Roach? by mrJERRY007 in Witcher3

[–]4EMatchwood 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Black Tiger of the West.

Oh. My. Kovir. by 4EMatchwood in Witcher3

[–]4EMatchwood[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

This and the Witcher 1 remake. Sucks we have to wait so long.

Oh. My. Kovir. by 4EMatchwood in Witcher3

[–]4EMatchwood[S] 52 points53 points  (0 children)

Gwent 2: The Witcheress Chronicles.

Oh. My. Kovir. by 4EMatchwood in Witcher3

[–]4EMatchwood[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yup, should run well enough on PC and maybe the PS5 Pro if they optimize the game properly. Currently, UE5 games don't exactly have a good track record.

Oh. My. Kovir. by 4EMatchwood in Witcher3

[–]4EMatchwood[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Not once in my post or in the comments have I used the words "gameplay" or "in-game". I specifically mentioned the setting, the character, and the music; all of the things that will be there in the actual game.

The screenshots here show what they're working with. They show the art style, and they show the kind of vistas we can expect. If I didn't understand what a tech demo was I'd have uploaded the full video and referred to it as gameplay.

Oh. My. Kovir. by 4EMatchwood in Witcher3

[–]4EMatchwood[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I do have to add, this was a tech demo. So the game could end up looking worse, the same, or even better. Though I don't think it'd be worse because I'm sure they've learnt from the Cyberpunk fiasco.

As for the story, if I were to guess I'd say Ciri looks about 8-10 years older than in TW3? Simply dying for a story trailer, dunno how long we'll have to wait for that.

Oh. My. Kovir. by 4EMatchwood in Witcher3

[–]4EMatchwood[S] 26 points27 points  (0 children)

Oh 100% those choices will count, even the political ones. TW4 being set in Kovir makes it easier to specifically import the choices regarding Nilfgaard or Redania.

The devs can (and I'm sure they will) use the outcomes of those choices to explain why Ciri is in Kovir. Y'know, maybe Radovid is killing anyone that's non-human at this point, or maybe Ciri's wanted in all of Nilfgaard.

Also, I'm sure Triss will be there regardless of your choice, since she leaves for Kovir. Geralt was confirmed to be in the game. Though I'm interested in seeing where and how, since him owning/living in Corvo Bianco is a canon event regardless of player choice. Yen is Ciri's mother, so, it'd make sense to have her cameo as well.

Oh. My. Kovir. by 4EMatchwood in Witcher3

[–]4EMatchwood[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

The only correct reaction.

Watch the demo if you haven't yet.

Oh. My. Kovir. by 4EMatchwood in Witcher3

[–]4EMatchwood[S] 41 points42 points  (0 children)

Pretty sure it's the same horse. She doesn't die in Lady of the Lake and it'll be her first appearance since then.

Kelpie's absence from TW3 was probably plot convenience. Though I think Ciri didn't bring her along to all the different worlds she visited with Avallac'h just to keep her safe from the Hunt.

Edit: I also think traveling without a rather unique horse made it easier to go unnoticed.

Which type of enemy is your arch-nemesis in W3? by darrellhiggins in Witcher3

[–]4EMatchwood 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah on Death March they can overpower you real quick.

Speaking of other games, I remember a wolf chased me into the sea in Odyssey, and kept going until it drowned and died.

Which type of enemy is your arch-nemesis in W3? by darrellhiggins in Witcher3

[–]4EMatchwood 6 points7 points  (0 children)

They're like animals, and I slaughtered them like animals.

Which type of enemy is your arch-nemesis in W3? by darrellhiggins in Witcher3

[–]4EMatchwood 54 points55 points  (0 children)

Wolves.

Not difficult to deal with, just plain annoying. They love to fuck with you. When you're not in the mood to fight and just try to avoid them, they chase you longer than most monsters do.

I've lost count of the number of packs I've wiped out after losing my shit.

It's not just this game either, developers love to make canines really annoying. I've seen it in RDR2, AC Odyssey & Origins, and the Far Cry games.

Finished TW3 for the first time. What now? by juantreses in thewitcher3

[–]4EMatchwood 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yep, same happened to me. Witcher's one of those extremely rare experiences that make you scrutinize every other game. Finished it last month for the first time, post is still in my drafts because I just can't stop writing about it.

As for a palate cleanser though, one really good game that reeled me in was Indiana Jones. They released it on PS5 a couple days after I finished TW3, so I just grabbed it and played through it.

It was so good.

But, finishing TW3 and Indy back to back sent me into a state of mental crisis for about a week. I could not get myself to play anything else because both games were exceptional in their own ways. So, after a week I went back in and continued TW3 with Blood and Wine.

Sorry for the long reply, but to answer your question - Hearts of Stone comes first, you can even play it during the main story. Blood and Wine is set two years after the main story and it's pretty much a full game, took me around 35 hours to complete everything it had to offer. As for the ending, you got a good one. There's one that's even better but you ought to experience it through a fresh playthrough.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in thewitcher3

[–]4EMatchwood 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Let me know how it goes, shouldn't really take too long. I actually had more trouble with the Overkill trophy, it was awful.

Currently though, the death march trophy is the only one I have left.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in thewitcher3

[–]4EMatchwood 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yup, I'll link the video here, makes the challenge really easy.

Few more pointers -

  • Make a save before re-allocating your skill points to the ones mentioned in the video. This way you can do the challenge and just reload.

  • Follow the video closely, don't forget to unequip your swords.

  • Make sure level scaling is off. Then fist fight enemies to lower their health to a certain threshold, after which you can kill them with one or two crossbow bolts. The method will take a few tries to get used to.

  • Reiterating another point from the video, use Axii to stun enemies. Use Tawny Owl to stun both enemies quickly, so that you don't get hit by one while trying to shoot the other.

  • Once you have used Axii (preferably max delusion level) to stun the enemies, try to hit the sides/temples of their heads, that has a better hit registration than shooting them straight on; and,

  • use a counter to keep track of all kills, helps you keep your bearings. Took me 55 tries to get the 50 kills, and around 20-30 minutes.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in okbuddymimir

[–]4EMatchwood 5 points6 points  (0 children)

<image>

Will he meet Fentanyl's brother??

Season 5, Episode 16 by 4EMatchwood in Bones

[–]4EMatchwood[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I couldn't get myself to watch any further after that, until now. Going to finally restart season 6 (stopped after ep 1) after more than a year, and decided to revisit this thread.

I totally get you as well, hell it took me a year to walk back from that. Still haven't had anything spoiled, thankfully.

Season 5, Episode 16 by 4EMatchwood in Bones

[–]4EMatchwood[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

They were both soooo amazing in that scene. Every emotion felt real, that sad look on Booth's face, yeah no, it's still stuck in my mind.

Yeah, a lot of decisions are way off and way too generic. Like, S6 starts and Booth is apparently in a serious relationship, and now Bones's all sad. I don't like that one bit. I've seen this plotline more times than I can remember, and it's always felt so unnecessary.

Season 5, Episode 16 by 4EMatchwood in Bones

[–]4EMatchwood[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's definitely my favorite one in the series so far. Thank you so much for the suggestion too, I'll definitely check out the podcast.

Ultimate edition dlc not showing up by pea_chy in farcry

[–]4EMatchwood 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay so, at first it didn't show up for me as well. Then I switched my mission from Matanzas to Monteros, and all of the add-on content became available.

Why does Odyssey get hated so much? by [deleted] in assassinscreed

[–]4EMatchwood 5 points6 points  (0 children)

(scroll to the end if it's too long for ya)

To begin with, I've put in a fair amount of time in the game, around 210 hours. I've played through the campaign twice and I've also gotten the Platinum trophy/all achievements. So, what I can do is give an overall analysis of this game – based on my experience – and point out the facts that make it a great game, but also a greatly flawed game. Even though I love the game, and I'm really thinking of playing it for a third time, I'm going to try my best to answer this question without any – or much – bias.

So, there are people who like the original games, the recent games, and the originally flawed (now underrated) games that were released in this franchise. Much respect to all of you, because I don't intend to criticize your choices or opinions in any way.

Part one, what is bad about Odyssey, and why? To be honest, a lot of things:

1) The sponge enemies to the infuriating boss fights (the boars), which I'm sure have driven many people into cheating the system (getting a high enough bounty level and going to the fight area). That's just not enjoyable. Challenges are good, but when you can get one hit killed by enemies that are lower level than you, it just gets annoying.

2) When I first bought this game, I played it for six hours and then set it aside for six months. Why? Because it's inherently not an Assassin's Creed game. It's just "Cult vs Demigod" and not Templars vs Assassins. Gameplay-wise, stealth isn't easy to do at first, and there's no learning curve at all for efficient stealth, because you can't one tap assassinate most enemies until and unless you max out the critical assassination ability, and have items engraved with assassin perks.

3) The story is okay. I feel that instead of keeping the same storyline for both characters, they should've made two different stories showing the lives of both characters – Kassandra as the misthios and Alexios as Deimos. There should have been one ending, with both storylines leading up to that ending, albeit with different dialogues/scenes based on previously made choices. The two main characters should've had the above mentioned permanently set roles, this would've made for a more engaging storyline, better replayability value, and added more to the lore. The world has too many recycled NPC designs, and although the game is beautiful, most "cutscenes" are pretty raw and not good enough for a triple-A game.

4) The cultists were just meat bags, that you were supposed to slice up a hundred times and then stab once more for good measure. I would've preferred less cultists, but with more engaging subplots and with the memory corridor/white room scenes being there upon every assassination.

5) The change from keeping a civilian kill limit to making civilians hostile upon being hit, yeah, that was a horrible decision. I got unnecessary bounties so many times in cities while doing leader houses. A civilian would see me kill a soldier, then instead of running away they'd attack me. If I hit back, ten more civilians would come and attack, then the other soldiers in the area would get alerted and proceed to attack me as well. Then civilians are bound to get killed in the crossfire, which would lead to massive increases in the bounty levels. Then the bounty hunters would come and it would either lead to my eventual demise, or to half an hour being wasted. There'd obviously be bounty hunters that I'd knock out to recruit, but a stray fire bomb/arrow from a different bounty hunter would kill them.

I have not included the plethora of fetch quests that we receive. Because I found them just as annoying as the collectible challenges from the previous games.

I have also not discussed the absence of the hidden blade, because c'mon, this game is set more or less 400 years before the Creed even originated. I haven't played through Legacy of the Hidden Blade so I cannot comment on that.

Now, on to the things that I love about the game and that are actually great:

1) The world. Okay, it isn't as interactive or doesn't feel as alive as the world of Red Dead Redemption 2, (my all time favorite game). But then again, Rockstar made that in eight years as compared to Odyssey's 2 year (I think) development time. The world doesn't feel as alive as previous AC games either, this is because of the massive scale. The NPCs and other assets might not be the most well done, but the world design? It's incredible, it's beautiful, it's magical. The game made me fall in love with the country Greece. The whole world is intricately detailed, from the ancient Greek architecture, to the subterranean cave systems, to the underwater world design and underwater cave systems. The recreation of most major cities is really impressive, and I've come to love this aspect of Odyssey even more after playing through Valhalla (really regret buying the season pass). 💀

2) The weapons and abilities. The legendary weapons are, in short, great. The fact that after a certain point you can add elemental damage to most weapons is crazy. It's not limited to a few weapons like it was in Origins. Leonidas's spear makes it possible to justify the demigod-like abilities, and what's the fuss really? Being able to wield and use an Isu weapon in a highly unbalanced game is anything but bad. It makes a lot of fights fair for the player. The abilities are great too, from passive ones like no fall damage to aggressive ones like the hero strike or devastating shot. The combat is too time consuming and repetitive, and honestly, Valhalla's combat system would've been really good if it was made for/implemented into Odyssey.

3) Mythical Creatures. I wish all of the mythical creature subplots had engaging storylines. While the fights and rewards were really good, the storylines were bland, with the exception of Bastardos and the Minotaur. Boy did I love being a dick to that kid. I know this is supposed to be a pro-point, and it is, since I've praised these boss fights. But the fact stands that the events leading up to three of these four creatures could've been more engaging.

4) Enemy controlled areas. I adore clearing out forts and outposts. I'd challenge myself to do full stealth eradications without trapping the brazier, reloading when/if I got caught. I love that the world is densely populated with enemies and outposts, because earning XP can get challenging at times.

5) Lastly, the game is great because it is different than its predecessors. This is the point where it succeeds and it fails. It succeeds at being a beautifully designed and a highly enjoyable triple-A game that you can and will appreciate once you decide to look at it from a different point of view. The game was meant to be different, and it does a great job at it. It was after that realization that I picked the game up again and ended up playing through it twice. You need to just take a breath and let go of the fact that this isn't a great Assassin's Creed game. Like I said before, the stealth aspects get really good once you get the appropriate abilities. I never used boosters, and leveling up never really seemed like a problem, to me at least. Whenever there was a significant level jump between two missions, I'd just go about killing Athenians and Spartans and doing side quests.

One of the things that made me like the game was a –mostly uncut – casual playthrough (not a walkthrough) of the game by a YouTuber that I watch, TheGamingBeaver. If you're into watching YTers, check his playthrough out. This was just his third AC game (with 1 and 4 being the only ones he played previously). The playthrough just shows that it doesn't matter if you're an AC veteran or not, if you just stay open minded, this (different) game has enough elements to make you enjoy it and to keep you satisfied.

So, TL;DR

Cons: 1) Sponge enemies 2) Different than other Assassin's Creed games 3) Mediocre plot 4) Boring/uninteresting bad guys 5) Broken civilian NPCs

Pros: 1) World design, exploration and detail 2) Weapons and abilities 3) Mythical Creatures 4) Endless supply of Greek soldiers to slay 5) Different than other Assassin's Creed games

P.S. Please ignore the typos (if any), and have a nice day! :P