[Alypius]

I tried replaying this a few months ago, but the lack of voice-overs was really distracting. Oddly enough, I started playing FFXIV recently (also no voices!) and got used to that, so I may revisit a modded Morrowind soon.

 

[Rhamnetin]

I tried replaying this a few months ago, but the lack of voice-overs was really distracting. Oddly enough, I started playing FFXIV recently (also no voices!) and got used to that, so I may revisit a modded Morrowind soon.

 
It's a compromise that is evident in other games too.  Voice acting vs no voice acting with way more dialogue.
 
When it comes to RPGs with race/gender choice, I favor a fully voiced game save for the protagonist which should be unvoiced.  A voice here would make no sense unless they spent an unrealistic amount of money recording lines for both genders of every race, and even then no voice should be an option for role-playing purposes.  Furthermore such an RPG should have many, many player dialogue choices so the budget would get out of control all things considered.

 

[GreenBow]

I did love Morrowind and will still have its save file on my PC.
 
However Morrowind wore me down. At first it was bliss. After many hours though I was exhausted with all the travelling. I was using Morrowind Overhaul and yes it was good looking. If it had a successful fast travel system like if it's modded it with Oblivion (Morroblivion) then I would try again, maybe.
 
However after getting a good way into the story twice and stopping (since it release). I think it might be time for me to pass over Morrowind.
 
(I found Morrowind's lack of voice acting quite peaceful.)
 
NB remember folks if you own Skyrim Legendary on Steam you get a free upgrade to the new edition coming out. It happens in October I think.

 

[Alypius]

I think SWROR got it right with the balance of voice-acting; fantastic stories with the right dialogue! Games like Mass Effect and Dragon Age also got it right with voicing. In 2016, it tends to remove the cinematic storytelling without it.

 

[Rhamnetin]

I think SWROR got it right with the balance of voice-acting; fantastic stories with the right dialogue! Games like Mass Effect and Dragon Age also got it right with voicing. In 2016, it tends to remove the cinematic storytelling without it.

 
Of course, it's impossible to have cinematic storytelling without voice acting.
 
Voice acting suits Mass Effect best as it doesn't set out to have the most role-playing ever.  The player character is always a human, is always Shepard, and you can only role-play as a paragon or a renegade.  Voice acting is ideal here.
 
It isn't ideal for Dragon Age: Origins and Inquisition however, games that let you choose your race and gender.  But at least Inquisition provides two voice choices for each gender, and like Origins it doesn't have tons of dialogue choices anyway.
 
But games like Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2, Fallout 1/2/New Vegas, and The Elder Scrolls would never work with a voiced protagonist (but NPCs should be voiced).  The Elder Scrolls has way too many race choices and each race sounds unique (except perhaps Bretons and Imperials).  Same for the Neverwinter Nights games.
 
The others have way too many dialogue choices unique to your character build.  An example would be how Fallout 2 totally transforms depending on so many different aspects of your character build, like low intelligence:
 

 
Fallout, Fallout: New Vegas, and Neverwinter Nights (especially the second) are all similar to that, although not quite as extreme (they don't change as much).

 

[GREQ]

Starbound - 7/10
 
I've had it since December 2013 and it's finally come out of alpha.
So far, only 48 hours of gameplay, but with the latest update that will soon bloat.
 
There's been huge leaps and bounds in development since it first came out, and now it's a rather enjoyable, medium/slow paced casual game with a more intuitive progression and a sort of 'play how you like' approach.
You can pretty much ignore the primary mission and still enjoy the game through all the other mechanics.
 
The most impressive thing is the variety of assets available to build, craft and wear.
 
I would only recommend it for casual gamers if you like to play alone.
But if you're more into challenges, and multiplayer CoOp gaming, then experienced/hardcore gamers will enjoy it too. 
If you enjoyed Terraria, this game is a must. 
 
The sounds and music add a really good atmosphere.
Kind of a modernized 8-bit platformer with endless adventure possibilities across the universe.

 

[Rhamnetin]

I started Total War: Warhammer, Dwarf campaign.  I have little prior Total War experience, as I never found historic settings to be interesting.  But this one is incredible and I have no real complaints.  Runs very well without MSAA and at 2560 x 1440 otherwise maxed out, only dropping below 60 FPS in battles with around 10k soldiers or more, or when looking up at arrows raining down on lots of infantry.  It doesn't have that many factions yet, so those with patience would do best to wait for a GOTY edition or something to that extent.

 

[GreenBow]

I finished Far Cry 4. I rate it about 6.6/10.
 
After rating it 8.3/10 after about the first twelve hours, that's quite a drop in rating. I actually doubt I would recommend even buy it. Or only buy it very cheap.
 
What's wrong with FC4 is that it gets boring. It is a grind.
 

1. There's about two hundred collectibles which means visiting often difficult to access places on the open world map. For XP, Karma, or some other reward. Yay I have loads of XP points unspent - what a waste.
2. If you've played Far Cry 3, you 90% played Far Cry 4.
3. You can not turn the tinny in car radio off permanently. It's great at first, but it plays the same tracks and same dialogue until you wanna stop playing.
4. The man quest is five main tasks, then couple of tacked on shorter tasks. Considering I played 67 to complete it that's hardly any story. All the story comes right at the end. I actually felt emotionally drained by the ending, and not because it was an emotional story. It was because I felt wasted after 67 hours of dragging my self through heaps of enemies, for a fairly generic ending. 
5. It's buggy in three ways. 1. You need to turn off 'godrays' in the video settings, or you will encounter regular random crashes. 2. Nearly every time you start up FC4 you need to reset it to fullscreen, because it snaps to windowed. FC3 did that too. 3. There are Shangri-La missions, which regularly crash even with godrays off.

 
The rest of FC4 is about constantly running into enemies while travelling about. However fairly early somehow I got a one handed grenade launcher (called M-79). With that you are invincible on the road. Fortunately blowing up enemies in their vehicles never gets old as it's always rewarding to slap them down.
 
The other an main aspect of the game that never gets old is the graphics. They are stunning maxed out. Driving around the countryside is what FC4 is all about. Even after 67-hours of play, I never got bored of the actual countryside. A solid 10/10 for this. Driving around it in a 4x4 or on a quad bike, pretty much rocks.
 
The shooting is pretty good too.
 
You can easily play the whole game even though some folk do find it a drag.

 

[GreenBow]

I started playing Assassin's creed: Syndicate, which was a freebie with my graphics card last year.  I really thought it was going to be boring and that I would hate being an assassin because it seemed immoral.
 
However the game has been a pleasant surprise. The only time I get fed up with it is when I can't manage the controls. It's usually after I have been playing for a couple of hours and I get lethargic with it. Then I find I can't get off objects, etc.
 
The beauty of it is the setting. The historic city of London is brilliantly laid out. Everywhere there is something too see or look at. E.g. I was walking along the back-alley of a row of terraces, and each walled in yard had something different in it. OK I don't go poking around all the gardens but on the bigger scale the buildings are excellently done. It's a graphics tourist's game.
 
The combat is OK. The quests rock. Killing the gang members in the streets doesn't feel like mindless murder because they always attack to kill the player.
 
One other aspect is that at about half the game is about collectibles. Finding them is not always easy, but it's always fun every-time because the setting is great. That contradicts what I said in the above post, in that Far Cry 4 is a collectible game set in a vast gorgeous map. However FC4 was practically a blue-print copy of FC3 so I was done with collectibles before I started playing FC4.
 
AC:S is something new. However I have only played 12hours, and I do fully expect I might get fed up: I don't know though.

 

[batmax25]

I've been playing The Witcher 1 recently, and I really like it. The story is quite good, and I love the universe that the game is set in (basing it off a series of books probably helped with the world building). The combat system, where you click for your character to go into a multi-hit attack animation, with multiple stances and weapons, is refreshing and different from other games such as elder scrolls and fallout, though it can get a bit repetitive at times. 

 

[Rhamnetin]

  I've been playing The Witcher 1 recently, and I really like it. The story is quite good, and I love the universe that the game is set in (basing it off a series of books probably helped with the world building). The combat system, where you click for your character to go into a multi-hit attack animation, with multiple stances and weapons, is refreshing and different from other games such as elder scrolls and fallout, though it can get a bit repetitive at times. 

 
Wow, someone with a positive outlook on The Witcher's combat system.  Personally I think it's the worst I've ever experienced, no idea what the developers were thinking.  Even worse than Morrowind.  

 

[GreenBow]

   
Wow, someone with a positive outlook on The Witcher's combat system.  Personally I think it's the worst I've ever experienced, no idea what the developers were thinking.  Even worse than Morrowind.  

I sometimes think of retrying Witcher 1. I gave up after about an hour. I gave up before that too, because of the combat. I didn't know you had to follow the little icon prompt and was just striking doing about 0.3% damage. I was screaming at it. When I worked out the icon for combat I was little impressed. It was because I was watching for the icon to show rather than watching the game.
 
The I finally gave up over the meditation at the fireplace, because I could not work out what it was for. Or what I was supposed to do.

 

[batmax25]

As you progress in the game there isn't an icon to help you out, you just intuitively figure out which stance to use for each enemy. Meditation at a fireplace has many uses. The main use is to skip time, which heals Geralt. In addition, two new buttons appear in the top . One allows you to craft potions, the other allows you to level up and distribute "talents". There are also some mods for the game that I have running which improve parts of the game.

 

[Alypius]

I really should play witcher 1...picked up the series with 2 on deployment and was one of the best games I've played.

 

[GreenBow]

I really should play witcher 1...picked up the series with 2 on deployment and was one of the best games I've played.

 
Agreed, Witcher 2 was ace. Apart from the mechanic that you could not take potions during combat. Plus I spent half the game fighting Nekkers and some other creatures with the wrong sword, making it very difficult.
 
The graphics of and around Flotsam created one of the most gorgeous and magical places ever in a game. I actually keep W2 installed just to pop back and have a look around Flotsam, now and again. I really need to get over this, haha.