Murk
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2008
- Messages
- 13,459
To reiterate my previous point that still stands, perhaps more so now after the last few pages:
Mikayel said:
Mikayel said:
So, what i get from reading most of the thread is that Gothic 3 is now considered a good game?
I hate this revisionist bullshit, the game is a piece of crap, no way around the fact.
I always felt it was a rather fun game bugs and all. Transforming into viloceraptors, no level scaling, fun just trying to reach the monastery the first time you play the game, high level spells made you feel powerful, just gathering herbs in the woods and running into a shadowbeast for the first time. Granted the game had pretty bad problems, it was still fun though.So, what i get from reading most of the thread is that Gothic 3 is now considered a good game?
I hate this revisionist bullshit, the game is a piece of crap, no way around the fact.
Revisionist bullshit? The fuck?
Even back then people complained about the things that sucked: bugs, bugs, bugs, horrible combat mechanics, heinous optimization, and lots of emptiness/filler, poor balance. And they still praised the things that they liked: music, atmosphere, huge world, exploration, large scale changes, etc.
Now the community patch removes the bugs, makes the combat mechanics bearable (but still not good), has made it playable (optimization), and offers an alternate balance (which is still not Sawyerian) making the game far, far better.
Anyway, what is this revisionism yous peak about? Were people's opinions of the game so different 2 years ago?
I kind of agree with LE. The camera is slightly behind the player, but it's still basically first person.Well, first of all Gothic is not 1st person.
Oh please. Whether you look at his butt or not, it is still a 1st person 3D game.
No, it is not. Whole gaming community calls it third person... 3rd person.
In Gothic 3 maybe. In Gothic 1 & 2, no.There would be a major difference in combat if it were first person versus third person.
Lady Shitposter.
Yes, people with a different opinion must be shitposters by definition. Sorry for not participating in your circle-jerk.
These things are great, but even with the CP Gothic 3 is a hiking simulator. After Gothic 2's sublime goodness I really gave Gothic 3 a chance. I gave that fucker 30 hours worth of a chance until I finally realized that it wasn't going anywhere. Despite the beauty, Gothic 3 is the epitome of "dicking around."And they still praised the things that they liked: music, atmosphere, huge world, exploration, large scale changes, etc.
In Gothic 3 maybe. In Gothic 1 & 2, no.There would be a major difference in combat if it were first person versus third person.
I thought the plot was meh in every single PB game, to the point that I can't even remember the details of G1/2/3 plot. Indeed G3's weakness is that it doesn't feature core areas like the Old Camp that really did a great job, but I think its areas and quests are done in the same style and philosophy, just not as punchy and not as focused (which is a flaw for the game as a whole). Thus I hold it more as a 'lesser sequel' problem and still a decent game.I liked it when it came out, I just though it was a pity that stunlock & DRM-60-second-stutter & loading times made it literally impossible to play. Now those things are solved, it's a pretty good sequel to G1/2.
I think G3 is a good game (with CP), but the patch cannot address the core failures such as uninteresting exploration, weak storytelling and monotonous questing. Exploration, storytelling and questing and how these three are woven together as an overall means to progression were the prime reason playing the first two Gothics was meaningful and satisfying. Gothic 3 lacked the core of what makes Gothic great, so IMO utterly failed as a sequel.
These things are great, but even with the CP Gothic 3 is a hiking simulator. After Gothic 2's sublime goodness I really gave Gothic 3 a chance. I gave that fucker 30 hours worth of a chance until I finally realized that it wasn't going anywhere. Despite the beauty, Gothic 3 is the epitome of "dicking around."
Shame. Risen was good though.
Despite the beauty, Gothic 3 is the epitome of "dicking around."
I was going to write a lengthy response, but then I realized that it would be somewhat akin to arguing with a wall. So suffice it to say that you are dumb and fail to grasp the meaning of simple terms.
Only took me about fifteen minutes of looking at his/her/it's posts to realize we have another early twenty-something trying too hard to fit in by bashing everything but one specific subset of old school cRPGs. Nothing to see here.
Thing with 1st person vs. 3rd person is that Gothic II and III (and I imagine Gothic I too?) can be played in 1st person.
In Gothic II the camera switches to 3rd person when holding weapons, though.
Could you? I know there is free look mode, but I don't think you can move around while doing that.
Someone should rename this thread to "Gothic 3: The circle-jerk is now complete"
So what you actually are saying is that Gothic is a first person game ; the fact it is a third person game being completely irrelevant.
I like your style, you are a perfect idiot.
I already agreed with you that it is technically 3rd person, but for me and others the Gothic games are close enough to 1st person games. Though again, who fucking cares how you call it...
monocled action RPG.
aRPGs are better in first or third person perspective. Gothic's and Morrowind's of the world.