I know, overdiscussed ever presently, but I actually have something to say.

The problem with actuality in RPGs is ineffable.
You might play some vidy and think, wow this is immersive, but the game itself might not be an RPG.
A game might have mechanics, if validity is of course it should be reaching high or at least somewhat complex levels in mechanics.
Not to trying to shit on anyone, just an example of how some games are met halfway, like Witcher 3 for instance.
It is in practical reasoning an RPG, but sadly just actually an action game with *some* elements, not complex enough. Of course not making the argument complexity makes any real difference, no, but an RPG with highly focused, carved out mechanics will shine through the complexity of it, both aesthetically and very incidentally mechanically.
The main problem comes to choice. Say, in VTMB, the choices do matter. Arcanum, Planescape, Alpha Protocol, Morrowind, New Vegas, etc

A bad-good example is wolf among us. The telltale shtick is actions have consequences, but all you do is directly hand-held, taking you wherever the game wants instead of you deciding.
Again, with Witcher 3, you "explore" places, do quests, and improve character, but it really is just that, it's like DND but without freedom, just a map filled with random things and seperated main & side.

I think the gold standard is VTMB. It's an extremely good example for choices, communication----- BUT
Take fallout 4. The problem is you have to understand, take the output past with efficacy.
It's complete shit, sloppy as it comes, but because of some mechanics, it's an RPG.

Don't be afraid to define or decide on something non-verbally. I would understand if someone reacted to someone saying "comfy", that is kinda retarded, but again the problem goes back to ineffability of this crazy genre.
danke

OP, forgot to post this.
https://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/495903
kind of the argument

>>3779957 (OP)
>What makes an RPG
having a lot of skills and stats that are completely fucking useless
stupidly spongey combat where everything including you just eats damage like nothing, except sometimes the algorithm aligns perfectly and you or the enemy instantly dies for reasons not even god understands
bugs, lots of bugs, very important part of rpgs
having no realtime gameplay, first person perspective, voice acting, or really any feature more recent than 1989, if it has any of that it's baby casual shit and not an rpg
it needs to so stupidly hard you physically need a strategy guide and math degree to optimize your character, if you have fun it's not a real rpg

>>3779957 (OP)
Mechanics are generally irrelevant to whether something is an rpg or not
They’re used to subclassify rpgs, which is different

>>3779957 (OP)
Mechanics: Combat, RPG elements, interactive gameplay, quest design, puzzle solving, reactivity.

Should i elaborate on each one separately? if you want i can do that later

>>3779957 (OP)
I prefer expressing characters through actions rather than dialogue choices.

VTMB didn't do much for me. Cool setting, characters, atmosphere etc. but it didn't feel like roleplaying.

Character customization and progression, shaping your character through stats gear and narrative choices, decisions that affect the story, characters, and world (ideally in meaningful ways), a role with motivations, identity and a place in the world with dialogue options and branching narrative paths, multiple valid ways to solve problems like talking, sneaking, fighting etc, a believable world with internal consistency, history, factions, and NPCs who react to your actions, collecting and using gear, currencies, and consumables in a meaningful way

>>3779957 (OP)
>The main problem comes to choice. Say, in VTMB, the choices do matter. Arcanum, Planescape, Alpha Protocol, Morrowind, New Vegas, etc
this is completely wrong. case in point: a tabletop oneshot dungeon crawl. no choice needed, just fight your way through. still an rpg.
>>3779997
>Mechanics are generally irrelevant to whether something is an rpg or not
and you are wrong also. mechanics are 100% what defines the genre.

>>3780008
>but it didn't feel like roleplaying.
exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about, it's just that incidentally you don't like the game, but it's just not that the game is of a stricter rpg cookie cutter either. As in too typical or basic otherwise.

>>3780012
Arguably the most important thing is where the game takes you, like literally logistically. The paths to be taken must be severe if the aim is to make an authentic RPG.

>>3780068
Absolutely but it would have an excellent system work all the same. Even if you GURPs retard level down to just rolls and a few stats, it's by definition a true rpg. Added bonus is imagination not letting the player get stuck going nowhere except what the game directs, into.

>>3779957 (OP)
>I think the gold standard is VTMB

How is that a gold standard?
No matter what you do in the game your main quest structure will always be the same with a very minor deviation in the ending cutscene
It all comes up to one final click on dialogue choices

bad guy always loses, either dies by bomb or another clan
siding with the bad guy leads to your death anyway
the ending is the things bombs and you either escape or die with him 1 ending with 2 variations
or another 2 endings for other factions but the outcome very similar

How is this gold standard?
Not only the ending is just one cutscene, its main quest structued dont even change.

Now compare this to Cyberpunk 2077 a game everyone here talks shit about for lacking in choices
Cyberpunk has 5 main endings and 3 of them have two variations. Also the ending is not just a cutscene but a whole quest followed by a cutscene.

VTMB also has a lot of stats but most of them don't matter as well and you have stats that overlap in meaningless ways
Unarmed + Melee = those two stats are almost the exact same, just fluff
The defense stat is weird, it doesnt make you tanky, it makes you agile and harder to hit.
You also have skills like haggle to influence price, pointless skill

Then you have some skills that influence their corresponding skill so like computer and hacking or seduction and subterfuge.
This is just skill bloat, too many things do the exact same and almost all of them don't influence choices that matter.

For each quest you can talk or sneak or fight, the stats with choices in dialogue all do the same thing but with different fluff, the intimidate and seduce do the same thing but one with a different line.


Suppose i give one side quest to 100 players and tell them to solve it. in a game like VTMB you will see 33% talk their way out 33% will fight 33% will sneak or hack
Is this your idea for gold standard? because that means Bethesda games are gold standard actually

>>3779957 (OP)
>What makes an RPG, mechanics wise
Nothing, because RPG is a far too loose, broad an ill-defined genre.

The closest you can get when it comes to systems is that RPGs focuses on a characters skill over player skill.
You don't need to be smart, have quick reflexes or good aim. That's more on the character.

>>3779957 (OP)
I'm not reading any of this, stop spamming your shitty threads.

>>3780218
>Now compare this to Cyberpunk 2077
Counterpoints:
old good new bad
niche good popular bad

>>3780225
What kind of threads do you read?

>>3780218
first of, even with the ending being little of difference, let alone it being left off-screen too much.. it still holds up as an excellent RPG.

>Compare to cyberpunk, 5 endings
Ah, you were baiting. Not bad.

>stats meaingless
cope because you don't like the game or more bait
this is a great post. 5/7, would read again

>>3780448
I gave you all these examples and thats all you have to say?
>Still holds up as excellent RPG
>You baiting
>Cope
>You dont like the game

You could've just answered the question and refuted the examples instead.

Well whatever I'll take the W anyway, thanks.

WHAT IS AN RPG??????????

>>3779957 (OP)
Turn-based combat (main defining factor) and dialogue choices

>>3780646
>W
pathetic-ish.. but still nice bait

>>3780068
>and you are wrong also. mechanics are 100% what defines the genre.
false.

>>3780448
I would support the statement that stats are often implemented weirdly and without much thought. The last 20 years or so it's basically skinner box ticking the right neurons, hence games feeling tedious and unfun, despite constant bing omg wahoos. Mgs v is such a game.

>>3781030
it's definitely a game

Can we just skip foreplay and go all pissant on calling witcher 3 shit as an rpg?

>>3781076
>lets call one of the best rpgs shit
Right on schedule

>>3779957 (OP)
It's not. Thematically rpgs are trying to emulate ttrpgs. Mechanically this is a turn based grid/hex combat system reliant on at least a combination of stats, skills, and equipment. Featuring character progression. A design focus on player agency, and verisimilitude.


A game can still be considered a RPG while lacking some of these elements, though the more of them they lack the more likely they are to fall into a subgenre that incorporates "RPG elements" I.E. Borderlands having a perk tree, and weapons stats being called a "Looter Shooter"

>>3780218
>Now compare this to Cyberpunk 2077
still just a gta clone w/ rpg elements btw

>>3781083
Would you say on every base to cover, it actually is an rpg?

>>3779996
anon, you just described modern RPGs... ooooooh that was the joke!

Press x to attack, your hit stat is -10000.
You miss, there that is what makes a rpg.
Everything else is a an action game/vn.

>>3781076
Witcher 3 embodies the R part of rpg.
Rolling,rolling,rolling....

>>3779957 (OP)
advice for a Greta Thunberg FNV build?

>>3779957 (OP)
Sorry (well, actually not) for being too political, but wouldn't Joshua Graham be a c*cksucker for Israel?

>>3782626
>Hardcore mode
>Good Natured, Small Frame
>tag Medicine, Science, Speech
>focus SPECIAL into CHR, INT, LCK
>start playthrough as pacifist, run from combat or sneak around
>no eating meat, she's vegetarian
>go through to Freeside and do everything to help the Followers and the refugees around Vegas
>take Arcade as companion
>acquire platinum chip peacefully
>activate Helios to give power to everyone equally
>head to the cave to start Honest Hearts
>enter Zion
>"How dare you!"
>use the minigun, missile launcher, and fat man you brought with you to exterminate every filthy kike you see in this illegitimate state
>laugh maniacally as they plead for mercy in their corrupted dialect of Yiddish
>help the Palelegstinians reclaim their homeland
>take Them's Good Eatin' or Cannibal and eat the guts of (((Gannon))) and (((Graham))) when they try to stop you
>return to Mojave and capture Hoover Dam with your energy efficient Securitron army to generate clean hydroelectric power to stop global warming

>>3783335
is this a rpg
>i play as a shitty white dude
>gameplay choices affects the progression and story
>offer a lot of customizations
>provide a lot of control and depth

>>3781657
yes

the particular mechanics aren't the issue so much as them being in service to characterization, world building, and story
the point of an RPG is that you are playing a role, in other words you are the character, so the most important thing is that you have the ability to make choices which the game recognizes and responds to
the greater the depth, detail, and responsiveness to your inputs the better the rpg
this includes combat of course, but that is the most shallow part of an rpg and as you point out if a game only responds to combat inputs in a shallow manner it's not different from an action game - it should also strive to have your inputs meaningfully impact the game world itself, and for your choice to spec sword vs axe, agi build vs str build, etc. meaningfully impact your characterization in some way beyond the amount of DPS you do

>>3781083
>>lets call one of the best rpgs shit
>Right on schedule
a game can be a really good game, which it is, without it being faithful to the idea of an RPG

>>3779957 (OP)
This might sound like esoteric bullshit, but I've been thinking about this for a while and I don't think that what makes an RPG an RPG is about the mechanics, it's about what the mechanics encourage the player to do.

See, an action game can take the form of a shooter, a beat-em-up, a Devil May Cry clone, whatever. The distinctions between all of those genres are mechanical, but all of them are encouraging you to pursue the same goal, which is mastery of the mechanics to the aim of a (usually righteous) end.

RPGs, on the other hand, are about as mechanically diverse as video games can be, with many eschewing even seemingly ubiquitous elements of the genre like stat blocks and open-ended progression systems. But they do all have something in common, and it's that the player character(s) must develop and progress, at least mechanically but ideally also narratively. Link grows from an orphan in the woods, the only boy he knows who doesn't have a fairy, to the warrior savior of Hyrule. The Nerevarine starts as a prisoner in a strange land with neither connections nor anyone to believe in him, and eventually becomes the god-slayer. A foreign adventurer looking for a job finds himself on the path to becoming the savior of Hydaelin and becomes hailed as the Warrior of Light.

These are narrative tropes that are pretty common in video games in general, but what makes an RPG an RPG is that the character develops mechanically along with his narrative growth. Link starts with a sword he found in the woods, a wooden shield, and some sticks, and gains abilities and tools that make him formidable. The Nerevarine gains skills, spells, and connections which enable him to gather sacred artifacts to fulfill his destiny. You follow your character arc, whether it's self-made or pre-set by the story, by using the mechanics to develop your character.

But that's just a theory.

>>3779957 (OP)
what makes rpg an rpg is an ability to roleplay and systems which enable said roleplay by working properly.
main problem of failed rpgs come from developers not being able to understand purpose of such systems, piling them into the game and failing completely cos those systems dont work and dont interact with eachother to create enjoyable mix.

>skyrim
you have possibilities to do many different things, stealth, spells, 2hand, 1hands, sword n board, vampire, werwolf, magic, mix it all. story is very cliche bog standard and gives very little choice but its very stylized and full of accepted tropes so its enables roleplay in those confindements (stormcloaks berserker vs imperiallegionary or taloself racist destroying humans).

>fallout4
you have realtively very few possibilities build-wise. gun choice is absolutely abyssmal if you count one-use heavy weapons off and high rate of fire weapons off cos ammo for them does not exist. so you have choise between sniper rifles and energy sniper rifles. or heavy revolvers. of theres also melee. but it doesnt really do anything cos its not like you can incapacitate or throw down enemies like you could in fallout 1. thats less variety than fallout1. so you get failure from the get go
BUT THERES MORE
cos plot is also completely nonsensical cringe. it employs no recognized tropes, player character has very dubious motivations and factions themselves are stupid as fuck, lacking or exist for no reason.
can I play as raider degenerate have sex and od on drugs? in such a limited capacity its a nope
can I play as heavy armored power armor guy with a minigun? nope cos ammo for miniguns dont exist due to bad design.
can I play as explorer of deadly irradiated areas? nope cos glowing sea doable naked
can I be speech guy? no cos dialogue system is 4 different ways to answer "yes" and deep lore explanations such as "you wont get it".

skytim is an rpg while f4 is a shooter with some shitty rpg elements which do not work.

>>3791739
and btw speech doesnt work in skyrim either, but majority of skyrim systems work so it gets the pass

>>3780218
vtmb and cyberpunk are not rpgs (or rather much less rpgs than actual rpgs) because player is forced into a certain role. and I do not mean plot forced like being elden lord in elden ring which is an actual rpg. I mean forced like beaing a fucking vampire - and thats the end of it - or being a witcher geralt - and thats the end of it-. they are narrative-driven higly responsible and very well written interactive novelas basically. you can be a different kind of vampire or different kind of witcher but in the end you are still witcher. at no point in the game you have control. at no point in the game you have power. at no point you have choice. you are playing dm character in a dm adventure and you will be sure reminded about it every step of the way.

its basically dark urge of bg3 done wrong with too much restrictions where biggest difference between bg3 and cp77 is an abilitiy to say "fuck that shit I see where it is going, eat a dick dm, I am not playing by your rules I am gonna do what I see my character doing". and thats very essence of the roleplay and what makes rpg an actual rpg.

If you strip what an RPG down to its actual fundamental elements, the best RPG ever made is the first Taleworlds Walking Dead game, and it's not even considered an RPG.

>>3791820
The essence of RPG isn't CYOA, that's merely branching narratives and RPG don't require narratives at all.

>>3791831
RPGs definitely require a narrative, and a setting and at least one character.
Playing a role without a narrative is completely meaningless and doesn't even make sense.

>>3791842
If I give you a setting and a system to define a character within it and you create a character within that, you don't need a narrative to roleplay within. It's exactly like living a life, you create your own meaning. This makes perfect sense.

>>3792141
NTA, but this is kind of like saying Dungeons & Dragons doesn't need a dungeon master.

What you're essentially describing is an open-world adventure game in which you create your own narrative experiences by interacting with the world through the game mechanics. Role-playing requires you to have a role to play, and I don't really see how you'd do that without having a story. At the very least you would need the game to mechanically lend itself to generating stories for you to play through, surely.

>>3792238
>Role-playing requires you to have a role to play, and I don't really see how you'd do that without having a story.
Witchhunter hunting witches for personal reasons.

I agree RPGs need stories, would be bland and simplistic otherwise

>>3792238
It isn't at all.
>What you're essentially describing is an open-world adventure game
I'm not, I'm directly describing roleplaying games.
>Role-playing requires you to have a role to play, and I don't really see how you'd do that without having a story
You create your character within a setting, that's your role. It's exactly like real life. You don't even need a fully fleshed out character to begin roleplaying, because you can form it as you go, exactly as people work in reality. You absolutely don't need railroaded experience to roleplay. Note, it's fine if you personally do need that, lack of imagination or needing something to guide you in life, but the essence of RPGs isn't following a narrative.

>>3791842
>RPGs definitely require a narrative, and a setting and at least one character.
>Playing a role without a narrative is completely meaningless and doesn't even make sense.
This statement has been completely misunderstood, the clue is in the second sentence. It doesn't even make sense to have a role being played by a character in a setting "without a narrative."
If you have a setting + a character + the character's interaction, this = a narrative
A narrative can be authored, improvised or simulated.
TTRPG like D&D do improvised (player generated) narratives all the time. The DM places you in a dungeon or a town, and the narrative is created by your interactions with the other players, the setting, NPCs, etc. It isn't necessarily dictated to you. But that doesn't make it not a narrative. The DM, just like the game itself in a cRPG, can assume more or less narrative control.

But those are the fundamental elements of RPG - setting, character, narrative (and interaction by player, otherwise it's just a story and not a game - more precisely it's an interactive narrative)
You can have an RPG without stats, skills, or a character sheet.
You can have an RPG without XP, levels, or loot.
You can have an RPG without combat, turn order, or hit points.
You can have an RPG without a quest log, dialogue trees, or cutscenes.
You can have an RPG without inventory management, crafting, or economy systems.
You can have an RPG without class systems, talent trees, or min-maxing.
You can even have an RPG without graphics, animation, or a visual representation of the world—text alone can suffice.

You cannot have an RPG with a setting, character and narrative.

>>3792318
>You cannot have an RPG with a setting, character and narrative.
without

>>3792318
>>3792319
>You cannot have an RPG with a setting, character and narrative.
you could say this for almost every video game, it's not helpful in determining what an RPG is

I think the core thing that distinguishes RPGs from other games is that characters have stats associated with them that interact with the game in a complex way, and these stats change throughout the game. these stats increasing is the primary way the player character (or characters) gets stronger

>>3792324
There are a handful of genres that can fit the definition but are not considered RPGs:
-Immersive sims, interactive fiction, open ended sandbox games like The Sims
But I would argue that these are actually RPGs even though not widely considered such, because they do fit the definition I outlined

There are also some that do not fit the definition but are generally considered RPGs:
-Loot based action "RPGs" like Diablo, Path of Exile - they are linear, have no meaningful role assumption or narrative agency. You just collect loot and level up.
-Gacha games - as above, narrative is decorative, non interactive, linear, you have no narrative agency or meaningful role assumption.
MMORPGs - the goal is doing raids to get loot, to do more raids to get more loot, to do more raids to get more loot
These are just linear action games with level ups and gear upgrades.

And the rest of games don't fit the definition and clearly aren't RPGs - puzzle games, arcade games, sports, racing, strategy, 4x, etc

>I think the core thing that distinguishes RPGs from other games is that characters have stats associated with them that interact with the game in a complex way, and these stats change throughout the game. these stats increasing is the primary way the player character (or characters) gets stronger
What do you mean by "interact with the game in a complex way" - this is dubious
If interpreted loosely then even a phone gacha game where you just click random shit and level up and get progressively higher stats is a role playing game.

>>3792318
A branching, prewritten, narrative is the thing I was responding to, the Telltale games are not the best RPGs ever made in a fundamental sense. Obviously any human activity forms a narrative because we are driven to view our actions linearly.

The fact is that you can roleplay in a completely freeform manner and your actions don't have to follow any story structure.

>>3792360
I don't know what all posts are yours but if you would call Diablo an RPG, where the goal is entirely focused around obtaining loot, but not Taleworlds' the walking dead, where the goal is assuming the role of a character within a story and making decisions that deeply impact the narrative, just because one has stats and leveling up and the other doesn't, then I would say I much prefer my definition.

I see that you didn't say "Taleworlds games aren't RPGs," you only said they're not the best, so I'm not saying that's your claim, I'm just posing an if statement to clarify my own position.
I don't really consider replacing your belt with an almost perfect stat line with one that has a slightly more perfect stat line to be role playing, and that's basically all Diablo is.

>>3780218
>Now compare this to Cyberpunk
lol
lmao even

>>3779957 (OP)
First of all, let me premise this post by saying that I am the biggest RPG expert in this thread, my definition of RPG has more value than every single one of you, I started discussing what makes an RPG before 4channel.org even existed, and before any of you even started posting on the Internet. I am the Alpha and the Omega. I am The Truth. I haven't read any other post, nor do I care about anyone else's definitions. My definition is 100% correct and infallible, and all your attempts at attacking it are impotent and will fail bigly.

What makes an RPG is
>CHOICES
that (You), the player, makes in such a manner that would make sense for the type of character you're playing, if applicable to your in-game character
>& CONSEQUENCES
for said choices, made by (You) on behalf of your in-game avatar, and said consequences are the result of your avatar's previous choices (often represented by attributes, skills, etc so that you don't have to make every single choice in your avatar's existence).

A short definition, which still falls under the above
>The RPG genre is defined by choices whose consequence are determined by an intermediary between the player & the world, rather than the player's skill.

/thread

>>3792767
And to add to this, no pure RPG exists, RPGs exist on a spectrum, same as most other complex genres exist on a spectrum. In example, everyone here instinctively recognizes FIFA 2050 as a "sports game", but it is basically an action-strategy game with RPG elements (or at least the last FIFA I played, maybe in 2005 , was).

>>3781083
>TW3
>(((one of the best rpgs)))
In what fucking planet?
>meandering open world that would unironically be better utilized as set dressing with half its distractions not existing: the likes of bandit outposts, smugglers' caches, monster nests etc. are all close enough that you're constantly glued to the minimap instead of the environment, and you likewise won't ignore them due to giving XP, loot, skill points when it comes to Places of Power and sometimes those "swim to a nearby area and find the treasure" side quests
>horrible loot system and non-existent economy, where you're not only not penalized but rather encouraged to loot everything that isn't nailed down (and nobody cares, nice immersion) for the rare chance you find super duper rare leather in someone's shack; that in turn leads you to selling most of the loot ending with dozens of thousands of coin even in the early game essentially nullifying another gameplay aspect: that of the bargaining of contract rewards, because you don't care about coin anymore
>on that note, due to the fucked up loot scale 9 times out of 10 the new sword you'll find will actually be worse than the one you have equipped at the time; and that is true as well for plot related, unique swords like the one crafted for you after a quest chain centered entirety around the sword or the one you're given by Crach for the Battle of Kaer Morhen
>all armors and swords stop mattering the second you reach Lvl. 14 and get to craft your very first Witcher armor, from that point forward it's an objective fact you're better off changing from Witcher gear to Witcher gear ignoring the other 99% of gear
>level caps are horribly thought out, with you leveling far faster than you can complete quests meaning even if you do the lowest level quest at any given time you'll still overlevel and thus, all lower quests from that point forward will give you 1% of the experience points so if...

>>3781083
>>3792805
...so if a normal quest would give you 250 points, doing it overleveled (something you have no control over) will make it so you get 1 point instead
>Quen as a power makes it so there's no reason for you to*not* pop that at the beginning of every. single. fight because it's a free hit
>the abundant existence of food items make it so you have an essentially infinite source of healing in and outside of combat. Not even Gothic allowed the former
>uselessness of the crossbow and any one of its bolts whenever it's not a flying or aquatic enemy
>quantity over quality of Decoctions + its location in the inventory UI essentially makes sure that, unless you're in a 10 minute long boss, you're never gonna use them due to how occasional their effects are
>bad continuity. Witcher 3 is a game, but it's also implicitly a direct sequel to something that came before. The non-existence of the Iorveth/Catriona Plague questline, forgetting Triss' role in the Rose of Remembrance brainwashing, throwing Radovid's TW2 character out the window by making him go mad in the six months between games, then likewise character assassinating Djikstra by having him, a spy that hides behind the shadows and who knows how dangerous Geralt is (motherfucker lost a leg because of him), try and attack the witcher like a common bandit. Given both Radovid and Djikstra are involved with the war, this effectively means 95% of players are gonna end up with Nilfgaard winning by proxy. The same thing happens with Cerys in Skellige, and in a game series known for its nuance and non-black white morality ends up having such in two of the three pillars of its plotline
>horrible main villains: for a game with the Wild Hunt subtitle, the actual Wild Hunt is characterized worse than they were at the end of TW1. Do you remember a single thing about Eredin? They're not a real threat because they're non-existent for most of the game. And because of that...

>>3781083
>>3792805
>>3792808
...and because of that, there's no stakes and you really only care about the moment to moment situation and never actually take the Ciri threat seriously

The Witcher 3 is an absolute mess of a game. Quantity over quality, deep as a puddle. It's not even the best Witcher game nevermind one of the best RPGs ever made. Preposterous.

>>3792809
You have no argument, The Witcher 3 is great.

>>3792809
Anyone that thinks Witcher 1 or 2 is the best Witcher game is retarded. Full stop.

>>3792931
Excellent post

>>3792927
>>3792931
>no comeback
Concession accepted

>>3792931
witcher 2 is best
eat shit

>>3792932
Meant for >>3792767

>>3793087
Witcher 3 is the best
Drink piss