I'm still waiting for the reveal that the game will actually, in fact, be third person - with the first-person perspective being just an option for those people who might prefer it (the way GTA V eventually offered a first-person mode) - so all this cosmetic stuff actually matters.
@kagatoac: Were there? Good. I'm all in favor of character creators having as many options as possible, even when they're ridiculous and outlandish and potentially inappropriate for the genre/tone/atmosphere. Roll the Saints Row and Dark Souls character creators together, throw in Dead Rising-style wardrobe choices, and still add on even more options. And put that in every game so I can always make the protagonist my own. I fully support that.
Cutscenes. If the game has a lot of cutscenes - and I imagine it will - you're likely to see/hear your character and you'll want them to match your vision. Though, I think we all know that someone, whether it's CDPR or the community, will eventually make an Elder Scrolls/Fallout style third-person camera mode. It'll be terrible, but it will let people see their creations.
@teshammutna: Lizard people do exist! All the world leaders are lizard people. They've infiltrated our governments and are systematically destabilizing our civilization to pave the way for their inevitable takeover. Everyone knows this.
And, sadly, furries also exist. But, yeah, who gives a sh*t about them?
But let's set those aside for now. How about little people? Where's the option to make my protagonist a little person, complete with the alternate perspective and unique challenges such a character would face? When they revealed the character creator demo, I don't believe that was an option (though, if I'm wrong, somebody let me know). Hell, how often do games let you create a dwarf protagonist, outside the fantasy genre where they're just bullsh*t mythical creatures like elves and orcs? Where's the social outrage over their lack of inclusion? If CDPR feel compelled to be all inclusive, then they should really go all the way with it. And if people are going to be outraged that their little group isn't being included, they should really stand up for everyone who's rarely to never represented. That's the bit the bothers me.
Well, then there had better be options for animal ears, tails, whiskers, fangs and the like so I can live out my ultimate furry fantasy. And there's no good excuse to not put it in, because, in a fictional future where everyone is augmented, we all know there will be people who go that route. Hell, we have the diet version of it right now, with people wearing their fox ears and tail buttplugs, or people wearing slitted contact lenses and having their tongues split. So, if you're being inclusive, make damn sure you include those people, too.
I had to know. Sadly, the best titles I got from the Mystery Bundle were Batman: Arkham Knight (which is regularly on sale for $4.99, less than the price of the bundle) and The Flame in the Flood (which I already own). If, instead of The Flame in the Flood, I'd gotten Book of Demons, I would've considered it a good deal. Had I gotten Book of Demons, Human Fall Flat, and The Signal from Tolva, along with Batman: Arkham Knight, I would be recommending the bundle to everyone - and probably would've gone back for more.
So, yeah, if you don't own any or many games, the mystery bundle can net you some decent titles at an okay price. But if you already have a pretty extensive collection, you're better off not wasting the money.
I'd be more tempted by that 'mystery bundle' if they broke down exactly what you might get from it. Or, hell, at the very least, sell it to me like a pack of Magic: The Gathering cards and assure me that I'll get at least one AAA title with a normal list price of $49.99 or more, three AA/A/B tier games that normally list for at least $14.99, and then all the garbage games I wouldn't buy for penny and I'm never going to play. I'd take a gamble on that.
thedarklinglord's comments