this post was submitted on 22 May 2024
11 points (100.0% liked)

games

20457 readers
2 users here now

Tabletop, DnD, board games, and minecraft. Also Animal Crossing.

Rules

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] a_little_red_rat@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah I know the rough history, as for the playability with the community patches, I don't agree. It's still trash in my opinion, while 1 & 2 & NotR are still amazingly playable.

I bought the third game full price on release, and as a teenager back then it was a lot of money. I am still bitter to this day lol. The only thing I kinda liked was some of the story, and the graphics which while now kinda ugly, still create a pretty cozy atmosphere.

[–] Muehe@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well yeah, there is no beating 1 & 2, but it still holds up IMHO. Huge world with no loading screen in sight, passable story and side-quests. But what was really great about that game was the music. Combat was meh though, still a Gothic game after all.

[–] a_little_red_rat@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I am the kind of weirdo that actually likes combat in 1&2. But 3's combat was bad

[–] Muehe@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I take it you didn't play ranged weapons then. :D They tried to modernise the combat and kind of made it worse, except ranged combat though. Free aim was just a lot better than target locking in earlier games. But melee in 3 wasn't really fun. That said, huge battles generally worked better in 3 and there were a lot more of them with a lot more NPCs involved, so that was kinda cool. Magic was also a bit more fun. But yeah, the game was overly ambitious in many ways and that hurt it a lot, even if you *disregard the clusterfuck of a release and its aftermath...