Tomius777

The Witcher 3 was already great when it was released, and the remaster proves once again why many consider the game to be the best ARPG of all time. The story, gameplay, graphics, everything in the game is top-notch, and the game's performance, even on a budget PC, is great compared to many other releases this year.

The game is unique and not exactly what I expected, but despite that it is worth buying, just a word of warning that the game's performance is definitely not what was promised, my own PC should be enough for the recommended requirements according to the official recommendations (i5-12400f + RTX3060 ov v2 + 32gb ram) I understand that my PC is not the latest, but it is only a four-year-old CPU and a five-year-old GPU, and what's the main thing is that their age or even the fact that they are mid-level hardware should not matter that according to the official requirements the PC should still meet the recommended requirements, and despite that, before I started using lossless scaling, I only got an average of 55fps out of the game with reasonable settings (Ultra/high) Luckily, there is lossless scaling because with it I can play the game at the same settings at 80-90fps and I don't notice any difference in image quality, at least not myself.Good about the game- the great combat- the fun puzzles so far-the story to this point is average but not badCons of the game so far- performance is not what was promised its not ok to have to use lossless scaling or similar when your pc meets the recommend requirements- some bugs but so far everyone been able to fix it by downloading save. If I had to rate the game on a scale of 1-10, I would give it a 9 based on these criteria, but my opinion may change for the better as I play the game further

The game has been absolutely amazing, and I don't understand what people are complaining about bugs and performance issues, I have a mid level PC and the only performance issues have been in a few cutscenes, otherwise the game has run on epic/high settings at 75-120fps without any problems. At this point, I've been playing for 27.7 hours and I've encountered exactly one bug. It's starting to feel like many of the alleged bugs in this and many other games and software are actually caused by people just not knowing how to use their hardware properly these days. The only problems in the game in my opinion are the balance issues and CSG has already promised to fix them in the next patch that will come out next week, just as they have promised to fix those "bugs" and performance issues, even though I haven't encountered them myself 83.5 h in game i have encountered 5 bugs 1 graphical glitch, and game has crashed 3 times, fps problems are only in some cut scenes.. Game keeps getting better and after 83.5 hours i can honestly say that it is definitely best game of this year, nothing come even close. and all the negative reviers are just ruksiparutski trolls who does not know how to use their hardware

Good story however its unplayable on pc, the game has crashed during one playthrough more than all 284 other games in my libraries combined, especially after the epiloque the game crashes at least once every 15 minutes usually more often, my nerves couldn't take it anymore and I stopped the game at 73%,,and no, my pc is really not a potato and it is quite perfectly sufficient for the recommended requirements (i5-12400f +32gb ram and RTX3060oc 2 12gb ) the game literally crashed more often than the other games in my library combined, also searches on the internet suggest that I am not really the only one who is this opinion. I can't recommend the game just because of the good story if everything else in the game is a problem, I will never put a single cent of money into Rockstar Games' games again, that's for sure, because the support is also non-existent, as I said to Rockstar's so-called support, after I had fought for a year with both the service login problem and the game itself crashing, I would definitely find something to play also from developers whose games are actually work as they shoul

I don't understand why this game got bad reviews at the time, in my opinion this is easily the best zombie apocalypse themed game I've played, The story is great, the game is fun, challenging enough but not too difficult if you don't play on too hard difficulty levels (I don't know yet, not yet haven't played as normal yet) The open world is a suitable size and there are enough side quests even the gameplay is completely competent. Someone could argue that the game is partially too repetitive, but if you think that such a zombie epidemic/pandemic would really happen, you would have to do exactly the same repetitive activities in the real world, such as collecting materials, ammunition, weapons, etc. food, everything you can think of to stay alive, I started I played Days Gone for the first time only on Sunday, I started at six in the evening and played until Monday night at 21:00, I even drank two pots of coffee the night I stopped playing, you can tell from that what I like about the game...

a typical bughisda product, a soulless game with a soulless plot and soulless and empty planets and soulless npc characters. An average game at the most and thats it put it kindly, that completely pales next to this year's true masterpiece Baldurs gate 3, I only recommend this to bughisda fanboys and girls. In addition to that, when in the game you get 45-50fps e average in cities with a 12gb graphics card, even if Todd Howard says what the game is optimized like a typical bughisda work... Every other game that has been released this year runs for me at 60-140fps max settings. Playable once-through unspeakable mediocrity, well in space no one hears a lot of noise out of nowhere. No big suprise looking wich studio made this, and game definetly it looks like it was made with a more than a decade old game engine that has been "updated" Cyperpunk has a hundred times better graphics and it also runs a hundred times better, the enemy npc artificial intelligence is of such a level that even a four year old can play the game without a problem, it's a shame that due to its age limit, the game not suitable for them. If you like this game but hate Baldur's Gate 3, well that tells you enough about your gaming taste. Litle edit after over 20 hours of play, game is not bad but once again bethesda has made game and let modders fix it.. optimized texture and dlls3 mod has rised my average fps in everywhere in the game like 15-20fps and and I don't see any difference in the visual appearance to the game's original graphics, also the ui mod must be downloaded because the game's original ui is really terrible and confusing

Typical bughisda product, a soulless game with a soulless plot and soulless and empty planets and soulless npc characters. An average tome at most that completely pales next to this year's true masterpiece Baldurs gate 3, I only recommend this to bughisda fanboys and girls. In addition to that, when in the game you get 45-50fps more than the average in cities with a 12gb graphics card, even if Todd Howard says what the game is optimized like a typical bughisda work... Every other game that has been released this year runs for me at 60-140fps max settings. Playable once-through unspeakable mediocrity, well in space no one hears a lot of noise out of nowhere