Support NeoGAF

[Spirited]

I've played all the souls games but I seems to be alone in thinking everything can't be compared to them.

THEY ARE DIFFERENT GAMES , if you can't play anything but souls because you for some arbitrary reason decided to compare every gameplay mechanic to those in the souls games then you're the one losing out.
Games isn't only a combat/movement system, there's lots integral parts of games like story for one.

 

[Filben]

Does this game get better?

If you don't like the quests and presentation that is way better than in any other RPG I've played since 1996, nope, it probably won't get better for you.

Weapon degredation is only a problem for the beginning, though. Not a real problem though since even with 50% you deal enough damage on easier difficulties than deathmarch. After a couple of hourse those amounts of gold you send on repairing stuff isn't a big deal. Not at all.

As for Bloodborne I don't like the sparse story presentation and the animations. God those animations... Since Demon's Souls it looks like the character is more floating over the ground. I don't feel the "stomping"; it feels very mechanical instead of organic.

to compare every gameplay mechanic to those in the souls games then you're the one losing out. Games isn't only a combat/movement system, there's lots integral parts of games like story for one.

This.

 

[Newtype-001]

Zero oomph.

I think it's funny that I find changing Trick weapons via L1 to provide a more satisfying oomph than doing that.

 

[Smidget]

Fallout 4 has the better loot system, but the Witcher games are more story-driven. And The Witcher 3 has much nicer graphics than Fallout 4.

Difference is that Witcher has great quests and great story.
Also that it's not even remotely close to Fallout gameplay wise, one is a fps the other has third person action combat.

Depends why you dont like fallout 4.

Thanks guys for all of the replies.

As far as why I didn't like Fallout 4:

I didn't like the loot/encumbrance system at all. To me, it's annoying picking everything up and having to inventory it and seeing what you can make, not a fan of crafting in most games. Read you can turn off encumbrances in the PC version but seems like that's "cheating".

Gameplay wise, it was a bit clunky and wasn't a giant fan of the VATS system.

And it's a bit too open world for my liking and too much to do and overwhelmed me to be honest.

It's always weird to not click with a game getting rave reviews from critics and players alike, maybe I needed to give it more time.

 

[Zemm]

After getting into Souls, all western action RPGs will suck in comparison. It's a fact of life

No it's not.

 

[CecilRousso]

I wish i would get around to exploring the quests which seem VERY good but i just can't handle the combat system. It doesn't feel intuitive for me and i just can't get ahead of what my character & the enemy are doing. Damnit.

I've played with M+KB though on PC.

That could explain it. I played it with an XBOX360 joypad on PC. And really, everyone who owns a gaming PC capable of running The Witcher 3 should own a good joypad. As awesome as mouse and keyboard are in many games, there's really nothing in The Witcher 3 that makes it suited for that.

 

[Abylim]

I loved Bloodborne, and loved Witcher 3.

I have played and platinumed every souls game, so its not like I casually played the souls stuff.

I dont get it, you can like both games. The combat is not as good as Bloodborne, but that certainly doesnt make me hate it in any way.

I think The Witcher 3 has probably the best story interaction. I felt immersed in the world, and a lot of the people you interact with.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

I loved Bloodborne, and loved Witcher 3.

I have played and platinumed every souls game, so its not like I casually played the souls stuff.

I dont get it, you can like both games. The combat is not as good as Bloodborne, but that certainly doesnt make me hate it in any way.

I think The Witcher 3 has probably the best story interaction. I felt immersed in the world, and a lot of the people you interact with.

Of course. I never said otherwise.

Anyway, played for a couple more hours. I think I'm about to throw in the towel. I'm just not having a good time. That's not to say the game isn't objectively great, but personally, I really can't stand it. Oh well.

 

[Randdalf]

Don't want to be that guy but preparing for the combat is an important part of Witcher, both lore wise and gameplay wise.

It's not that weird that it takes some time.

Oh I know, I should have said, I really enjoyed that aspect of it, I didn't find it weird.

 

[EatChildren]

Of course. I never said otherwise.

Anyway, played for a couple more hours. I think I'm about to throw in the towel. I'm just not having a good time. That's not to say the game isn't objectively great, but personally, I really can't stand it. Oh well.

The main quest alone is like 30 - 40 hours long, and the side quests supplement it enough to spend easily 80 - 100 hours doing shit. So yeah, if you're not feeling it now, you probably wont. And it's not worth gruelling through a game you're not enjoying when you've so much more to go.

 

[Shin Kojima]

Zero oomph.

This is the equivalent to the chest opening animation in the modern Zelda games. It feels more like it happens to a character on-screen than it happens to you, the player. It's just fluff. Good gameplay and design make it feel like YOU are the one experiencing and doing awesome stuff, not just seeing your avatar experience it. That's something a lot of people in this thread don't seem to understand.

 

[Ryne]

I gave up on it as well due to the combat. I should throw it on easy and just beat the game so I can experience the story, which seemed like it was going places.

The combat just wasn't for me.

 

[Moaradin]

I gave on it as well due to the combat. I should throw it on east and just beat the game so I can experience the story.

That's what I tried to do. The combat was even more boring at that point, and it became tedious just playing the game to get to the story. Eventually I just gave up lol

 

[UrbanRats]

yea it would make no sense when you 100% HP he? Critical hit kills are totally random.

There's items and weapons that raise that stat. They're random within the statistical percentage over which you have some control over, like most RPGs.

W3 may roll the dice more than BB does, doesn't mean it's not tied to a mechanic.

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

The combat is what I see as the most disappointing aspect.

 

[Kwansu Dudes]

Of course. I never said otherwise.

Anyway, played for a couple more hours. I think I'm about to throw in the towel. I'm just not having a good time. That's not to say the game isn't objectively great, but personally, I really can't stand it. Oh well.

I gave up on it as well due to the combat. I should throw it on easy and just beat the game so I can experience the story, which seemed like it was going places.

The combat just wasn't for me.

Easy mode is the way to go to experience the series. I fucking hated the Witcher 2 because of the obtuse combat and focus on potions but dropped it down to easy and am a big fan of the series. I think it's a given that wRPGs will never have gameplay that matches japanese aRPGs (or at least for a while).

 

[faridmon]

After getting into Souls, all western action RPGs will suck in comparison. It's a fact of life

What a shitty drive by post.

 

[tbd]

After getting into Souls, all western action RPGs will suck in comparison. It's a fact of life

There are many people that think Souls is shit, doesn't seem so factual after all. I can just repeat myself. No idea how those games can spoil you for other games. Even if you like them, they go a whole different direction. However, just played Dark Souls again the other day and I just had to drop it a few hours in. Corridors with fences everywhere that you can't climb, almost no verticality except ladders while there are ledges and diving in Witcher 3, basically no music, boring, gloomy world, weird as fuck hitboxes, no decisions or actual role-playing, crafting mechanics and blacksmiths scattered in every part of the world with fast travel points 10 minutes away from them for some reason and absolutely cryptic droprates and weapon/armor balancing.

It does nothing better that's important for RPGs. And compared to Devil May Cry, Bayonetta, Darksiders, Monster Hunter, Dragon's Dogma and so on, I wouldn't even say the combat is good. In fact I hate the combat. I can't put in words how much more fun I have with Fallout or Witcher games than with Souls games. The amazing perk system of Fallout alone is more enjoyable than everything in Souls for my liking.

The combat is what I see as the most disappointing aspect.

Not the game's fault when you have some weird as fuck expectations, though. I'd love a list of decision making open world games with focus and most resources going into decisions, crafting, world building and story that have amazing combat.

 

[Sanctuary]

I'm not sure what it being open world has anything to do with whatever strides CDPR has made to the genre regarding combat. You don't even have to compare it to a Souls game either, since that really is one of the most refined combat wise.

You can simply look at a game many haven't even played yet, but will get a second chance in January. There are two franchises you can use for comparison. Souls, which isn't an open world RPG (not really) and Dragon's Dogma, which tries really hard to be and is the closest valid comparison.

It completely blows away the combat in TW3, and that's counting solo and group wise. CDPR should have been looking at that game instead of one that's more skill based and suffers more from wonky ass hit/hurt boxes. Plus, the game already feels floaty as it is, and has very little feedback.

It does nothing better that's important for RPGs. And compared to Devil May Cry, Bayonetta, Darksiders, Monster Hunter, Dragon's Dogma and so on, I wouldn't even say the combat is good. In fact I hate the combat. I can't put in words how much more fun I have with Fallout or Witcher games than with Souls games. The amazing perk system of Fallout alone is more enjoyable than everything in Souls for my liking.

Probably because the Souls games aren't even RPGs. Even calling them Action RPGs is stretching things. They also aren't "character" action games either, so comparing them to those that are makes little sense. On top of that, games like Devil May Cry or Bayonetta don't even require that much skill at all to finish. Yes, you can turn up the difficulty and you can go for all S-rank combos and level scores, but they aren't a requirement to easily finish the game. The closest comparison to any of the games you listed would be Monster Hunter, but only in the weighty aspect of some weapons and pattern recognition/prediction. The Souls games just don't feel like any other action/adventure game, and they actually kind of require you to pay attention. That's why so many people enjoy them.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

As an aside, I sincerely regret mentioning Bloodborne. I was just trying to give some perspective on where I was coming from, as it was the last game I played (and I played it a lot). I wasn't trying to directly compare the two, though I guess that was going to happen, just by me mentioning it.

 

[Servbot24]

Not the game's fault when you have some weird as fuck expectations, though.

He says, after complaining that Dark Souls isn't Uncharted + Fallout.

 

[UrbanRats]

Easy mode is the way to go to experience the series. I fucking hated the Witcher 2 because of the obtuse combat and focus on potions but dropped it down to easy and am a big fan of the series. I think it's a given that wRPGs will never have gameplay that matches japanese aRPGs (or at least for a while).

Potions were the best part about W2's combat.
The fact that you had to prepare before hand added a cool sense of tension to the whole story.

Also, W2 was piss easy on normal, aside from the weirdly super hard tutorial.

As an aside, I sincerely regret mentioning Bloodborne. I was just trying to give some perspective on where I was coming from, as it was the last game I played (and I played it a lot). I wasn't trying to directly compare the two, though I guess that was going to happen, just by me mentioning it.

Well Souls comparisons will always happen regardless, no matter the topic.
"You may have a good insurance, but what if FROM made one?"

 

[nkarafo]

Money was never an issue in this game for me. i don't even know where to spend it. I even repair junk items in my inventory that i'm about to sell anyway, just so i can feel like i'm spending some money. It's so easy to get money by selling junk that it shouldn't be an issue repairing your gear, even every few minutes. You also get repair tools in the wild pretty often too.

 

[Lux R7]

basically no music, boring, gloomy world, weird as fuck hitboxes, no decisions or actual role-playing

 

[Omotesando]

There's items and weapons that raise that stat. They're random within the statistical percentage over which you have some control over, like most RPGs.

W3 may roll the dice more than BB does, doesn't mean it's not tied to a mechanic.

I don't own the videogame lexicon, but calling that a mechanic, especially when talking about gameplay is stretching it imo, i would call it more stat based, indeed stat based randomizing.

To me a gameplay mechanic is positioning or a special move like countering etc.

 

[Kwansu Dudes]

As an aside, I sincerely regret mentioning Bloodborne. I was just trying to give some perspective on where I was coming from, as it was the last game I played (and I played it a lot). I wasn't trying to directly compare the two, though I guess that was going to happen, just by me mentioning it.

Witcher 3 will always be compared to Souls regardless if you mention it or not.

Potions were the best part about W2's combat.
The fact that you had to prepare before hand added a cool sense of tension to the whole story.

Also, W2 was piss easy on normal, aside from the weirdly super hard tutorial.

The tutorial was what threw me off. It was ridiculously hard and weird. I just don't like the way the combat is made with random attack animations, shoddy dodging and no weight to the combat. Playing it like dynasty warriors got rid of the issue for me.

 

[UrbanRats]

I don't own the videogame lexicon, but calling that a mechanic, especially when talking about gameplay is stretching it imo, i would call it more stat based, indeed stat based randomizing.

To me a gameplay mechanic is positioning or a special move like countering etc.

You want to discuss RPGs but then don't want to consider stat based elements as mechanics? Well, suit yourself.
Regardless, it's not "totally random".
W3 combat isn't good, but it's not trying to be Ninja Gaiden, so it doesn't need to shy away from every stat based element in the genre (not that Souls games have no stat based elements, of course, hell, Dark Souls 2 tied iframes to Agility stat).

 

[Cyber Caesar]

OP you only need three hours to determine if a game is bad or not.

Spoiler

J/K

 

[nkarafo]

basically no music

Something must be wrong with your equipment. Check your sound card or sound options or something. In my copy i get rich, non stop music with great variety and quality. Some of these tunes are so good that i even listen to them separately.

 

[Jumeira]

Yeah cause that is totally representative of your general sword swings and not a finishing animation.

I was lopping arms, legs and planting my sword through peoples shoulders into their mid rift. Gratifying and plenty of omph to be had. You feel like a monster.

But I can see your critism, the connection of the sword isn't satisfying as there's little weight to your swings, I'm not sensitive to this fortunately.

 

[Deleted member 98878]

Quite happy I've never played (and never will) a Souls game. I like my WRPGs, would be a shame if one game would spoil them all for me

Haven't played Witcher 3 myself yet, but I know it will be my GOTY.

 

[keidashxd]

The problem here is focusing on combat and not in the choices, the adventure itself or the great world to explore, I can enjoy witcher 3 only by exploring some new area, the combat is not the primary thing in the game... and you get used to it, it's not as fun as others but it has its complexities and it's enjoyable.

 

[EmSeta]

I couldn't really get into W3 either. I made it all the way to Skellige, but it never really clicked for me.

Beautiful environments, good monster design and some nice music, sure. Expansive open world with tons of suggestive places, sure. And the Bloody Baron quest line was great.

But the combat, the controls and the setting just didn't work for me. Maybe a first person mode would've helped? I don't know.

 

[tbd]

He says, after complaining that Dark Souls isn't Uncharted + Fallout.

Expecting some open fields with optional paths and verticality except ladders which are the absence of gameplay (hold analog stick) and letting yourself fall from one point to a lower point from an action RPG in 2015 isn't weird, though. Even Fallout has this, especially with the jetpack in 4 which lets you jump from building to building and climb towers. Expecting great, deep combat from a game whose genre is known for barely giving a shit about deep, skill-sensitive combat is weird, though. I don't even understand how this happened. No one ever cared about bad combat in older Witcher games, TES, Fallout, Dragon Age, Gothic, Deus Ex, Drakensang or Risen (although some would imply Risen has good combat), people just enjoyed them for the role-playing. Then there is Witcher 3 which, unlike those games, actually gives us some advanced action game elements which are well implemented, like Z-targeting, sidehops (which From Software needed like 30 games for to accomplish), iframe rolls, parrying, balanced arts and everyone criticises the shit out of it. It's like the decent combat makes them forget that the game is actually still a classic role-playing game. Not to mention it also actually gives us this "Uncharted" style climbing with grabbing ledges and diving.

Something must be wrong with your equipment. Check your sound card or sound options or something. In my copy i get rich, non stop music with great variety and quality. Some of these tunes are so good that i even listen to them separately.

Yeah, you have music during those two minutes boss fights and some very few locations, I'm aware of that.

 

[nkarafo]

Yeah, you have music during those two minutes boss fights and some very few locations, I'm aware of that.

No, i have music during the entire time. It almost never stops. I don't know what version you are playing. Maybe increase the music volume?

 

[Omotesando]

You want to discuss RPGs but then don't want to consider stat based elements as mechanics? Well, suit yourself.
Regardless, it's not "totally random".
W3 combat isn't good, but it's not trying to be Ninja Gaiden, so it doesn't need to shy away from every stat based element in the genre (not that Souls games have no stat based elements, of course, hell, Dark Souls 2 tied iframes to Agility stat).

Ok sure it's a ''mechanic'' lol. it's pretty damn random though, even with that in mind. It's not like when you're combatting stuff and you are finishing someone off, it's totally derived from you playing a certain way. Ooh wait I did have that sword equipped! Awesome!

Indeed W3 combat isn't that good, we can agree on that though. I agree too that it's not trying to be Ninja Gaiden. It's more like trying to be Ass Creed.

 

[Sanctuary]

Potions were the best part about W2's combat.
The fact that you had to prepare before hand added a cool sense of tension to the whole story.

Also, W2 was piss easy on normal, aside from the weirdly super hard tutorial.


Well Souls comparisons will always happen regardless, no matter the topic.
"You may have a good insurance, but what if FROM made one?"

I don't know what game I played, but I keep seeing both praise and disdain for the potion preperation "requirement" aspect of TW2. I literally never used potions at all in that game aside from three fights where I knew ahead of time what I was going to fight, and that it was a boss.

Also, did you play the game on PC when it was initially launched? It wasn't super hard or anything, but prior to the EE patch, it wasn't "piss easy" on normal at all. For those uninitated with difficult combat, it could be downright brutal at times. Also, the EE patch fixed a lot of really stupid things that had no business being the default mode of the original game.

 

[tbd]

No, i have music during the entire time. It almost never stops. I don't know what version you are playing. Maybe increase the music volume?

I was referring to Dark Souls, not Witcher 3.

 

[Vulcano's assistant]

^^ First Letho fight was stupidly unforgiving. On the first week you would see people complaining about on every page of the OT iirc.

 

[Jumeira]

Quite happy I've never played (and never will) a Souls game. I like my WRPGs, would be a shame if one game would spoil them all for me

Haven't played Witcher 3 myself yet, but I know it will be my GOTY.

I cannot stand the Souls games, none of it clicks with me, the world, nonsensical lore and lack of influence on the world, non existent dialogue but its combat is tight, and the boss designs are fantastic. You should at least try it before you dismiss it.

 

[sublimit]

You don't play the Witcher 3 for its combat. You play it mainly for its story,characters,sidequests,and its unique,beautiful (and at the same time "filled with dirt") eastern European influences in art direction and the culture of the game's world.

I'm a huge Souls/Bloodborne fan but i still enjoyed the Witcher 3 a lot.With that said i thought the combat was playable-ok.Nothing as stellar and deep as Souls combat (or Dragon's Dogma) but not as terrible as the Elder Scrolls games either.

 

[nkarafo]

I was referring to Dark Souls, not Witcher 3.

Damn, sorry then, my bad.

 

[Sanctuary]

^^ First Letho fight was stupidly unforgiving. On the first week you would see people complaining about on every page of the OT iirc.

Only because they didn't understand the power of the Quen. That, and Aard trivialized the fight even before the patches.

 

[Deleted member 98878]

I cannot stand the Souls games, none of it clicks with me, the world, nonsensical lore and lack of influence on the world, non existent dialogue but its combat is tight, and the boss designs are fantastic. You should at least try it before you dismiss it.

Pretty sure those games are too frustrating for me. Might give it a try when Dark Souls gets in the $1 humble bundle tier.

 

[Shin Kojima]

I've played all the souls games but I seems to be alone in thinking everything can't be compared to them.

THEY ARE DIFFERENT GAMES , if you can't play anything but souls because you for some arbitrary reason decided to compare every gameplay mechanic to those in the souls games then you're the one losing out.
Games isn't only a combat/movement system, there's lots integral parts of games like story for one.

If you're gonna make a game, the gameplay needs to be top-notch.
If you want a story you can read a book or watch a movie. The whole point of a game is playing it, and it's paramount that that aspect is done well. Not saying story is never important, but if that's the main focus of a game developer he chose the wrong career.

And you're right that not every game needs to have Souls mechanics, but that's an example of a game that does gameplay beautifully. That's really not to much to ask of a game that has a lot of combat like The Witcher.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

Expecting some open fields with optional paths and verticality except ladders which are the absence of gameplay (hold analog stick) and letting yourself fall from one point to a lower point from an action RPG in 2015 isn't weird, though.

lol, you didn't get very far into Dark Souls if you think the game lacks optional paths and verticality.

Expecting great, deep combat from a game whose genre is known for barely giving a shit about deep, skill-sensitive combat is weird, though. I don't even understand how this happened.

See my original post. It happened because people played Souls games and learned that action RPGs can have great combat in contrast to the shitty combat found in Western action RPGs.

 

[Dark_castle]

I don't see it or must have missed it.

Read OP again. "So I bought the game recently and after a hundred hours of Bloodborne,..." That's already one. Not a sentiment I disagree, but that's a subtle way of taking a dump on Witcher 3 to try and make themselves feel better about Bloodborne.

 

[sobaka770]

After playing both BloodBorne and Witcher 3 (didn't finish yet), I would say that first-of-all the two games are not comparable. You don't play Withcer 3 for combat, or even RPG progression, you play it for story full of great characters and interesting developments. You can roleplay the Witcher on highest difficulty or you can drop it down to Easy and still enjoy the heck of the story, sidequests, lore, exploration etc. BloodBorne is about execution and even if you don't get what the story is about the challenge and overcoming overwhleming odds is all the game is about. There's no difficulty seting or a story that 90% of people playing will understand.

Second of all, if I had to choose the GOTY, I had much more fun with Bloodborne so far this year. This game just gives and gives and executes what it aspires to flawlessly. I was enthralled until I finished. Witcher 3 is so big it becomes overwhelming and it's not what I like to feel in a game. The game also has a bunch of minor annoyances, like easily outleveling content, movement (Roach!!), cluttered menus. It would be definitely the best game last year when the best game was the very mediocre DA:Inquisition, but this year we are blessed by a cornucopia or great games which is fantastic but also daunting at the same time.

Nevertheless, it's easily the best WRPG of the year, and I will certainly finish it. To the OP, you won't get any better WRPG game, but maybe you stumbled into the wrong genre.

 

[Y2Kev]

I really enjoyed Witcher 2 far more. I'll stipulate up front that for an open world game, Witcher 3 does a lot to correct the issues I have with the genre-- the world is densely populated and imaginative. If you disable the hidden treasurer markers, it's not so ubisoft at all. However, I did feel that by the end of the game it becomes annoying because Skellige is definitely a lot less interesting to play (but pretty to look at) and more difficult to traverse (tons of elevation changes) and quests start sending you across long distances far more frequently. Combat is still bad, Roach is simply not fun to ride, and I think the game drags on too long in the end. By the time you get to the "recruit everyone to save the world" part of the game, I was really ready for it to end.

When I played, the game was also severely hampered by technical glitches. Framerate was awful, Novigrad was a mess, and the menus. Oh god the menus. So slow.

I think the plot is not as well done as 2, too.

Overall, I was surprised at how little I enjoyed it given how much I liked 2. I know part of my unhappiness is due to the open world but not all of it. Dunno. Just wasn't digging it.

 

[Omotesando]

If you're gonna make a game, the gameplay needs to be top-notch.
If you want a story you can read a book or watch a movie. The whole point of a game is playing it, and it's paramount that that aspect is done well. Not saying story is never important, but if that's the main focus of a game developer he chose the wrong career.

And you're right that not every game needs to have Souls mechanics, but that's an example of a game that does gameplay beautifully. That's really not to much to ask of a game that has a lot of combat like The Witcher.

That perception is changing / has changed man, and I feel like we are in the minority now. The times of gameplay above anything has been long passed, where flawed games like Witcher 3 are being celebrated in the media, while lacking in gameplay and games like Destiny being chastised in the media by lacking story.