Yea I didn't feel a sense of failure in TW2, which is a shame because it was present in TW1 (investigation, even killing Abigail is a failure as it turns out to have been the wrong choice). DX also had it in 2 parts I can think of.
KnightofPhoenix said:
Well, if you get snide with Iorveth, I count that as failure. Also the little sisters quest. Really misjudged that one in my first playthough. But you're right, TW1 is much more unforgiving in this regard. People you call allies or friends can end up in some nasty situations due to your choices. It happens over and over in that game. I remember commenting to Corylea on the forums years ago, right after finishing TW1, that I'd felt like I was punched in the gut on a few occasions. It was the first game that had really done that to me.
Edit- also, chatting with Odrin and his drunk buddies is another clear moment where you can fail.
I'd also like to point out what Vivaxardas said about Dishonoured back on the first page. Though it did just come down to stealth or bloody serial killing open warfare for the most part, they did nail the latter down. You were penalised for it. Corvo might have have been some Billy Badass mystic power guy, but in open group combat you could easily get your ass kicked.
Csszr said:
Nah, there are ways to beat down on open groups in Dishonored, I like that aspect about it- that you can find a way out if you get smart about it, just like in Witcher games.
slimgrin said:
I did forget about the little sisters quest.
While I love that moment when Iorveth kills you for bad mouthing him, I count it as a failure only on insane because it's irreversible. Otherwise it just loads and you don't do it again.
Far Cry 3 is not an RPG. It is an open-world shooter, with no dialogue trees at all. Its purpose is to put players into a certain survival scenario, when any attempts to persuade would be meaningless. Far Cry 3 is an essential shooter, exactly as Thief is an essential stealth-game. You don't have a prayer winning in Thief if you go in guns blazing.
I would say, in a perfect world all RPGs should have several ways to achieve objectives. In this case people who like fighting, can enjoy pure and simple fighting, while those of us who like to debate and persuade, will be able to reach the same objective bybullshitting persuading their opponents. TW2 was very good in providing mostly realistic progression (besides some weirdness with taking on entire camps in chapter 3), but we did not really had a choice per se. We had a choice what thing to do, but we didn't have a choice how to do it, except very rare cases (fight golem in Secrets of Loc Muinne outright, or talk him into self-destruction). In TW2 I want to see more options to approach some situations, and not just choose what situations I would like to get into. If TW3 to become a perfect RPG it should have this multiple-approaches feature, not just multiple-paths feature.
I would say, in a perfect world all RPGs should have several ways to achieve objectives. In this case people who like fighting, can enjoy pure and simple fighting, while those of us who like to debate and persuade, will be able to reach the same objective by
vivaxardas said:
Yes, totally agree.
And I used the FC3 example because it has some of the most provocative scenarios I've encountered in a recent game. I wish RPGs would be that bold or risky.
slimgrin said:
Oh, I forgot about that one. Indeed I also failed that one on my first approach. I just did how things are usually done in other games - but this time they weren't
Though the consequences weren't anything, really. So I don't count it as a game-changing, character-defining failure.
Your failure in the prologue is pretty damn memorable to me, defines the rest of the game as well.
Agreed with darcler.
It's the same with Geralt's defeat by Letho. It's great for the story and for showing Geralt as vulnerable, and I absolutely love that scene. But there is no sense of failure for us as *players.*
It's the same with Geralt's defeat by Letho. It's great for the story and for showing Geralt as vulnerable, and I absolutely love that scene. But there is no sense of failure for us as *players.*
Great thread, Bloth, I agree that having more meaningful encounters and varied ways of progressing is badly needed in modern games. TW2 had a nice amount of combat, just enough that it's fun and doesn't get too grindy, although I'd personally like to see more monsters and less human enemies in the next one.
IMO The Witcher 2 lacks that sense of failure because Geralt is so impartial. A lot of unpleasant things happen, but almost none concern Geralt (= the player) personally, as TW2 overall isn't about him as much as TW1 was. Even the biggest personal choice in Act 3 has a default 'happy ending' that lifts the responsibility over someone's destiny for you.
IMO The Witcher 2 lacks that sense of failure because Geralt is so impartial. A lot of unpleasant things happen, but almost none concern Geralt (= the player) personally, as TW2 overall isn't about him as much as TW1 was. Even the biggest personal choice in Act 3 has a default 'happy ending' that lifts the responsibility over someone's destiny for you.
Dona said:
I agree, but I see it as a shift in focus for the writing team, not a fault really.
Ah you mean failures from our choices that we have to live with, not the Roche, Iorveth and Henselt's camp death where we are caught in dangerous situations. Loved those latter ones by the way, in Dragon Age we run smack bang into BUT THOU MUST points, in the Witcher you just get killed.
I suppose you could count Newboy and Aryan's deaths, the little sisters or perhaps even the two blokes from the Claws of Madness quest, who are brought to Loredo's "justice." But yeah there was none so clear cut as the Abigail choice.
I suppose you could count Newboy and Aryan's deaths, the little sisters or perhaps even the two blokes from the Claws of Madness quest, who are brought to Loredo's "justice." But yeah there was none so clear cut as the Abigail choice.
After reading through and posting in this thread I remembered something my friend said years ago when I played it for the first time on his pc.
"Literally everytime I look up and see you playing this you're either: Talking, gambling, drinking, drinking and all of the above, or banging yet another chick. Is there even any combat in this game?"
"Yes, but everything you said is the best part."
"Literally everytime I look up and see you playing this you're either: Talking, gambling, drinking, drinking and all of the above, or banging yet another chick. Is there even any combat in this game?"
"Yes, but everything you said is the best part."
My room mate always seemed to look on how Geralt was fairing wherever I was gambling or frolicking. Boy, did he love those dryads. Though, he did get TW2 on 360 and loved it.