379
Many are worth checking out
(lemmy.world)
!gaming is a community for gaming noobs through gaming aficionados. Unlike !games, we don’t take ourselves quite as serious. Shitposts and memes are welcome.
1. Keep it civil.
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only.
2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry.
I should not need to explain this one.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month.
Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
Logo uses joystick by liftarn
I feel like that sentiment only applies visually. The world and story of 1, as well as the gameplay if you accepted it was more of an RPG than an action game, felt much better than 2 did, imo, it just looked like absolute shit.
I just struggled hard with the gameplay. Some games throw up road blocks, but TW1 threw up entire mountain ranges for me. Maybe I just didn't quite get something in the mechanics, but it felt like the game would routinely go from playable, to "die incessantly until you grind and overlevel". A lot of the game's difficulty felt like it was just level-gating progression blocks. Maybe I was just trying to go too fast? I admit that I may have just brute-forced my way through things that probably had a more nuanced or subtle solution.
This is also not to say that I dislike TW1 at all. I quite enjoyed it. It just frustrated me more than 2 and 3 combined.
Witcher 1 did want to be more meticulous. Researching the monsters, making specific potions or coatings, using the right weapons and juggling fighting styles, ~~collecting sexy lady cards~~, balancing swordplay with signs, navigating political choices thay would be completely abandoned in the sequels...