Quote:
Originally Posted by dcb  <snip>
Racial tensions are not usually depicted in an RPG? I always thought dwarves vs elves and half-orcs versus everyone else was pretty standard. Games like WoW where you have the Horde vs the Alliance are racially motivated. Most D&D settings have very high racial tensions. I can imagine there a plenty more examples, but racial tensions in fantasy RPGs is probably pretty common.
<snip> |
Common perhaps, but not consequential as it is in The Witcher.
Dwarves and elves in this game are not versus each other, and the D&D setting allows for racial tension, but I do not recall a computer game implementation of D&D which have dwarves and elves rising up and killing civilian human, taking children hostages etc.
As for the Warcraft setting, that is hardly comparison either. That would be like saying that Space Marines and the Aliens in Quake demonstrate racial tension.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcb <snip>
I didn't say it's automatically bad. It is, however, less than ground-breaking and not anything I consider a "masterpiece" as so many fanbois are quick to vote.<snip> |
When you include a combat system as a negative, you do it because it is "bad".
And "fanbois" will always vote masterpiece, however "haters" will always vote against it, so *shrug*, hardly a choice of word I'd use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcb <snip>
My problem with cutscenes is this - game developers often use cutscenes to relay the game's story or specific details about a character or other event. If I wanted to watch a movie, I'd watch a movie. If I wanted to interact with the environment, I'll play a game. Sitting idly by while a game relays it's story through a non-interactive cutscene, no matter how good it looks, is akin to watching a movie. Games are supposed to be interactive. In the few hours that I played The Witcher, the majority of time was spent watching cutscenes. If you choose to skip them, you miss out on story elements or perhaps plot points or even what you're supposed to do next.
<snip> |
I have no problem with cut-scenes if they convey story, are well done and especially if they are "skip-able". Cut-scenes in this game does indeed tell the story yes, but it does so because the player himself isn't able to do so.
I've yet to see a game which would be able to allow the player to make choices unguided. The player simply is never knowledgeable enough to advance through a story. Many of the elements of The Witcher requires knowledge of being a Witcher, and there is no way the game would be able to allow the player to "advance the story" on his own.
And if we then compare to practically any CRPG out there, then dialogue options and story advancement is always guided by the game. I've seen many times where you only have one dialogue option you need to press to advance a story - and that is not interactivity, that is stupidity.
Games interactive scope is choosing dialogue option 1, 2 or 3. And when only one option actually exists then the game could just as well flow through it.
Of course if one dislikes them, then it will cause issues with the gameplay - but again, that is a purely subjective and individual decision. I found the cut-scenes well done and good for advancing the story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcb <snip>
I was pretty annoyed by The Witcher after reading such glowing reviews. I guess I expected more/different than what I actually got. |
Well, now that is hardly the game or the developers fault.
I expected little outside some hack n' slash RPGish game, and what I got tuned out to be so much better then the majority of the RPG field out there.