Games

Could somebody please explain fo me how either of these two aggressively cliche and generic games are in any way "ambitious, weird, and unexpected"?

I have no comprehension what this is attempting to imply as I'm not sure who makes what games...

However, I do have some valid input. Kingdom Come Deliverance is the only single player game I've played since literally Metal Gear Solid 2...

Zero interest in single player games, yet I got Kingdom Come Deliverance for free so screw it I was bored hopped on got stoned.

By like hour 14 I realized I was playing a movie. With endless paths true freedom. I almost actually played it... I think I made it 40 some hours in and 20 of those hours were unlocking combos and learning them. Killing randoms on the roads etc.

I enjoyed it thoroughly yet, in the end it was still a single player game. All I could consider the entire time playing it was .... Imagine if this map had 100 players on it. How epic of an mmoprg this game could make.

This might be a unpopular view but I think games like Elden Ring or Lies of P are a better RPGs. More action packed, less busy/boring missions. I beat BG3 and had fun for the first half of the game, the last half was a bit of a drag. I tried KCD 1 and couldn't get into it, going from one end of the map to another doing mindless tasks. It was more of a middle-age simulator. I put ~250 hours into Elden Ring + DLC and I wanted more by the end of it.

Either way, I have some hope for the future of games.

BG3 isnt even a deep RPG. Im really glad it's popular, but as an rpg it doesn't even have half the options final fantasy 7 had.

Kingdom Come is a much richer experience, imo. Even though the options are even fewer on paper.

I'll just sit over here rocking in place and muttering Owlcat Games over and over