I played Fallout 4 first then moved to New Vegas. I kept hearing that New Vegas was better but I really don't think so. I find the additional problems solving health issues in New Vegas do not enhance game play. Having different ammo types do not enhance game play. Repairing weapons do not enhance. Fallout 3: Much more linear than New Vegas but still has a pretty decent and compelling story, as well as pretty good gameplay. Fallout 4: The writing and gameplay is fair enough, but the game runs so poorly and puts outrageous demands on CPUs to play it even on lower settings.
Comparing these two games is kind of silly in the first place. They only share superficial similarities, mostly because they are both open worlds RPGs, but at the core they are very different games. I think taking this approach is not going to win you much favor, and I feel like you'd get a much better response if you simply talked about why you think Fallout 4 is an underrated game rather than trying to prove it's better than another highly praised game that it shares only superficial elements in common with. The Witcher 3 is primarily aiming to deliver a strong narrative with compelling characters in a richly portrayed fictional world. Fallout is all about exploration and player freedom, with narrative and characterization taking a major backseat.I think you do makes some decent points, but others not so much.
Complaining that you have to play as Geralt in the Witcher is like complaining that you can't create your own character in Super Mario Odyssey. Geralt is the Witcher, the books were mainly about him, with Ciri and Yennefer also having large roles. The previous two games are about him. It's fine if you prefer games where you create your own character, but that's not a fault of The Witcher. It's not that type of game and was never meant to be.I also don't think player population numbers or random GOTY awards are a very good tactic to take in this argument.
Even though I think the comparison is silly in the first place, if you're going to do it keep the discussion centered on the merits of the games. Being popular is not a 1:1 correlation to quality, and bringing up player counts as some sort of 'objective' metric of quality is a major fallacy. I also don't think bringing up GOTY awards really helps your argument. You're trying to claim that the awards Fallout won were more prestigious and that the publications that awarded The Witcher are less reputable.
Aside from being pretty transparent and questionable in assessment, you conveniently neglected to mention that The Witcher not only won 'more' awards like you said, but somewhere in the vicinity of 70% of the GOTY awards for 2015, with rest mostly being split between MGS V, Fallout 4, and Bloodborne.The final thing I'd like to say is this. Don't let the internet hivemind get to you.
Yes, it is true that general consensus seems to be that The Witcher 3 is a great game and Fallout 4 is disappointing, but it's not a universal truth, just a common opinion. If you didn't enjoy The Witcher 3 and you love Fallout 4, there's nothing wrong with that. I understand the desire to defend something you love when it seems like it's criticized a lot, but taking the approach of trying to disparage a popular game to prove the game you love is better is misguided in my opinion.Not every game has to be pitted against each other.
There's no limit to the number of games you can love, and loving one thing doesn't mean you need to dislike something else. Two games can be good in their own ways without having to be directly compared. I was in the middle of typing out a very long response, but hit most of my points. The only addendum I'd add is that I don't really buy your premise that the Witcher fanbase has been bashing Fallout 4 for not being more Witcher-like. Bethesda's games have always been open-ended canvasses to tell your own story with, and have never been about focused storytelling.
I'd wager a guess that anyone arguing they should follow CDPR in that regard either has no idea what they're talking about or probably just don't like Bethesda's style of games to begin with. Your time would be best spent ignoring them, if they even exist to begin with.Ironically, most of the criticisms I've seen leveled at F4 have actually been the opposite of your experience, mostly concerning how badly they neutered the open-ended aspects of their RPG systems. And honestly?
They ain't wrong. Speaking as a noted Bethesda apologist, even I think that adding a voiced protagonist and all-but removing skill checks in favor of some Z-tier Mass Effect knockoff conversation system was the biggest misstep they've ever made that didn't involve the phrase 'Creation Club'. I would make the argument that you can't play your own character in FO4, your character is pretty much already made for you. You just decide whether or not they are snarky, a jackass, good, or inquisitive in conversation trees. That's not really role-playing.I agree with some points, but I wouldn't put Witcher 3 on the same level playing field as FO4.
FO4 is really an open world FPS game that you can just do stuff in, while The Witcher 3 really wants you to participate and care about the world it's centered around. FO4 I'll admit is more satisfying to play, but I'll also say it's a guilty pleasure of mine. I like it better than a lot of other Bethesda games, including Skyrim, but that's because the gameplay is more honed in.
If Morrowind's barrier to entry was better, I'd very much consider it to be my favorite Bethesda game (or RPG in general). That's because like the Witcher 3, they took time to craft a world worth caring about.But yeah, playing FO4 on survival mode is one of my favorite things I've done in gaming. But I'm not at all surprised that people hate FO4.
It's not really a world worth caring about or being in so much as an FPS survival playground. It's cool if you like Fallout 4 more than Witcher 3 but most (not all) of the reasons you laid out are either wrong or not useful.
Obviously, the only thing this comes down to is opinion and no one can say your opinion is invalid. You have your own reasons for liking stuff.I found Fallout 4 to be incredibly boring. I think it plays it too safe and doesn't innovate on its core enough to be a worthy follow-up to the games that came before it. The world feels sterile and uninteresting and outside of a few characters, there are very few memorable NPC's to interact with. There are some good side missions but I found the main story to not live up to its potential.
There are cool moments but on the whole, it really didn't do it for me.Witcher 3 is my favorite game of the last few years. The sheer amount of good to fantastic stories are too many to count and honestly kind of unbelievable they were able to put so much quality content in this game.
People have issues with the combat, understandably so, but I actually like it a lot outside of it feeling a bit clumsy sometimes. I think It's really something special anything else I say will probably just come off as hyperbolic fawning so I'll just end it there. It isn't a perfect game by any means but I certainly think it's better than Fallout.
'the new Witcher fanbase are constantly bashing people with different opinion. Some of them even send death threat to Youtube reviewer for talking bad thing about it's combat, and starting to post fake positive review on Glassdoor after news about CD Projekt Red's working condition problem starting to surface.But that's a story for another day.' You don't have to look that deep to find Fallout fans like those or fans of anything on the internet. I don't understand why you have such a low opinion of Witcher fans.
The one thing I can agree with you on is the combat of W3, it's indefensible. Here are my responses, in no particular order:Falllout 4 is way more popular than some gaming enthusiasts are willing to accept.I'm a huge Fallout 4 apologist but Witcher 3 is top to bottom a better product, in terms of delivering on what it aims to do.I think by now I've seen every possible criticism for Fallout 4 and people don't really compare it to Witcher 3. It's mainly to New Vegas.Because of my preferences, I've had a much better time playing Fallout 4 and have put hundreds of hours into it. You're not alone in enjoying it! I liked Fallout 4 fine, but it, in my opinion, is nowhere near as good as The Witcher 3.
The Witcher 3 is the open world (maybe also including fantasy as well) game to be as good or better than from now on to me. The Witcher 3 isn't perfect, but it's in my top three open world games to date, with Red Dead Redemption and the remake (not the original on last-gen) of GTA 5, which allows you to play in the first person. Fallout 4's issues, at least on the PS4, is that it has some bad frame rate issues and the story could have gone into a more interesting direction. I liked that it wasn't as brown as previous Bethesda Fallout's, but it could have still used a little more color and variety in its setting with more interesting side content.
I did everything in it, like The Witcher 3. I certainly played and enjoyed Fallout 4 much more, and I think it's just the combination of the organic nature of the exploration, and searching and fighting, the mods, and especially survival mode.The Witcher 3 is amazing, a game made with so much care and devotion. Despite that I just don't connect with that world very much, and Geralt especially, despite the incredible detail and tied together story threads by the hundreds. I just don't care about that universe I guess. It's really weird; I totally see why people love it so much, but I lose interest every time I try to go back and progress. Subjectivity, sensibilities, relatable culture.blah, blah, blah. TBH, it bugs me.
I legit had a terrible time with fallout 4. My wife and I rode that hype train way too hard, I expected a sequel to N.V or at least a good story linking to the enclave from 3 and I personally expected some BIG DLC from that game for buying the season pass. It was the last game I ever pre-order, 'innovation' is an interesting word, and don't get me wrong there is nothing wrong with liking f4, but that base building system was the opposite of innovation. Skyrim introduced a house DLC, and Bethesda fell in love with it. Do you have to build a base to hold a G.E.C.K or something relevant to the story?
NOPE, here put a teleporter down and bam game done pretty much! I fucking love fallout, I think it is one of the best storylines to ever grace gaming, but fallout 4!?
Gone is any custom ammo from N.V, gone was the entire idea of fighting the enclave in an all out war. No rebel radio, I assumed some form of the resistance would have lived considering it was so close to the placement of fallout 3.
I do not know what the story of fallout 4 was going for, but it is by far the farthest from the fallout series. To me fallout is a story of desperation, about one single character that you make that is your 'Geralt' you are the only reasonable person in a world full of idiots.
You're needed for a quest to get paint to paint a wall, you are not immune from trivial petty tasks in fallout 4 however I think all those tasks you do have zero effect world wise. I think the big difference is Witcher 3 for me has a sense of 'humanization' I slaughtered certain people in that game and comments were made about it down the road. I remember in N.V when I went to join Caesars legion and I learned they give women a hard time, it resulted in me going on a kill campaign against anything that wore those colours.
I miss that kind of siding with the fallout 4 game it seems it's quite 'ARE THE ROBOTS REALLY BAD!?!?!?!?!?!' Just on a side note, that Robot DLC, Vault DLC, and Nuka DLC(which is by far the best one) holds nothing to the witcher dlc. I felt quite ripped off to be honest with the fallout dlc, again it's my fault I had pipe-dreams for the game. But building that vault, gah what a waste of a DLC.Also that whole one dude magically solving a 'unique strand of F.E.V' made me so angry, I shot him with a mini-nuke in a cave.Also 'he speak like your average uncle Joe'Did.you meet preston garvey? I placed him into a bed in a room and surrounded him with mines because that dude.is legit 'uncle joe' and never shuts the hell up about the same things. :Well here's the story, one of Youtube channel Worth A Buy review Witcher 3 before, and praise most of it's content except it's combat which isn't very good, and a tons of fans went outrage and down voted the review (which cause it's likes to be around 50/50) and spam lots of hate messages to harass him, which he made another video to respond this craziness by review solely on it's combat, basically he states that he can't recommend the game is because of how simple and boring the combat is.
The videos has since been took down and my guess is he still receive those kind of messages from time to time so he just remove it to save the trouble. That review did leave some topic trace behind though.most recently Youtube channel YongYea has been reporting some of CD PROJEKT RED working condition issues base on some job review throughout many years on Glassdoor, which he also got contacted by ex CD Projekt Red developer. Loading Video.After these news surface, some fans starting to post fake positive review on Glassdoor, it's worth noted that everyone can post review on Glassdoor, but before September 2017 there was only about 30 reviews throughout those years, here's a screen shot i took from YongYea's video.And now go check on the website, you can see just in two months they got a significant boost from people.do i think these are fake beside just randomly show up after the news came out?
Well because this one particularly stand outQuote:I worked at CD PROJEKT RED full-time (Less than a year)ProsAll I have to say here is that a lot if not all of these reviews below are fake. We often talked to our staff and made sure they are perfectly happy working there. If anything was missing, we'd make sure we had a plan to atleast implement it.I no longer work there simply because I got too stressed, and I will never work anywhere if it's stressful, even if it is my dream job.
I hate stress.ConsThis website is a con.End quote.Do i really need to explain why i think it's fake?I'm not trying to bash people who like the game and studio too, but mindlessly believe in the studio being some kind of messiah of the industry and harass anyone who disagree? It feel more like a cult rather than fan base, of course not everyone is like that but constantly hearing them shouting thing like 'The next Elder Scroll should be more like Witcher 3' or 'How dare you insult a character wrote as good as Geralt.' : This is false when it comes to Vanilla Skyrim but its absolutely true if you mod Skyrim then it turns into a whole new thing.
In fact, never play Skyrim unmodded or else you don't play the game as intended. They intentionally designed Skyrim to be broken so the modders can use it as a canvas to improve the game fully. And they did.And to be honest, modded Skyrims combat feels way better than in vanilla The Witcher 3 (which is difficult to mod) but it always depends on what mods you're using. I mean Skyrim also has traces of dodge mechanics in it but there were never fully implemented, realized nor activated when the game came out because Beth felt like it would confuse players. Modders then the fully in.Not only that, the Perk system is vastly more complex than The Witcher 3s, that is, if you mod it. Again never play Skyrim without mods, you miss about 95% of the whole experience (one of the unfortunate circumstances where consolepeople felt left out and for good reason).
Even just using with adds to the game a lot and it's a mandantory part by everyone who considering modding their Skyrim for the first time, at least those two get my recommendation just to see what a modded Skyrim does compared to the unmodded variant. Fallout 4 is barely even a Fallout game at this point. It has more in common with Minecraft than the original CRPG that inspired it.At a certain point though, fans of the original games really cant use this excuse anymore. When the bulk of a series is 1 thing, that kinda becomes what the series is. There have been 3 Bethesda Fallouts following the same formula, compared to the 2 originals. I mean, there was only 1 less Tactics game than there where Black Isles RPGs in the series.
Aliens and Alien 3 are still Alien movies, even if they aren't the same claustrophobic horror movies as the first one was. : I think bethesda fans can be pretty bad too, before witcher 3 there was Skyrim lol. Also i don't think fan quality or even working conditions for the developers makes a game any better or worse. The games stand on their own merit, and i personally don't think fallout 4 is even in the same league as witcher 3 or even skyrim/elder scrolls which it's gameplay loop is based on.And I don't think those witcher 3 fans represent the majority, I mean by the logic you could easily call all Bethesda fans perverted(seriously had to turn the adult filter on nexus mods for skyrim/fallout lol).
Fallout 4 is barely even a Fallout game at this point. It has more in common with Minecraft than the original CRPG that inspired it.At a certain point though, fans of the original games really cant use this excuse anymore. When the bulk of a series is 1 thing, that kinda becomes what the series is. There have been 3 Bethesda Fallouts following the same formula, compared to the 2 originals. I mean, there was only 1 less Tactics game than there where Black Isles RPGs in the series. Aliens and Alien 3 are still Alien movies, even if they aren't the same claustrophobic horror movies as the first one was.I totally understand that.
As someone who hasn't seen a full episode of original Star Trek, but has seen almost everything TNG and DS9 ever put out, I probably represent that latter category of fan to a degree. But I think that Bethesda's history of making a very specific type of game, regardless of whatever franchise gets slotted into that template, was too hard a pivot from the original 3 Fallouts for my taste. It would be more like if Alien 3 had been a romantic comedy or Bollywood musical. And I think there are plenty of franchises that have, to a point, strayed so far from the source material that they become unrecognizable to fans.
I don't understand why you have such a low opinion of Witcher fans.In OP's defense, Witcher 3 fans can be very obnoxious towards other games about their love for the Witcher 3 to the point where they practically replicate OP's approach to discussions. They are comparing W3 to games that have a completely different philosophy and proceed to bash the other game for their philosophy not aligning with W3. While it started out strong, I do not have a lot of love for Fallout 4 but there were a lot of arguments made at the time of F4's release even on this website that kept unreservedly comparing every aspect of it to W3. : This is false when it comes to Vanilla Skyrim but its absolutely true if you mod Skyrim then it turns into a whole new thing. In fact, never play Skyrim unmodded or else you don't play the game as intended. They intentionally designed Skyrim to be broken so the modders can use it as a canvas to improve the game fully. And they did.And to be honest, modded Skyrims combat feels way better than in vanilla The Witcher 3 (which is difficult to mod) but it always depends on what mods you're using.
I mean Skyrim also has traces of dodge mechanics in it but there were never fully implemented, realized nor activated when the game came out because Beth felt like it would confuse players. Modders then the fully in.Not only that, the Perk system is vastly more complex than The Witcher 3s, that is, if you mod it. Again never play Skyrim without mods, you miss about 95% of the whole experience (one of the unfortunate circumstances where consolepeople felt left out and for good reason). Even just using with adds to the game a lot and is mandantory by everyone playing Skyrim.My god I actually love Skyrim quite a bit but the phrase 'They intentionally designed Skyrim to be broken' is something else. And besides, there isn't anything wrong with that. Without Skyrim to be this broken there wouldn't a community dedicated enough to fix it/adding new and exciting stuff. The game being as it is was the point where millions of people came together to discuss, mod and enjoy the game 'fully realized'.
Games Better Than Fallout 4
It is ever ongoing process.I disagree with this. The game isn't 'broken', it has 'issues', but its not broken. I never use mods for any Bethesda games.
I play them all plain/vanilla. And I still enjoy them for what they are. I would also argue that a very large portion of the player base does too. I put 200+ hours into Skyrim when it launched on PS3. Then played it later on PC, and still never used any mods.
And I have it again on PS4, and although I haven't played it. I can't see myself using any of the mods they offer for it.And in your previous post saying, 'never play Skyrim unmodded or else you don't play the game as intended.' , that is some crazy nonsense. It was intended to play vanilla, as it was released. As is every game. Hence it was released that way.
That comment, and your argument make no sense to me. And besides, there isn't anything wrong with that. Without Skyrim to be this broken there wouldn't a community dedicated enough to fix it/adding new and exciting stuff. The game being as it is was the point where millions of people came together to discuss, mod and enjoy the game 'fully realized'. It is ever ongoing process.I disagree with this. The game isn't 'broken', it has 'issues', but its not broken.
I never use mods for any Bethesda games. I play them all plain/vanilla. And I still enjoy them for what they are. I would also argue that a very large portion of the player base does too.
I put 200+ hours into Skyrim when it launched on PS3. Then played it later on PC, and still never used any mods. And I have it again on PS4, and although I haven't played it. I can't see myself using any of the mods they offer for it.And in your previous post saying, 'never play Skyrim unmodded or else you don't play the game as intended.' , that is some crazy nonsense. It was intended to play vanilla, as it was released. As is every game.
How to get rage mod. Rage is a Warframe mod that converts a percentage of Health damage received into Energy. Notes The amount of Energy gained from damage taken to health is affected by Warframe Armor., Stacks with Hunter Adrenaline for a total of 85% damage conversion., Applies to Status Effects that deal damage. May 29, 2017 Hey guys, was looking for a way to farm for the rage mod that's higher than 0.063% on an already rare unit.
Fallout 4 Vs New Vegas Map Size
Hence it was released that way. That comment, and your argument make no sense to me.I mod my Skyrim experience nowadays, but I agree with everything you said. The claim that Skyrim was designed to be broken is a statement that needs a credible source to back it up.
Otherwise, it is just speculation and not a tiny shed more than that.I play a lot of XCOM and certain people make the same claims in relation to its Long War mod counterpart. 'How can Firaxis release this game so underdeveloped when the Long War mod team adds so much? It's a disgrace'. It is a very poor argument to make since if you have any experience modding, you quickly realize the combined effort of all modders rests entirely on the architecture already in place by the actual dev team. Long War adds, maybe, 2% of actual lines of code to the game and practically none of the design work. On top of that, most people will fall off Long War long before they will finish it.Skyrim vanilla is played and enjoyed by many more people than modded Skyrim is. You think that the mods you use make the experience superior.
As someone who mods my game, yes, it does. You cannot create a game with the intention of appealing to a thousand people. You need to appeal to millions. If you think everyone will enjoy Skyrim the way you're playing it, you're just unable to distinguish your preferences from those of other people.I know for a fact that the proposed Cutting Room Floor mod is an atrocious piece of mod content. They literally add in cut content that on several occasions is way too obvious why it was cut.
The user in question doesn't realize he is part of niche group, and possibly the 1% within that group to boot. The error in the assumption that Skyrim is designed to be broken is that it assumes Skyrim is designed for you. It's designed for hundreds of thousands if not millions of people. And all the work people have ever done on Skyrim mods since that game launched up to today pales in comparison to the actual work done by Bethesda on vanilla alone.
: Uh oh, I can't even imagine going into the game vanilla at the point. Even before the modding tools were released I began to mod it after I've beaten Alduin and I remember that it wasn't really all that good (though the vanilla game world has some great details, it certainly did a lot of good things when it comes to open world gameplay, also the music is fantastic)Anyway, I recommend that you should try the game modded. Its a whole different game and to the very least I consider it better in all aspects.At any case, I wanted to make the point that without the game being as it is, there wouldn't be such a gigantic community adding a whole plethora of good things.
The best thing Skyrim did was bringing communities together in lots of positive ways so who cares about the game being playable unmodded or not. Its popularity certainly got boosted by modding.Maybe I'm going to check out the Special Edition unmodded at some point just to see if vanilla Skyrim is actually playable.
I think it is shameful for Beth to intentionally causing a stir by using the modded community as a sort of a money sink in such bad faith, that was a big mistake on their regard. Beths reputation as game creators is certainly very damaged by now.
I mean, I liked both games. So I guess I'm just some crazy extraterrestrial that can enjoy two completely different things without comparing them?Nah, this just means you can enjoy things on their respective merits and flaws:)!: I agree, all I wrote was just speculation based on observation. It's just that the modding community really blew up and some of the mods were downloaded tens of millions of times, if the game would be perfect surely such a thing wouldn't be the case.Also CRF is just something I add to my Skyrim, I didn't want to imply that it is something everyone does use (which doesn't make a whole lot of sense either way).
Its just something I feel is essential but whether or not it is for you is a statement towards the beauty of modding. You can basically make your own perfect dream RPG.I think I'm going to rewrite that part so its less confusing, thanks for pointing that one out duder. Also sorry for kinda derailing the thread so if everyone has questions or want to discuss things further, hit me up with a PM and I will respond as good as I can. I think Fallout 4 is better than Witcher 3 because Fallout 4 no longer being just an RPG, it actually try to innovate, even if something doesn't work quiet as well at the end, it was walking toward the right direction, while Witcher 3 did it best to polish the old formula (Fun fact, Witcher 3 was actually trying to include a location damage system similar as Fallout, but was scratch before release).So you value a game trying something that doesn't end up working well, over a game that you yourself say has polished mechanics. You also feel it's valid to critique a game based on a bad mechanic that's not even in the game. Even if these don't hold true to you, presenting them to your readers is not a point in favor for your arguments. Stopped reading after that quote in your OP because that has to be one of the silliest fallacious 'critiques,' I've read in a long while.
(not quite sure if I'm using 'fallacious,' correctly, there). This is a real rollercoaster of an openingpost. As someone that also wants ham in his hamburger, i would've liked it if Fallout 4 was an RPG and not a coloringbook where all the lines have been drawn already. Especially if you liked New Vegas, it's surprising that the removal of choices doesn't bother you.Popularity and longevity of games also don't say much about how good a game is. A narrative game with a start and an end can be amazing, but probably won't be played as much as any MMO. I'm not playing Hollow Knight anymore, but i do like that game a lot. : It also depends on what angle you're coming from.Personally, I don't play skyrim without at least 70 gb of essential mods added to the game.
However, essential can mean anything to everyone, we're talking about modding after all:)!Also I 100% agree with you on the thing that we're both correct, modding isn't just something where you follow the same guides for mods all the time. However, at least with Skyrim (and Skyrim modding) to the very least people do learn how to clean and fix compatibility issues and its also a great start to learn the basis of Skyrims in and outs (and even some programming).I think it doesn't get any better than modding Skyrim, you really can turn the game inside out, even in parts create something wholly new again. I was about to create a guide for modding Skyrim at some point, like a fully fleshed out guide where I use some mods I'm using to give people a basis on how to learn it. The only requirement would be a SSD or even a m2, unfortunately a stable Skyrim comes with a major cost and thats loading times.I wish The Witcher 3 would have the same modding capabilities and its unfortunate that the engine ain't made for that, and thats a huge shame.Also since you know modding I'm sure you know about.
If you even enjoyed The Witcher 3 chracter depth a little bit, you should go ahead and check it out. Fixes a whole lot of issues people had with Skyrim. :That was my reply to why i have such a low opinion of Witcher fans, you can criticize Bethesda fan too, but they never went to harass people or fanboying like that.And no i did not lower my opinion on the game because of it's fan quality, it's two separate things. But working condition on the other hand, well I don't know about you, but i would rather enjoying my game more knowing that the game didn't made base on developer's torment.:Why? I think Fallout 4 is better than Fallout 3, it did a lots of thing New Vegas previously did like companions have their own background story now and you can actually chose which faction you want to side with, and weapon modification is even better than New Vegas.:I was thinking about using words like 'chocolate moose without chocolate' or 'milkless ice cream'.'
Toyless Happy Meal?' I'm not really good with that, so i think hamless hamburger will do. So you value a game trying something that doesn't end up working well, over a game that you yourself say has polished mechanics. You also feel it's valid to critique a game based on a bad mechanic that's not even in the game.
Even if these don't hold true to you, presenting them to your readers is not a point in favor for your arguments. Stopped reading after that quote in your OP because that has to be one of the silliest fallacious 'critiques,' I've read in a long while. :I have no problem with people who prefer Witcher 3 more than Fallout 4, both are great but I just feel like someone need to make a statement for the silent majority. I just want to provide a little bit of diversity of thoughts which I think is most needed in recent time.Maybe you didn't read the post i wrote, but i don't really blame you, it was kind of like what you said which draw me into this in the first place, when DICE and BAFTA gave Fallout 4 GOTY award lots of Witcher fan freak out and whine all the way despite Witcher 3 has won lots of other game awards.