Keep in mind that I consider quest resolution (stealth, skill check, choose a side.) gameplay and not story. The story for each quest is generally better than risen and worse than witcher while the gameplay is worse than risen's best part and better than witcher. The big twist of the game is telegraphed to you by knowledge you gain from several side quests.Īs for the game, its design hover between witcher and risen. I am happy that they gave the single-player RPG a chance, and i am glad I bought and play it - it's entertaining, though it reaches not the niveau of a Dragon Age, Mass Effect, or Witcher.Įvery quest not involving bridge/theleme/native killing themselves and each other unravel the lore and eventually reveal the nature of the world and the real reason behind the disease. I know that Spiders did not have much budget nor people, so that explains most points one could point out. Even their traders stand next to 3 vases, and invite me to "look at my rich offerings!" Not very immersive. while the cities of the 3 factions are rich in detail, every corner is different, you can discover the residents' daily lifes - the native villages are some huts and some vases.
Most annoying is the way they present the native villages.
Greedfall does not manage to draw me in the same way. I like the game but I do not love it, like I do love Dragon Age, Mass Effect, Witcher (all of them I constantly replay). Inquisitor Aloysius is a good example: The first time I met him I thought "Aaaah, well so finally a worthy antagonist, fun to hate!" And then. the first time you meet inquisitor Aloysius or Kurt's companion quests. There are some aspects that keep me playing though, like for example Constantin's fate. There are some scenes I thought "Yessss, that's it, more!!!" but they are rare. I am further into the game and in my opinion, it starts the way you describe it, sometimes it is better and more exciting, but it goes back to scratching at the edge of boredom.
0 kommentar(er)
