Originally Posted by Adgaroth
Originally Posted by Riandor
Originally Posted by Adgaroth

I can't say for the first 2 because I've never played them, and I'm not saying all the witcher games are the same, but I can recognise them at a glance on the first 5 minutes as being part of the same series,I've played them and enjoyed all without ANY issue (and I player witcher 1 when it came out,not after playing 3,so you could tag me as a purist in that regard)
I'm not against change in videogames,I'm against dishonest marketing.

And I'm against hyperbole.
Can we perhaps agree that for now it isn't looking good enough for you and we all wait a little until we see some more before reaching for the pitchforks?

I've said it multiple times,I can only give my opinion based on what I've seen and a few interviews,and I don't have any problem on changing my opinion if or when I'm proved wrong,maybe one year from now the game screams BG everywhere but divination is not my school of magic so until then this is what it is. And I think is better to give feedback now that things can easily change and not when the game releases, if ''wait and see'' worked they wouldn't be undergoing an EA period.

I can't agree on that because is looking good enough,I'm not saying the game is or will be bad,I'm saying it's not BG enough (or at all) to be called BG3,thus my dishonest marketing problem.

Im not saying don't criticise, heck there are things I am not yet impressed by... I am just saying let's not reach for terms like dishonest marketing whilst we are still in pre-alpha and assets are known to be borrowed/completely missing.

I must admit, whilst I love early previews and being involved in alphas etc... I do sometimes yearn for the time when all we saw was an article in a magazine regarding upcoming titles and then release. Often showcasing early work to the public seems more trouble than it's worth (not aimed at you Adgaroth, just talking out loud).