Yes. Witcher 3 is a technological marvel and a masterpiece of game-making, IMO.

I can't wait for Cyberpunk 2077.

Bullshit.

The core Fallout fanbase wants a single player, open world story-based game.

And despite what you posted, story was absolutely a strong point in FO: NV.

Has a little Bioshock feel to it. Also has a non-cell shaded Borderlands vibe as well.

Count me in. This is the Fallout game I've been wanting since New Vegas.

If they release another, they need to scale it back a bit. I actually never finished TW3 because the side and main missions weren't intertwined in a way that made things truly "open". You should never fail a mission because another mission was successful. Other games since have handled this correctly in changing success criteria based on player-induced changes but to just outright drop a quest and fail it because you did something the game engine didn't expect is an immersion killer.

That never bothered me at all. And of course depending on the choices you make sometimes you have no choice but to fail a mission that conflicts with what you did.

I actually just wrapped up my fourth run through Witcher 3 recently. Did a couple of things different just to see how it would play out. The DLCs are really good, too. I especially like Blood and Wine.

Just finished Hearts of Stone and about to start up Blood and Wine.

Spoiler regarding HoS:

He was, but I found the story line to be a little annoying. Too many puzzles and hoops to jump through.

I started to play Hearts of Stone after wrapping up Blood and Wine, but I've got Geralt up to level 54, and unfortunately the DLCs don't take into account the extra levels you get from completing them, so I basically get no points for completing quests now. I kind of petered out on it after that.

Yeah, I'm just too OCD for it. I just think that if 2 quests are intertwined enough the completing one will fail the other, they should be combined into one quest with a combined (even if it's binary) outcome. I've played other games since TW3 that have done this much better.

Quite frankly, I think AC Origins is better. Sure, they took some ideas from TW3 but it's just a better game.

<iframe width="640" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Qtk9o8t5Zq4" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

This.

I played F3 for about 8 hours a day for a month while layed off back when it came out. Played it for a good year after. It was so deep and so many replay options.

Online games depend on online players which usually makes the experience worse and not better...

I've never given a second thought to playing Elder Scrolls online or FO76.

I'd go back and play FONV tonight if I was bored.

You know what would be awesome as an open world, sandbox style RPG?

Oddworld.

Same here. The only problem is that FONV tends to crash fairly regularly during new area loads now that I'm using Windows 10; not constantly, but frequently enough that over the course of a couple of days I get sick of it.

I'll typically rotate between Skyrim, Witcher 3 and Fallout 4.

Elder Scrolls online isn't even done by Bethesda, Developer is Zenimax.

Fallout 3 was the best in the series, even loved the green phosphorous look. Fallout 76 is pretty much a solo experience where you can play coop. PVP is an absolute joke as it should be.