Comment on Are there any games you don't play as it was intended to be played? If so, what game and how?

• who@feddit.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Then you purchased a wrong game

  Perhaps.

  But you’ve made a lot of assumptions in your comment, and you’re mistaken about most of them.

  I played the side quests. Many came with a good story, but a story is not gameplay. Nearly all of them were copy/paste instances of a small pool of tedious tasks. There were a few good exceptions, but very few.

  I explored the world, as much as one can “explore” something that is fully labeled with point-of-interest markers. They lead the player to a repetitive handful of uninspired encounters, cloned over and over again.

  It has plenty of other flaws as well. If you loved it, then I’m happy for you, but I found the gameplay boring.

  The strengths I found in The Witcher 3 were its story, lore, characters, and Gwent. Not its gameplay.

  To each their own, I suppose.

  source

  • MolochAlter@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    Gwent is actually a slight hack of an existing board game called Condottiere, which is IMO the better game.

    source

    • who@feddit.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      This one?

      boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/112/condottiere

      source

      • MolochAlter@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        Yep. I played an earlier version but it’s the same game.

        The key thing that made me notice was the scarecrow cards that allowed you to pick up your units, those make sense in Condottiere as it’s divided in rounds where you fight multiple battles, so it made sense to pick up your units if you had excess power and were winning anyway, save your strength for the next battle in the round, whereas it made a lot less sense in Gwent given its 1v1 nature and fixed amount of rounds.

        Mind you Gwent evolved a lot afterwards, I don’t know much beyond the witcher 3 version, which I still enjoyed plenty.

        source