The Witcher 3 | Review Thread

Calabi said:
Does anyone know what happens when you die or how the save system works. I mean do you lose all your progress as it loads the latest save point. How often does it auto save or do you you have to manually save all the time.
Click to expand...

I believe it auto saves when you make quest progress or use fast travel. There was a video of a youtuber who was just out dicking around, he died to an enemy and got teleported all the way back to the last fast travel he used. So manual saving will be necessary.
 
Derp said:
Bloodborne vs Witcher 3 vs Arkham Knight vs Battlefront would be a nice bloodbath if the last two do really well.
Click to expand...

The only other game besides Bloodborne that I see even coming close to Wild Hunt for me is MGSV. But even then I feel like they will not touch it for me.
 
Nzyme32 said:
I'm afraid I'm also of the opinion that MGS4 is in no way a 10/10 game.
Click to expand...

aaand? just because it's from the same person does that make witcher 3 not a 10/10 game? please. kevn also gave asscreed a 9.0 but to me asscreed 1 was 2/10. did that make mgs4 not a 10/10 for me? no.
 
IGN's criticism on the game being filled with fetch quests isn't an opinion. That's why it should be taken seriously. It's a definitive, factual statement. It's not like he said 'I don't like the color scheme in this game'. He said it's filled with filler fetch quests to pad the game. This isn't a case of taking one negative statement and ignoring all the positive ones. What he said wasn't an opinion.
 
Lingitiz said:
FPS drops are always YMMV with how intrusive one would feel they are.
Click to expand...

I have to agree. If I managed to enjoy Dark Souls without Blight Town even bothering me, I think I will be more than fine here. I would gladly take 900p and a smoother experience, but I will be fine.
 
Anton Sugar said:
One thing to consider here: CDPR has amazing post-launch support. Not just in terms of bug fixes, but balancing/tweaking the game, adding new content, etc.
Click to expand...

This really can't be overstated. I got W2 on PC day 1, and the amount of patches, tweaks and content the game received (including all the original preorder DLC and all the content from the EE), all entirely for free, is really without precedent or equal in the modern gaming landscape.
 
Heavy said:
IGN's criticism on the game being filled with fetch quests isn't an opinion. That's why it should be taken seriously. It's a definitive, factual statement. It's not like he said 'I don't like the color scheme in this game'. He said it's filled with filler fetch quests to pad the game. This isn't a case of taking one negative statement and ignoring all the positive ones. What he said wasn't an opinion.
Click to expand...

A massive open world game with over 200 hours of content has some standardized quests mixed in with all of the good? Unheard of.
 
Derp said:
Bloodborne vs Witcher 3 vs Arkham Knight vs Battlefront would be a nice bloodbath if the last two do really well.
Click to expand...

I am so fearful that Arkham Knight is going to let me down, but at 28 bucks on Nuuvem, I could do much worse.

I think Witcher 3 will score higher but Bloodborne will take home GOTY for more sites.
 
AdanVC said:
Yeaah I mean, game got amazing reviews, yet there's a ton of discussion going on in here... Like, scoring a 10 on Gamespot is not even a reason to be excited for the game anymore. There has to be some sort of discussion somehow anyway :(
Click to expand...

Famitsu's infamous 40/40 were regarded as being extremely rare and they were looked upon by many as being the holy grail of reviews. GameSpot has this weird reputation where their reviews have jumped ship for the last couple of years. I think a large part of it is due to having certain personnel leaving and then having others replacing the core of their website. You also have to take into consideration who is doing the review. You have a certain group of journalists who do a review and you might even know what they're into. If they don't like RPGs or Open World games then you suspect their review to be a little more harsh than say a person who has enjoyed RPGs since the early 90s. I think some journalist understand what its like to have a game appeal to a crowd, while some just know how it appeals as being a good game. It can also go the other way. The journalist who knows what a good RPG is might think something is mediocre compared to the person just starting out who thinks anything is great or hasn't played the best in that group of games (genre). If its your first day on the job you might think a mediocre game is perfection.

This is one reason I stopped reading GI because I didn't know how they catered their reviews. I still don't like some reviews that feel like they're being catered. It's one thing to enjoy a game because its gotten a lot of press and there's the other where you enjoy it because its part of a certain genre. Obviously The Witcher 3 seems to be a solid game, but opinions can stir a lot more than just that. You could see someone jump up in the next few days and find ethical problems or saying its something that its apparently not to a fan of the series.

Just because we enjoy seeing these high scores doesn't mean everyone else will. It can become extremely ignorant or it'll become an opinion.

You'll always have a crowd that doesn't like what you thought was good. I could say TW3 gets GOTY. There's going to be a mile high discussion sometime this year about which game deserves to be GOTY.
 
Prine said:
HOOOLY SHIT I didnt expect this!

Looks like a real contender to take Zelda:OoT title !
Click to expand...
That's not really a comparison one can make. Only an early great game in the New VR Wave (or other new waves) could be said to be in a similar position. Better games than Oot have been released for years, yet the breakthrough to 3d adventure is what made the difference.
 
Heavy said:
IGN's criticism on the game being filled with fetch quests isn't an opinion. That's why it should be taken seriously. It's a definitive, factual statement. It's not like he said 'I don't like the color scheme in this game'. He said it's filled with filler fetch quests to pad the game. This isn't a case of taking one negative statement and ignoring all the positive ones. What he said wasn't an opinion.
Click to expand...

Need check that review, but does he break down what these quests actually are like? After all CDPR never said game wouldn't have fetch quests, they said that when they do such quests they want add meat to it. Not have them be just "Go to X and kill Y amount of Z and come back" quests, but more personalized stories of themselves.

Basically did reviewer say if they are super barebones stuff or more involved?
 
Heavy said:
IGN's criticism on the game being filled with fetch quests isn't an opinion. That's why it should be taken seriously. It's a definitive, factual statement. It's not like he said 'I don't like the color scheme in this game'. He said it's filled with filler fetch quests to pad the game. This isn't a case of taking one negative statement and ignoring all the positive ones. What he said wasn't an opinion.
Click to expand...

But what about the other reviewers that said it wasn't filled with fetch quests? How do we know which "factual" statement is true?
 
Wow, amazing reviews. Dont have a PS4 yet but I think this will be my first game for it, along with TLoU.

Time to find a story summary, finished the second game but forgot quite a bit.
 
Does this mean I can feel good and justify my preorder?

Also so far of the reviews I've read, only IGN mentions boring fetch quests? Anyone know of another review that does?
 
Heavy said:
IGN's criticism on the game being filled with fetch quests isn't an opinion. That's why it should be taken seriously. It's a definitive, factual statement. It's not like he said 'I don't like the color scheme in this game'. He said it's filled with filler fetch quests to pad the game. This isn't a case of taking one negative statement and ignoring all the positive ones. What he said wasn't an opinion.
Click to expand...

And what about all the other reviews saying the game is filled with interesting, well-written quests with C&C? Everything can be stripped down to a fetch quest. Dark Souls 1 tasks you with ringing a bell, sounds exciting right? Context is the key word here. And that is something The Witcher games have always managed to provide.
 
ironcreed said:
MALs4a4.gif
Click to expand...

Why is he wearing a picnic tablecloth as a shirt?
 
Gaz_RB said:
But what about the other reviewers that said it wasn't filled with fetch quests? How do we know which "factual" statement is true?
Click to expand...

IGN, obviously. Because "filled with" and "to pad a game" are totally facts and have no subjective connotations. Others claiming the side quests are actually interesting and enrich the world, no matter how trivial they start out, are the only subjective opinions.
 
Regarding those "fetch quests": if you view everything from that perspective, then e.g. the combat is utterly repeating, because you just press buttons to win. Also the story only involves persons doing something. 5/10
 
ironcreed said:
A massive open world game with over 200 hours of content has some standardized quests mixed in with all of the good? Unheard of.
Click to expand...
You're downplaying IGN's statement. It's not just 'some', it's "fetch-quest-heavy main story". IGN says the actual side quests are high quality with good story, but the main story of the game is filled with bad fetch quests, which is as weird as it sounds. o_O

Gaz_RB said:
But what about the other reviewers that said it wasn't filled with fetch quests? How do we know which "factual" statement is true?
Click to expand...
Did they explicitly say it's not filled with fetch quests?
 
EatChildren said:
I've read a handful of reviews, here's my 5c on some of the hotter topics.

RE Main Quest: Few of the reviews downplay it, some outright praise Geralt's personal journey. That's something to remember, maybe for new Witcher fans. An overwhelming majority of RPGs place the protagonist in the middle as the chosen one/god/hero/lord of everything. The series isn't like that. Sweeping changes happen, but often as a backdrop or around your character rather than to or purely because of your character. Keep that in mind you'll always, in a way, play second fiddle to the world itself.

RE Endings: Reviews are divisive but remember there are multiple endings with variations OF those endings based on progress of the plot. It seems you just kinda get a summary of how it all ended, for better or worse. You're never guaranteed a happy ending. Or a cathartic abundance of closure. Maybe your ending will be exactly as you wanted. Or maybe it will be unexpectedly tragic and a bit of a downer. That's how these games roll. The Witcher 2 fucking ended on sorcerer/sorceress genocide and a mass invasion, neither of which you could prevent.

RE Fetch Quests: Seems the main quests are the culprit, and I could see how: you're probably tasks with far reaching "get X of Y" to progress. But most reviews don't paint fetch quests in the same way people are familiar with from the likes of Inquisition and Skyrim. Most reviews praise context and development of quests. Most quests in games can be distilled down to basics of fetch, but context is key. And that context, along with ramifications, sound like the game's biggest strength.
Click to expand...

God bless you, EatChildren.

The story stuff is interesting to me, we'll have to see how it goes. I personally prefer when you're not the center of the world, but I still can't quite tell if that's the main issue with the story with some reviewers or if it really is just light and not that compelling.
 
Heavy said:
IGN's criticism on the game being filled with fetch quests isn't an opinion. That's why it should be taken seriously. It's a definitive, factual statement. It's not like he said 'I don't like the color scheme in this game'. He said it's filled with filler fetch quests to pad the game. This isn't a case of taking one negative statement and ignoring all the positive ones. What he said wasn't an opinion.
Click to expand...

Absolutely and this is especially true given that there exists a universally accepted and agreed-upon definition as to what, precisely, constitutes a fetch quest. I doubt CDPR would take issue with any aspect of this characterization.
 
viveks86 said:
IGN, obviously. Because "filled with" and "to pad a game" are totally facts and have no subjective connotations. Others claiming the side quests are actually interesting and enrich the world, no matter how trivial they start out, are the only subjective opinions.
Click to expand...

Given the size of this game, I could imagine someone getting unlucky and doing the worse quests in time for the review and having a lot of better ones still out there.
 
Heavy said:
IGN's criticism on the game being filled with fetch quests isn't an opinion. That's why it should be taken seriously. It's a definitive, factual statement. It's not like he said 'I don't like the color scheme in this game'. He said it's filled with filler fetch quests to pad the game. This isn't a case of taking one negative statement and ignoring all the positive ones. What he said wasn't an opinion.
Click to expand...

Context is key though and that's where the statement becomes muddied, especially when contested by other reviews that specifically outline the weight of context behind the optional side quests compared to typical fetch quests we're familiar with from other titles.

The statement isn't false, but the definitions and your personal interpretation are subjective, and the exact opposite being specified in other reviews makes it impossible to draw any real conclusion.

Like I said earlier, the idea of a "fetch quest" is poorly defined. In reality, most/all RPGs structure quests in a "fetch" variety. But the context of that structure and the pacing ultimately define them. Being asked by a character to go find the thing can be called out as a fetch quest, but the journey you embark on to find the thing, the choices you'll make, and the ultimate resolution will dictate how fondly you remember it. Most fetch quests are made unmemorable or disappointing entirely because they lack appealing context and development. They're literally go find the thing and you do just that almost to a T.

What excites me is that most reviews are highlighting that this isn't the case for quest structure in Wild Hunt. A woman asks you to go find her missing frying pan. But rarely, if ever, are the quest arcs that simple and trivial even if they seem that way at first.
 
Leb said:
To assist those individuals trying to make the most informed purchasing decision possible, I've helpfully compiled what I feel to be a fair and representative collection of excerpts from the higher profile reviews.
Click to expand...

Clearly, Obama really hated his time with Witcher 2. :P

SargerusBR said:
But the one with the worst combat of the last decade.
Click to expand...

lol I really liked the main mechanic of the combat there and wish it was implemented and expanded upon in games like DA where I always find the combat boring. W1 combat has a myriad of issues with difficulty curve, little freedom in character development and little actual strategy needed but rhytmic clicks is not one of them, its weirdly relaxing and engaging.

Heavy said:
IGN's criticism on the game being filled with fetch quests isn't an opinion. That's why it should be taken seriously. It's a definitive, factual statement. It's not like he said 'I don't like the color scheme in this game'. He said it's filled with filler fetch quests to pad the game. This isn't a case of taking one negative statement and ignoring all the positive ones. What he said wasn't an opinion.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's because the search for Ciri is the case of "I'll tell you about her if you help me first with my problem." That problem may not be a fetch quest in itself (aka collect 5 gryffin heads) but it will not have a lot to do with Ciri and the main storyline.
That's the impression I'm getting from the few main quests one could check out so far.
 
The Gamesradar review is really weird.

"A big one, yes. A beautiful one. But not open, and certainly not a sandbox in the way Skyrim’s environment operated. As Dragonborn, you could disappear for months ascending the ranks of various guilds, getting married, buying property and clearing dungeons while everyone waited patiently for you to save the realm. As Geralt though, you’re rarely able to shake off the grip of the developer’s hand as it guides you from point to point."
Click to expand...
 
IGN says the actual side quests off the beaten path are excellent and rich with story, but they say the main plot line is filled with poor fetch quests. Usually it's the other way around. I've never heard that before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Featured
The Talos Principle: Reawakened | Review Thread + Mini OT
|OT| Review 
13
3K
Astray replied
Lunar Remastered Collection | Review Thread
Opinion Review 
43
3K
anthony2690 replied
Avowed | Review Thread
Analysis Review  28 29 30 31 32
2K
86K
GymWolf replied
AI Limit | Review Thread
Opinion Analysis Review 
36
2K
Thick Thighs Save Lives replied
  • Poll
Assassin's Creed: Shadows | Review Thread
Analysis Review  18 19 20 21 22
1K
71K
Rocco Schiavone replied
Top Bottom