I mean, to each their own but when they start reviewing the player base...that's where they lose me. The reviewer is right, everyone else is wrong, and here's why.
Roxor said:
Which brings me to my final point. I hope that Original Sin 2 was successful not because but despite all those changes. That people played it more or less on autopilot, ignoring the fact that it’s mechanically about as shallow as a puddle, because the pretty graphixxx, undead lizardmen player characters and battle teleportation managed to effectively distract them.
Oh yes, I'm sure because they thought the game was a downgrade from DOS1, all 22,000+ positive reviewers on steam and 92/100 meta critic review from 72 critics were all just dazzled by graphics....and apparently undead lizards and teleportation?
Personally, I enjoyed DOS1 but the story didn't grab me like it did in DOS2, mostly because I felt that the story was really unfolding to the tune of my own choices, like "I'm in this mess with the chickens because I chose to be able to talk to them and talk with every animal I can find". I also don't get the allure of custom characters, sure you get to customize the your character and "make it your own", but it was still a blank canvas with little to no personality that didn't really react to the world and rather just
moved through it. Whereas in DOS2, the first thing that really hit home was the fact that
my choices on what I did with my character, who they were, who I chose to be in my party, and what their stats were all really mattered and required me to go about things differently every single time.