安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
I just watch streams and probably have more fun than playing It myself and saving money. I did the same mistake with Stalker 2 and deeply regret buying It Day 1. I´ll never have the experience like someone who plays It two or three years later with all the bugs and stuff ironed out.
Oh and btw, you´re not alone with GOW:Ragnarok, I didn´t even finished It. *Tips hat to you*
Been playing for some 40 hours now and there's nothing woke or gay about it.
It's the same setting in terms of how the world turns like the first one.
To my avail, the whole thing is totally optional, as has been communicated by Warhorse after this ridiculous fallout.
Bottom line - if you enjoyed the first game, you'll love this one. Writing is one highlight after another, it's just amazing.
Gameplay is pretty much the same, though combat is a tad harder now but more fair, more refined, especially in regards to the master strikes that totally butchered KCD1
And Mutt is your best companion now and just doesn't bark up every tree - he's super useful, not only in combat but also for quests.
It's great - don't miss out on the game just because there's literal homophobia amongst some folks.
Having to endure Musa and Samuel is not optional is part of the game.
Has media literacy really got that bad?
Guy is a foreigner merchant/scholar in a strange land where 99% of the population doesn't know his land and most can't read.
OF COURSE he is going to prop up his culture and country and be biased. He has seen some 5% of Europe and says and already makes comparisons.
He says women are treated better, because IN HIS OPINION, his culture's way is better. And then other people in the camp says he leers at women there. AND to top it off, he says he had to flee some place because he slept around with married women there, admiting his hypocrisy.
Do people really just look at him and see one or two lines of dialogue and judge it all by that?
He speaks about how the code of conduct for Muslim warriors is great and then Harry speaks about Chivalry and it's kind of implied both are decent ideals for warriors but that aren't followed as well as they should by most.
If you see the dialogue you can see it clearly, he speaks of his land being more advanced in many ways (except archquitecture) but then describes how he had to travel a lot to learn what he knows and then how he fled to Hungary when the place he was in(ruled by a Sultan) was about to get embroiled in war.
It makes me dissapointed people don't pay attention to these kinds of things, the game isn't making any propaganda, it's just trying to represent how people at that time would act.
A LOT of people in the game justify horrible acts as being righteous. Do you guys believe them too just because they are saying it?
So this scene checks out! Buffons existed in the medieval times too.
Why are so many people blindly assuming that the Mali guy could have been there? Yes, technically he could have been there, it wouldn't have been impossible - but extremely implausible, due to the many obstacles that would have been on his way (more than e.g. for an Ethiopian Christian). If a guy similar to Musa would have been around Central Europe during this time it would have been documented, but there is not a single credible account of a Sub Saharan traveller/trader/adventurer in Central Europe during this time. He is not much less implausible than the Dinosaurs that are hidden somewhere in the game as easter egg - technically they also wouldn't be impossible.
I welcome that they tried to make this game more diverse but IMO they did it in the worst possible way. They put in an implausible character like Musa but missed many other ways to implement diversity and also show how diverse medieval times actually were.
Where are all the handicapped and disfigured people? There was a ton of them around and it's an important aspect of diversity, yet there seems to be none in the game (up to 1% of the population would have been handicapped by a Polio infection, and that's just one of many possible causes).
Why did they not integrate the Roma people more into the story? Would have been historically plausible and represent one group of people that's even today discriminated almost everywhere.
Why did they not split up Musa in two separate characters, e.g. a Turk and Christian Ethiopian? That way they could have filled the religion and the skin color "checkbox" and it would at least make a bit more sense.
Instead it seems they just lazily dropped one guy somewhere in medieval to satisfy the most generic definition of diversity and totally ignore how many facettes of diversity there would have been to be implemented into the game and create a better story.
However it's still a great game and I would say the diversity topic is a minor letdown compared to many positive aspects.
You also get to play errand boy to the semites while they call you g*y. It's disrespectful to European culture throughout, you can't even enter any churches. The gameplay is better than the first but the forced DEI elements left a sour taste in my mouth.
Truth. Musa is a very realistic foreigner.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/vKRmZyFlLhM