I finished the game after about 85 hours and yeah… act 2 and 3 need some polish. I ran into more than one gamebreaking bug. But overall it was still a really really great experience and taking the complexity of the game into account I think the overall polish of the game at release was quite good.
How did you beat it that fast? I’m 70ish hours in and only starting to get close to done with act 1 maybe.
By at some point saying ‘OK, enough side quests, let’s move on with the story’. I plan to replay this game multiple times, so I do not mind missing some side quests in my first playthrough.
I was fortunate enough to not run into any of the quest-breaking bugs. Had no issues doing what I wanted to do. What I did run into a lot was buggy scripting where dialogues assumed I had information I didn’t, so I wouldn’t know what my companions were talking about some of the time.
The bigger problem in my eyes is spells/items/class abilities/feats not working correctly and being outright non-functional in some cases. That’s going to be an enduring problem for replays, and it’s not encouraging to me that very little has been done on this since release.
I do think this game wouldn’t have scored as well as it did if so many publications didn’t rush to press with half a playthrough. In this particular case, I think the game–bugs and all–is still a strong GotY contender, but I really hope there’s a conversation being had in the professional games criticism sphere about how this practice could cause a scandal in the future.
As it is, I’m genuinely surprised the reviewers aren’t coming under fire more than they have for this. I come from an era where publishing a review without completing a game would have been unconscionable.
Do you have an example? Haven’t noticed that yet in 110h of playing.
