I will do it again. I can't deny the story is good.
I did Divinity Original Sin 1&2 and Diablo III with a friend, I don't think I would have done them solo, I'm not sure it can be this fun playing them all alone.
I played X3: Terran Conflict (2008 game), Assassin's Creed Origins & Odyssey more than those games =P


----------



## Stealthyboy (Apr 15, 2019)

Now it's not that good of an RPG some people might say. But I have been really liking Kingdom Come: Deliverance. It's a really nice realistic medieval game.


----------



## Enterprise24 (Apr 15, 2019)

Can someone please recommend AI companion RPG game (preferably including myself = 4 or more characters) with many classes to select. I have quiet good experience with Dragon Age Inquisition.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 15, 2019)

Played Shadowrun Returns/Dragonfall/Hong Kong?


----------



## Enterprise24 (Apr 15, 2019)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Played Shadowrun Returns/Dragonfall/Hong Kong?


Never. Will look on Steam now. Thanks for suggestion.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 15, 2019)

I guess they're not really AI companions because in combat, you control them.  Outside of combat, they just follow you around.  Each character has a preset class.  Your character you can build into whatever you want them to be rather than predefined classes.

If you haven't played Dragon Age: Origins, that might be more what you're looking for.

If you don't mind shooter more than action, check out Binary Domain.  It works a lot like the Mass Effect games where you have two companions that you build a report with out of six that change at predetermined points in the plot.  It's not a really long game...definitely not a traditional RPG...quite linear but the conversation system with your squad mates keeps it interesting on replays.


----------



## Rahnak (Apr 15, 2019)

@Enterprise24 Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen is a RPG where you can have up to 3 AI companions. Could be what you're looking for.


----------



## Flogger23m (Apr 15, 2019)

rtwjunkie said:


> I have to wonder if we played any of the same games. Wow.  Literally every single point of yours I had the exact opposite.
> 
> Nearly everyone thinks story was better in ME2.  It was very encompassing and vast, getting the player invested in gettin the gang together.
> 
> ...



About ME2 read the link by FordGT. Story was very shallow. There were small disjointed side stories which had nice dialogue but they took up too much time and you have little interest in helping these awkward people/aliens complete their personal issues. Miranda - daddy issues.  Jacob - daddy issues. Tali - daddy issues. Jack - not literally daddy issues this time but practically the same. Thane - son issues which is practically the same.

Again they certainly can rile up some emotions but don't make for a good story. You gather these... awkward individuals to help you (how?) find & stop the collectors. Their skill sets are so off the wall and practically pointless to the point it makes little sense outside of the forced roles you select for them at the last minute. How is an assassin supposed to help you fight and stop the Collectors again? Or a Thief? How do those skills even make any sense for the mission at hand? 

Outside of the ending which I felt was out of place in ME3, the overall story is a lot stronger in ME3 than it was in ME2. ME1 is still the best in that regard although obviously the combat/gameplay and camera work doesn't hold up too well.

FONV may be good for a Fallout game but it doesn't make anything else I said less true. As a game it was pretty bad in many ways. That atrocious Pipboy menu system was utter trash. Combat was crap. Engine was crap. Invisible walls throughout the map. Yes I still had a lot of fun at times but it was far from a superb game. 

Witcher 3's story is much the same as ME2. A lot of side tracking with little to the core story. The problem is the issues presented in Witcher 3 are even less interesting by a large margin. The game drones on and on. The end result of the story is a bunch of gibberish that is spit out and a few cut scene differences that don't change anything meaningful. You spend the whole game chasing around this girl that the game tells you repeatedly that you care for without giving you any real reasons to have a vested interest in them by the time the journey is up. I'm still unsure of why I should care about Ciri. Anything semi meaningful in The Witcher 2 was brushed aside in the 3rd game. Which kingdom did you back? Literally makes no difference. Whatever decisions you made are flushed down the toilet at the start of Witcher 3. Top it off with underdeveloped combat and constant use of Assassins Creed style "eagle eyes" and nothing stands out as particularly great. 

Was it playable? Of course. Great? No. Especially not the story.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 15, 2019)

Flogger23m said:


> Outside of the ending which I felt was out of place in ME3, the overall story is a lot stronger in ME3 than it was in ME2. ME1 is still the best in that regard although obviously the combat/gameplay and camera work doesn't hold up too well.


I concur.  I remember starting it: "WTF did they kill the protagonist?" "To indebt the player to the enemy. [facepalm]" "WTF is this cover system BS?" "Oooo, Tali! But why is she being evasive?" "Oh, right, you killed the hero. Genius!" "God these guns suck." I distinctly remember finishing ME2 the first time and being wholly disappointed:  "That was really it?"  "They had the gall to call this Mass Effect?"  "What was the point of any of it!?!" Then it hit me like a freight train: "Filler!"  It boggles my mind how ME2 gets so much praise.  I don't have much good to say about it other than it's prettier than ME.  Doesn't matter how many times I beat it, the same conclusions were reached.

ME2 should have started with Spectre Shepherd scouring the galaxy for allies and hunting down more relics to improve equipment and readiness for the invasion.  Midway through, discover the sleeping Prothean which leads to the schematics for the catalyst.  Game should end with what was the Arrival DLC.  Most of the conflict stems from recruiting galactic allies (which would include other spectres and aliens).  ME3 should have been about taking the fight to Reapers to buy time and resources for the Catalyst to finish.  Like how it is, the focus should have been on severing the Reapers from their allies (Geth, Cerberus) using information gained from the Grayson experiment.

TL;DR: ME2 was a mistake.  ME3 had an incomplete ending that they fixed redeeming the series...despite the pathetic middle.  Then they proceeded to drive it off a cliff with Andromeda.



Flogger23m said:


> Witcher 3's story is much the same as ME2. A lot of side tracking with little to the core story. The problem is the issues presented in Witcher 3 are even less interesting by a large margin. The game drones on and on. The end result of the story is a bunch of gibberish that is spit out and a few cut scene differences that don't change anything meaningful. You spend the whole game chasing around this girl that the game tells you repeatedly that you care for without giving you any real reasons to have a vested interest in them by the time the journey is up. I'm still unsure of why I should care about Ciri. Anything semi meaningful in The Witcher 2 was brushed aside in the 3rd game. Which kingdom did you back? Literally makes no difference. Whatever decisions you made are flushed down the toilet at the start of Witcher 3. Top it off with underdeveloped combat and constant use of Assassins Creed style "eagle eyes" and nothing stands out as particularly great.


100% concur.  Where ME2's core plot length didn't disappoint, Witcher 3's did.  If you only did the main quests and nothing else (including all the NPCs forcing you to sideline like finding and healing Uma or prancing off to Skelliga because a thing), there's less than 10 hours of content there.  Like ME2, you know what's going to happen a few minutes after you start.  There's really not much in the way of plot twists.  Witcher 2 and even Witcher had much more solid plots.

And yeah, I was disgusted at how the previous choices imported into Witcher 3 meant utterly nothing.  The elf and dwarf uprising should have accounted for something meaningful but, no.  They basically got slaughtered so it doesn't matter what you think you did.  Witcher 3 basically dismisses everything that happened in Witcher 2 when it felt very important in Witcher 2.

I would have preferred a Witcher 2 like game in place of Witcher 3 with a well developed branching narrative.  CD Projekt wanted to copy the Ubisoft formula for AAA game production and with that come all of the negatives.


----------



## Rahnak (Apr 16, 2019)

Flogger23m said:


> I'm still unsure of why I should care about Ciri.


Because Geralt took her in when she was a kid and raised/trained her? That point came across very clearly to me.


----------



## mouacyk (Apr 16, 2019)

Rahnak said:


> Because Geralt took her in when she was a kid and raised/trained her? That point came across very clearly to me.


And she foreshadowed the coming of Cyberpunk 2077, which was a nice noncanon use of her powers by CDPR.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 16, 2019)

Rahnak said:


> Because Geralt took her in when she was a kid and raised/trained her? That point came across very clearly to me.


But you spend so little time with her.  It was like "Friends" in "Far Cry 3."  You're only doing this thing because the game is telling you to, not because the game has given you any reason to want to.  Ciri is literally introduced in the third game to the protagonist about half way through it.  Once you find her, there's like five quests that involve her and then it's game over.  Then they add those cheesy Gearlt influencing Ciri bits like she would really listen/care when they're practically estranged.  I was underwhelmed.  The highlight of Witcher 3 is the world and side quests.


----------



## Rahnak (Apr 16, 2019)

Dunno man, I gotta say I'm like @rtwjunkie and I just get wrapped up in the games I'm playing, especially if we're talking about role playing games, and probably to the point where I just use my imagination to fill in some gaps. I'll agree about Ciri being introduced too late in the "trilogy" though.

I had a similar feeling playing the second game though, regarding Yennefer.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 16, 2019)

Rahnak said:


> I had a similar feeling playing the second game though, regarding Yennefer.


True that.  I still think Witcher was the best of the three overall.  Gearlt having amnesia helped ease the player into the lore and there was a lot of major character building, especially Zolton, Triss, and Dandelion which virtually vanished in the second and third games.


----------



## Flogger23m (Apr 17, 2019)

Rahnak said:


> Because Geralt took her in when she was a kid and raised/trained her? That point came across very clearly to me.



Which is again, why I said it was forced. You don't sincerely start caring for Ciri. The game tells you that you care for her. That is what I expect from an average video game grade story. "This is your friend, they died, sad scene." There isn't a whole lot of build up into why Ciri is important, why we should care and she has very little game time. The game spits out some gibberish at the end to make her seem important but that is about it. 

Witcher 3 isn't a bad game. It just isn't an excellent game. It put it up there with games like Mass Effect Andromeda. Not terrible, but not great.



FordGT90Concept said:


> I concur.  I remember starting it: "WTF did they kill the protagonist?" "To indebt the player to the enemy. [facepalm]" "WTF is this cover system BS?" "Oooo, Tali! But why is she being evasive?" "Oh, right, you killed the hero. Genius!" "God these guns suck." I distinctly remember finishing ME2 the first time and being wholly disappointed:  "That was really it?"  "They had the gall to call this Mass Effect?"  "What was the point of any of it!?!" Then it hit me like a freight train: "Filler!"  It boggles my mind how ME2 gets so much praise.  I don't have much good to say about it other than it's prettier than ME.  Doesn't matter how many times I beat it, the same conclusions were reached.
> 
> ME2 should have started with Spectre Shepherd scouring the galaxy for allies and hunting down more relics to improve equipment and readiness for the invasion.  Midway through, discover the sleeping Prothean which leads to the schematics for the catalyst.  Game should end with what was the Arrival DLC.  Most of the conflict stems from recruiting galactic allies (which would include other spectres and aliens).  ME3 should have been about taking the fight to Reapers to buy time and resources for the Catalyst to finish.  Like how it is, the focus should have been on severing the Reapers from their allies (Geth, Cerberus) using information gained from the Grayson experiment.
> 
> ...



Agreed with you overall, but I still think ME2 was an excellent game. The story was thinner than ME1. But it is still on par with a "good" video game story. The dialogue, gameplay, music, combat to conversation pacing all come together to create something special. 

It is hard to choose a definitive Mass Effect game out of the original three. ME1 had the best story, was fresh, and the most sci fi feel. ME2 had better combat, better inventory management (actually they practically removed it), better cinematics, graphics and whatnot but a thin story and a loss of the sci fi aspect. ME3 had the best weapon/inventory system, decent story pacing but lack of choice in mission approach, bad side quests and a poor ending. But some of the middle sections of the game were absolutely stunning. 

Andromeda sucked in comparison to the original games, but when put up against other open ended RPG/adventure games it is still pretty good once the patches fixed the major issues.


----------



## potato580+ (Oct 20, 2019)

wheres no ni kuni


----------

