Okay let me start with two heavy hitters right from the get go and don't forget these are only personal oppinions and I absolute understand if you like those games. Good for you!

Zelda: Breath of the Wild - Not a bad game per se, but I don't get the hype behind it. Sure the dungeons are fun but the world is so lifeless, the story non existent, the combat pretty shallow, the tower climbing is very much like FarCry but for some reasons it's okay here while Ubisoft gets the blame...like I said I dont get why the game is so beloved. Never finished it after the 20 hour mark and probably never will.

Red Dead Redemption 2 - Just like Zelda not a bad game, but imho highly overrated. Graphics and and atmosphere are amazing but the controls are clunky and overloaded, nearly everybody is an unlikable douchebag who I would love to shoot myself at the first opportunity (maybe except Jack and Abigail) but I have to root and care for them. The game is just so long and feels very stretched, you already know that you won't get Dutch because it's a prequel and for an open world game you often get handholded in your weapon selection or things you can do because you have to wait for them to be unlocked by the game. I'm now nearly done with the game, playing the epilogue at the moment and I would say the last chapters are more entertaining than the rest of the game, but I still can't understand why this game was on so many game of the year lists and I really wanted to put the controller down a dozen times.

So there they are, two highly controversial oppinions by me and now I'm really curios what your takes are and how highly I get downvoted into oblivion 😂

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] iqwertyasdf@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Balders gate 3. Just couldn’t get into it

[–] frickineh@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Did you play any of the Dragon Age games? I've heard the combat is pretty similar, which is a bummer because that was the thing that kept me from continuing DA:O. I feel like I'd enjoy the story of both but can't get past the actual gameplay.

[–] iqwertyasdf@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

I played DA:O too but also couldn’t get into it. And yes same as yourself, I just couldn’t get passed the gameplay

[–] Chuymatt@kbin.social 3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Curious: what about it, do you know?

[–] ackthxbye@feddit.de 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

For me it's not a bad game by itself. But I think it's the worst recent CRPG by far, so it irks me that it's heralded as the best game ever everywhere. Some details:

The character building is so incredibly shallow, this is mostly the fault of DnD5E, but Larian could have at least given us more Subclass options. Multiclassing doesn't really help because some combinations are just so incredibly overpowered that it doesn't make sense to play anything else (For example: adding 2 Warlock levels to your Sorcerer is always better than playing a plain sorcerer), this is exacerbated by the next point
Why is 12 the level cap? The game is long enough to go the full 20 levels. Level 12 is particularly odd because almost no classes get anything special at around that level (exception: fighter with the 3rd attack at 11). Going to 20 would have the advantage that all classes get a capstone ability which would make single-classing worthwhile.
The amount of companions available is laughably low, and all of them seem to be the creation of a 13 year-old with how uber-cool they are. We got: Vampire boy, Mystras loverboy, Tiefling badass, stuck-up Githyanki, Shar's pet and Warlock superhero. Each and every one of them makes me yawn.
This also extends to the main character even when you are not of the defaut origins, you are an instant super-hero starting at level 1. Nice power fantasy, would have maybe been compelling to me when I was a teenager.
All conversations are voiced, whoop-de-doo. The flip side is that all conversations are extremely short. Compared with "real" CRPGs the writing is shallow, once again this feels like it was made for pre-teens. I'd rather have writing that rivals a good book.
Why in the nine hells is this game even called Baldurs Gate 3? It continues neither the story nor uses similar mechanics beyond pretending to be a CRPG. The familiar faces you can meet feel extremely forced. At the very least they should have allowed 6 party members.

[–] swab148@startrek.website 1 points 9 months ago

You forgot about "Bear Himbo"

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

It's Baldur's Gate in name only. They took Divinity and slapped a Forgotten Realms skin on it.

It's still the same terrible Larian game: player-punishing gameplay (low hit chance, overwhelming enemies), traps/hazards fucking everywhere, shallow class mechanics, and rage-inducing camera and UI controls. I will finish the game once and never touch it again (like all the other Divinity games).

[–] iqwertyasdf@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

That’s the thing I’m not entirely sure. I expected the graphics to be better and combat to be more exiting I guess? Especially for GOTY. Voice acting was a bit basic too

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 1 points 9 months ago

Same but I'm just not into RPGs or D&D generally.

So I got on that game and it was kind of fun up until the first town when my friends were like "we need to talk to people to figure out what to do."

I don't mind games having a bit of lore and story but ... I want to be doing (read: typically fighting) stuff in my games not just talking to a bunch of people... And when I don't even know what people I need to talk to, to most quickly get back to the action, I'm out.

The one exception to that is possibly RuneScape because I've been playing that game for ages. However, even there I use quest guides and sometimes just spam through all the dialogue.