I know I remember seeing some people talk about how nice some of the environments in Hitman were, and that they'd just walk around as a tourist from time to time, treating it like a walking simulator/virtual tourism thing instead of the stealth assassination game it is. Curious about other things like that, where you play a game totally differently than it was meant to be played.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 49 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Like playing Gwent instead of fighting monsters as the witcher?

[–] SolarMonkey@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 hours ago

I felt that way about blitzball in final fantasy 10 (I think). Never finished the actual game.

[–] who@feddit.org 3 points 2 days ago (4 children)

An argument could be made that Gwent offers better gameplay than the larger game in which it resides.

[–] takeda@lemm.ee 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Then you purchased a wrong game and should just play solitaire.

Witcher 3 is absolutely great, but if you just go through only the main quest, won't explore the world and won't do side quests then I can see you ending up disappointed.

What I like is that side quests can impact the main quest and even the ending.

[–] who@feddit.org 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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 backstory, but that is not gameplay. Nearly all were copy/paste instances from a small pool of tedious tasks. There were a few memorable 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.

Meanwhile, Gwent is a surprisingly well-designed strategy game. So much so that it ended up spun off into a stand-alone version (although I don't know how good the spinoff is).

To each their own, I suppose.

[–] MolochAlter@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] who@feddit.org 1 points 3 hours ago

This one?

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/112/condottiere

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 3 points 2 days ago

Are we certain Witcher is the larger game in which Gwent resides and not the other way around?

[–] BuboScandiacus@mander.xyz 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

There is no argument if the statement is objectively true

The Witcher 3's gameplay was so bad that I couldn't finish it (the map and the quests' gameplay part too, but that's another story). Gwent was pretty cool though