Yeah, if you’re financially responsible you can totally do that. Most people, however, from what I’ve heard, aren’t and don’t really make good use of their winnings. When you win that much, however, pretty hard to go back to being poor no matter which way you go.

No, you need a third party torrenting site and a third party to crack the game and a third party torrent client… that’s somehow much better… No matter how you slice it, you still need at least one middle man between you and games.

Half? So they could get 850 over 25 years? That’s 34 million/year… Or 2.8mil/month… In what world is that not enough? Unless you’re afraid they’re gonna stop paying you after like a year or two, which is fair, especially in this day and age… yeah, okay, I’ve changed my mind, I’d take the lump sum too… not risking it.

The only problem is that people are idiots, especially online. Go to any comment section and you’ll find people angry at the content, no matter what the content is. And you’re taking them seriously, for some reason. Laugh at them and move on, no more polarization problem. As you’ve said, 77% of people enjoyed avowed. Probably even more, as people are a lot more likely to leave a bad review than a good one.

See, we’ve come full circle back to my previous argument that we’re simply disagreeing on the definition of the word deep. For me, a deep game is a game where there’s many choices. For you, that’s a game with a lot of detail to every bit.

Most people, in my experience, agree with my definition.

What makes deus ex deep? The amount of choices you have. Your choices don’t change the plot. The only thing you change is how you finish the game. You still end up in the same place.

Think of it this way: there’s a slider for choices and one for story detail and length.

Which one is the deeper game, the one with no choices but with a long and detailed story? Like a really long walking simulator, for example.

Or a game with 10 levels that you can approach in 10 different ways each? Sort of like a hitman game or something?

Yeah, you got me. I totally said that.

Yup. I’m fine with bg3 being considered a shit game. That’s an opinion and everyone can not like it. But it’s silly to label it something that it’s not. Something that’s more or less measurable . Like pretending the sky is green or something. Makes no sense. Don’t like the characters? Fine. Don’t like the plot, writing, etc? Fine. But don’t tell me it’s shallow when it has so many different ways to approach everything and so many things you can do differently.

My thoughts exactly when I read your list of “deeper” games. What exactly can you do in kingdom come that BG doesn’t allow you, for example?

I’m talking about the definition of the words “deep” and “shallow”, here. Nobody said bg3 was the best or the worst game. Just that it’s shallow. And most people agree that it’s not.

And yes, there’s issues, but none of the ones you’ve brought up make it a shallow game. And honestly, outside of act 3, and more specifically the ending, I haven’t noticed any of the stuff you’re talking about. And what game gives you a more “evil” path than the one where you help the goblins kill a bunch of druids and refugees and get minthara as a companion. You can convince gale to sacrifice himself and blow up the whole party just for lulz. You can become an assassin of bhaal. You can get shadowheart to and astarion to become evil too, since those are choices as well. All the dark urge stuff, there’s the kid in the druid grove that stole the idol which you can either save or let the mean druid bitch kill her. You can choose to either save or destroy the last light inn in act 2, bunch of people will die there as well. Remember scratch? You can return him to his abusive owner. You can kill karlach.

You can take over the netherbrain and use the absolute’s army to conquer the world, you can wipe out Baldur gate’s citizens memory and rule over them or you can make them kill each other. Or you can become a mind flayer and get everyone in BG to do the same and make them serve you

I could go on. But you’ve obviously made up your mind and I’m probably just wasting my time. We’re not arguing opinions here, we’re arguing facts. And apparently, for some people, fallout and kingdom come are deeper games even tho your second playthrough will be 90% the same and you only have like 4-5 meaningful decisions to make that only amount to whether you kill or not some guy and whether you side with some guy or another and then you get an either sad or happy or angry or neutral prologue at the end.

Is bg3 he deepest game ever? No, but it’s not shallow either. In most RPGs, 1 playthrough or 2 are enough to see everything. Or better yet, 1 playthrough plus a 10 minute YouTube video or one wiki page that explains it in a few lines.

Only other game where the my second playthrough was more different than the first one was disco Elysium and even that wasn’t like a whole other game or anything.

Never said it was perfect. I’m just saying that op claiming it’s shallow is wrong. At least not more shallow than any other rpg out there. And at least by my definition. And I think other people’s too, because as of right now, they’re at -16.

Just because it doesn’t have a huge map with a 1000 pointless quests and bandit camps that add nothing to the game doesn’t mean it’s shallow. The biggest decision a game like fallout ever gave us was the decision to nuke a town. Beyond that, it was just a kill this guy or convince him to run away. Not sure how that’s deep but whatever.

Guess we just have a different definition of deep then if you feel like those games give you more options than bg3.

I see. We just have different opinions on what RPGs should be and that’s okay. I prefer a deep lake to a shallow ocean, so to say. I’ll take bg3, disco Elysium or mass effect over Skyrim any day of the week.

I’ve still got 100+ hours in games like that as well… they’re just not as fun or memorable to me and I often end up bored before the end. Had to force myself to ignore a bunch of the map in order to finish Witcher 3 and kingdom come, for example.

Gothic 2 is like the sweet spot, imo. Large enough that you don’t feel confined, but not that large that you get bored doing the same stuff over and over again. And while I did say that KC:D had me bored with exploration by the end, I didn’t feel bad about skipping parts of it like I did in other games because there the size of the map is just for realism and it’s not actually filled with meaningless stuff.

As for character building, I just play path of exile for that. I play RPGs for the stories. If it can have both, great, but I’m not gonna complain about build diversity in a game that I’m not gonna play more than once or twice anyway.

You all keep throwing these big accusations around without actually giving any alternatives for those of us that actually want to play these deeper more complex games that we’ve somehow never heard of. Why is that? Give us some games to play, please!

Can you give some examples of games that give more freedom than that? Because as the other person said, ff7 is not one of those. And I too am curious because I love those kinds of games. And while owlcat’s pathfinder games are great, they’re also not a viable answer, since you’ve mentioned them.