The combat is mediocre but the open world is amazing

The combat is mediocre but the open world is amazing.

Attached: dual_monitor_wallpapers_geralt&ciri_pack_right_EN.png (1920x1200, 2.96M)

Agreed. Its a great world to get lost in if you like that kind of stuff. I also love RDR2's world, exploring and role playing as an outlaw.

This is how I feel about Xenoblade

What is amazing about the open world?
The way the npcs animate and interact looks really bad after playing rdr2, not that rdr2 does open world all that well but the witcher 3 is even worse.

>not that rdr2 does open world all that well

What games do an open world better?

The open world is boring as fuck nothing but forest with bandit camps.

What makes it amazing, though? What else is there to do other than questing? Geralt controls like shit, so you can't even have fun traversing the game's landscapes.

idk why you fags rag on the combat, it's good. i have complaints about it but i think it's definitely superior to most 3rd person melee games. More moves, better timing, enemy variety, all of that would have gone a long way toward making it better, maybe even different styles like the first game.

and that swamp humanoids

My idea to improve it would be for certain combinations of light and heavy attacks to give you different combos that did different things if you levels up the swordmanship perks.

As it is, it's fine. There a a multitude of game with worse games that TW3.

so that is why i didn't like it

I love how you idiots always shit on popular games that objectively do open world right and never put forward your own examples of better open world games.

All in the name of tearing down every single video game in existence. Soon no game will be considered good.

>the open world is amazing
>villages are copy/pasted
>"go kill this monster for the 3,700'th time" bulletin boards
>monsters and aggressive animals especially dogs and wolves expertly dodge sword attacks and counter
>loot is trash everywhere you find it
>environment colors are way too saturated at certain times of day
lol ok

Open world games feel pointless when the world doesn't challenge you. Breath of the Wild, for example--and to bring up a popular example--gives you a multitude of options with which to traverse the world so that you at least feel engaged by the world. You occasionally need to plan out your climbs and account for your stamina and other such things. Even GTA is more engaging than TW3's open-world, because you need to drive everywhere and that at least requires your attention.

Meanwhile, TW3 has auto-run when on your horse while on trails.

Attached: 1584385341970.jpg (400x341, 86.85K)

No, your favorite game is, because its loaded up with pro-gay shit lol

>Combat is just not fun
>Subpar voice acting
>Swamp monsters everywhere
>Hunt quests which are literally just the same thing over and over again
Everything about this game is ass, why this mediocre game is highly praised as GOAT and countless peoples favorite is beyond me.

The open world in W3 is actually garbage and there was no reason to have it. If anything, it held the game back.
White Orchard and Kaer Morhen are by far the tightest and most satisfyting areas when it comes to size/content ratio. And that's because they are available only at set moments in the story. Skellige, Novigrad and Velen are all available at all times during your game. Yes, you can actually skip everything and just go to Skellige right away as soon as you left WO, if you have the money for ship. There is some dialogue changes if you do that but not that much. But almost no one will do that.
I am pretty sure that easily 99%+ of players did the game in the Velen > Novigrad > Skellige order and even did this when replaying the game.
If Witcher 3 had the structure of 1 and 2 and those hubs were restricted to different Acts, nobody would actually notice much of a difference. If anything it would allow for some intense changes and differences in map etc. depending on your choices and for more dynamic and tightly woven world.
For now W3 open world feels more like a theme park ride where every place is a separated mini-story unrelated to everything else instead of a living place.

Attached: 1506762678919.jpg (167x263, 17.55K)

>The combat is mediocre
The combat against monster is mediocre. Outright bad, even.

Combat against a bunch of human NPC is actually pretty damn fine. Rolling around is useless in that situation, and you have to rely on well timed dodge and parry, all the while keeping an eye on arrows flying at you. Deflecting arrows with a well timed parry is pretty satisfying. Then you bomb, chop, dodge, swing, parry, decapitate, parry again and igni the shit out of that last two ennemies.

Open world hasnt been done well at all. Dark Souls comes close but it's not an actual open world game.

>I am pretty sure that easily 99%+ of players did the game in the Velen > Novigrad > Skellige order and even did this when replaying the game.
That's cause retard arte now used to the "me see quest marker, me follow" mentality that plague RPG since Oblivion. I actually enjoy a slower pace more, akin to Morrowind, or The Witcher 1. I played the Witcher 3 without loot marker on map and mostly took time riding from hamlets to village, discovering side quests as I went. Felt a lot like I actually was a Witcher and not the central point of a story. I mean, sure, a lot of the hamlet quests were "dude, bounty here" or "dude, monster problem there", but hey, that's litteraly the bread and butter of a witcher job.

None of these open world games utilize the fucking open world. The only interesting thing you can do in these games are the quests and they lock you into a certain scenario/setpiece and all the freedom you had is just gone.

Use Ghost Mode or Enhanced Edition. You now have a mechanically fun game on top of the great world.

This, fighting huge groups of human enemies is fun.

Monsters are only fun to fight in the DLC bosses.

The fact that almost every open world is trash doesn't make tw3 one better.
It's just the same villages, npcs, monster nest, water enemy copy pasted everywhere. There's 0 dynamic interaction.
At least the nature, the geography, etc. are nicely done.

I think the best part of soul-borne open world is that you can wander into a challenging and dangerous without warning. I think random generated events/spawn with huge challenge and rare reward should be a feature in open world to make it interesting.

Problem is game is designed with certain progression in mind. The quests and monsters are even leveled this way.

best part is that it doesn't feel like an Assassin's Creed game and the devs at ubi went full on Witcher.

Attached: ACOdyssey_2020_04_17_01_52_47_923.jpg (2560x1080, 876.84K)

Botw is baby shit.

witcher 3 is shit

>not that rdr2 does open world all that well

Are you fucking serious?
Hate the missions all that you want, RDR2's open world is an achivement.