mandude

To reiterate, I don't like the witcher senses, but it's only a single element of a quest rather than 100% of it, as it is in Skyrim. I don't think it's less lazy, just that there's far less of it in the game. I don't know how you are playing the game, but I am playing through it as well, and far far less than a tenth of my time with the game is spent engaging with the Witcher senses.

But if you want an example of a game that truly has no compass marker and no senses, and manages to keep the player well oriented and well informed, I've already mentioned Morrowind.

@bojackhorseman: I certainly wouldn't say most quests. But even those that do, it is generally only one part of the quest, whereas in Skyrim, the map marker is your guide 100% of the time. To be fair, I don't think you can even compare them, though. As little as I like witcher senses, at least trails have a physical presence in the game's world and they have to be found first before they can be followed. I'm not sure what map markers are meant to represent.

@bojackhorseman: The game with which I made a direct comparison was actually Morrowind. I don't like the idea of map markers in The Witcher 3 any more than I like them in Skyrim, which is why I turned them off. As for the witcher senses, I don't like them either, but I don't recall them being necessary even most of the time, and most importantly, they only highlight the objective when I ask them to.

But I agree. If I had played the game in the way you suggest I did, I'd have the same problems as I had with Skyrim.

I wouldn't say that. I played the Witcher 3 without the HUD (save for health), and the environmental and quest design was executed well enough that I was rarely confused about: where I was, where I was going and what I needed to do there.

That's interesting that you would say that, because my problem with Skyrim was that it was too gamey. In Morrowind, my sense of purpose and orientation was informed by the world and the people inside of it, whereas in Skyrim, they were informed by a user-interface.

I'd similarly argue that Skyrim's structure is too obvious. Every location can be (and is) neatly fit into categories that speak volumes about them. I only need to enter one major city to know what the rest are going to be like. The structure of a game like Skyrim is very easy to pick up on, because the game is constantly broadcasting it through the UI.

The quests fall into the same trap. Every quest has it's own background, lore, history and associated characters that make it feel unique and interesting, but it's undermined by the fact that every single quest in the game is only ever comprised of two actions:

1. Follow the map marker;
2. Kill it or Push E at it until another map marker comes up.

Pretend I said environmental design. The concept is still the same: is the environment informing the player's sense of orientation?

@tyrrael said:

@mandude said:

Replacing good level design with a mini-map/compass that does all the navigation for you.

This is why Skyrim, while being fun, didn't leave me with as many memories as Morrowind did.

I could not disagree with this more. Being able to go off on a tangent and "explore" and being able to quickly get back on track with a minimap is one of the best things about any open world game. The lack of a feature like this is one thing that will always dissuade me from playing a game. All you would be doing is aimlessly wandering around until you happen to stumble upon where you're supposed to be. Not knowing where to go, and not having an idea of where to go, aside from something like "go north when you're on the most southern point of the map, is blatant time wasting and simply padding out the length of what would already be a decent length game. Minimaps are a godsend and drastically reduce needless downtime that could be spent actually doing something meaningful.

This is kinda what I'm getting at. If, without a mini-map, you would only be "aimlessly wandering around until you happen to stumble upon where you're supposed to be," then it proves my point: the level design is poor.

If the Switch has a flexible screen or some other gimmicky hook, I've zero interest in it. Having a console that you can pick up and go anywhere with sounds genuinely useful as long as the execution is solid.

The Wii was a terrible system. The fact that it sold tonnes of units to an unstable market that didn't stick around isn't a point to be made in support of it.

Replacing good level design with a mini-map/compass that does all the navigation for you.

This is why Skyrim, while being fun, didn't leave me with as many memories as Morrowind did.

@opusofthemagnum: If you can, they've hidden it well. Aye, leaving my mark across the landscape is part of what make's the game fun.

It'll be a while before I know what I feel about some of the game's systems, but I do love the interface. It seems everything important is available without opening up sub-menus and the like.

A bit disappointed I can't rename cities and leaders though. I guess this design choice was informed by the new importance being placed on the different civs being unique.

€350 if they even hope to be competitive.