I agree that there is a lot of weight given to a reviewers words and they control certain aspects of the gaming industry that they maybe shouldnt, but again it just comes back to customer preferences in how you perceive the medium. I like using Let's plays as my source of information, but mostly for 4x and RTS games with some exceptions, as to me a Let's play shows everything you need to know in those games, but otherwise I feel like you are missing out on two things in other genres.

-The feel of the game and the draw of the characters you play, which is compounded if you enjoy listening to soundtracks like I do, to me they are the biggest immersion factor at times (again one of the reasons I do prefer Witcher to Fallout, but thats just personal preference (and again it speaks volumes about the Witcher to say its OST is better when Fallouts is fantastic itself).

-The feel of the first few moments to me are ruined if you play let's plays. One of my favourite games companies is Naughty Dog and I will never watch a Let's play of their games cause it WILL ruin that incredible cinematic story telling. Can you imagine the emotional attachment to Last of Us being as strong had you just watched the intro instead of playing it yourself?

To me Fallout is better played for the first time, and better understood in written format than it is viewed on youtube. If watched Fallout tends to look boring, if played you get a completely different vibe.

TW3 has also been out for months. If Fo4 had been out as long it could well have won as many. Nobody seems to take that into consideration. Are we allowed ti just like both games now or does literally EVERYTHING in this world need to be a competition and a flame war? It's getting SOOOOOO WEARY!!!!!

Trolls have taken over the internet.

Witcher 2 wasn't exactly an open world game that offered the freedom that Skyrim did so it's not like Bethesda had any competition at the time. Sure the Witcher 2 had strengths over Skyrim but those aforementioned things seemed more important to critics. With the Witcher 3, CD project finally got rid of those flaws and went beyond.


Like I said in my first post, had Fallout 4 been released in 2014 it would be breaking records in terms of receiving GOTY awards.

Watch this:

Many CDPR fans, even those outside of the die hard fan base, praise the game for its rich character's that develop over the course of the game, citing that the characterization and emotional drive of each character creates a likable and relate-able ensemble - one of the reasons why many people enjoy playing through a Witcher game

And like I said originally:

Apples.

Oranges.

Apples and oranges in the case of the Witcher 2 but apples and apples in the case of Witcher 3. Why because previously nobody could make a game the way Bethesda did let alone better which is why Skyrim, Fallout 3 and Oblivion fared better in gaining more GOTY. Now we pretty much have another company that can with the Witcher 3.

Opinions!

Reasons.

Subjective Conclusion.

I think the most desired award by a studio is the one given by the other game developers, I don't remember what it's called but there is one that is only voted by industry professionals. Bethesda Game Studios is highly respected by the other professionals in this industry, so if they win anything there I think they will be more happy than from regular media outlets.

Have a Happy New Year everyone!

Cant give you 10 examples its been a while.

But I do remember several quests where you could frame people instead of killing them, or get them high on drugs, or somethings along those lines.

In addition to several quests with diplomatic approaches to completion, the ones that did have kill-this only approaches even had variations in how you could complete them. I remember a quest where you could knock out all of the humans siding with the Nightkin by passing a speech check, where the leader essentially ordered their execution for example. These approaches where more frequent in NV and 3, and not nearly as prevalent in FO4.

Oh goodness. How the hell did I go from disaproving the notion that the OP has that Fallout 4 has not won any GOTY to explaining user scores all the way to bashing Bethesda's mediocre writing?

there were no great consequences in NV, give me an example cause nothing in NV is different as far as "consequences", the battle at the dam happens no matter what and, if you side with the boomers they fly a plane over, big deal, there's nothing in NV that has any different type of consequences then anything in fallout 3 or fallout 4, this whole thing about "branching quests" is kinda overblown all its about is picking sides and factions you choose, not much different than fallout 4.

Then arguably FNV did something right that its engrained a feeling of consequence in your approach to a quests completion? In which case it had done its job.

As I remember it FNV did have varied approaches to quests, and I appreciated the game more for it.

Sorry, it's still apples and oranges. You can't even make the comparison between the open world aspects because Skyrim's overworld was actually worth exploring, even Morrowind's overworld is better. Witcher 3's idea of exploration and over world was pretty scenery with numerous question marks that bled over into Assassin's Creed-itis (checklist-mania). After spending about 15 minutes going from mark to mark, just to find a chest lying about to kick open, I said [censored] this on with the main story.

I played Witcher 3 and beat it completely in 49 hours. I have played and beaten Skyrim multiple times, and continue to add more hours to the 1000+ I have already accumulated. Witcher 3 offers a unique experience that TES/FO fail to provide, while TES/FO offer an experience that Witcher 3 fails to provide. I can appreciate either title for what it is, and don't need to participate in this petty discussion over whether a [censored] apple tastes better than an orange.

GDC (http://www.gdconf.com/).

Both Fallout 3 and Skyrim won game of the year, we'll see in March.

I like how some people seem to forget that the witcher games are based off the books. which means that most of the characters were written and ready to be applied to the game. while bethesda had nothing to go on and started from scratch while witcher games had a head start thats why one game has more in depth characters than the other, now if we take away the book advantage well then we have a diffrent situation .

You can't realistically expect Fallout 4 to win the GDC like Skyrim did, how disconnected do you think the professionals are from the 'real world' fans and magazines reviews? Skyrim won 200+ 'real world' awards in 2011, including all the major ones, and then won the GDC, whereas Fallout 4 was murdered by Witcher 3 this year, it would be very unlikely to win the GDC against all odds.

Jumping in late just to day: Until I saw this thread, I didn't even know anyone had done GOTY lists and I still don't know who won any of them. I stopped paying attention to that crap years ago.

But... but Bethesda has a award winning writer or something, the guy with Italian name, which I forget all the time. So they had all they need to write characters like Witcher's, or even better?

Funny thing is Sapkowski, the Polish author of the Witcher books, doesn't consider the Witcher games canon

Post limit.