-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
How I learned to love The Witcher 3
- Thread starter OrbitalBeard
- Start date
Or opinions be opinions.
Lanrutcon
Member
I had exactly the same experience. I even ranted in the OT a bunch. I stuck with it for the moments of brilliance, and slowly came to realise that despite the flaws it is probably one of the most well crafted RPGs of the modern age. It grew on me as I explored the various systems. While I never really got to the point where the combat was anything other than mediocre to bad, the rest of the game (story, dialogue, quests, characters, world) is exceptional.
The franchise desperately needs a new combat system, because it's been 3 titles now...all with depressingly bad combat.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Pretty much.
Spiritwalker
Member
Everything is suberb except for combat which is 3/10 at best. What a shame.
You're right, it's 2015 already. That's the problem, quests (and pretty much everything else) in Bloodborne tend to fly over the head of people who never played a rpg before 2006.
Uh, what? That is one of the 5 spells you have. The tutorial even teaches you how to use it. It is one of the most basic and core aspects of the whole combat.
Yabberwocky
Member
In some ways, Bloodborne vs. W3 isn't the fairest of comparisons, as they're such different games. That being said, combat is combat, no matter what game you're playing. W3's combat would feel quite flat after Bloodborne.
I have to admit, I have the weirdest love-hate relationship with the W3. The world is beautiful, the writing on the side-quests are great, the character animation is incredible (such an achievement for a game of this magnitude), and Geralt/Yen are one of the well-written duos in gaming. The characters are all enjoyable, and you can just see all the love that has gone into the world, from individually designed NPCs to a dank ol' cave in the middle of nowhere.
I just unfortunately feel the shift to the more open-world was really detrimental to the main story, not only with Geralt's motivations, but just the pacing itself. (W2 is so damn impressive in that regard, especially considering the plot/character variations.) In W3, I constantly felt like I was being being stalled with the main plot. I stopped the game for a few weeks because of the Novigrad sub-plots, as it just felt like continual filler. Well-written filler, mind you! The inventory is also atrocious, and the the inventory/map lag is painful on console, especially considering how much time you spend using the damn things. The combat is serviceable, but again, playing on a harder difficulty I spent so much time in inventory/bestiary/etc dealing with organisation hell and lag that it really put a d(r)owner on the whole experience. Really, I should just put it on the easiest difficulty and move on with my life so I don't spend as much time in the inventory screens.
I took a break from W3 to play AC:S when it came out, and was surprised by how much enjoyment I immediately had with Syndicate - and I realised how sluggish I was finding W3 in comparison. I'm in awe of the Witcher 3, and it's absolutely a masterpiece, but I bizarrely find I don't always have much fun playing it.
I have to admit, I have the weirdest love-hate relationship with the W3. The world is beautiful, the writing on the side-quests are great, the character animation is incredible (such an achievement for a game of this magnitude), and Geralt/Yen are one of the well-written duos in gaming. The characters are all enjoyable, and you can just see all the love that has gone into the world, from individually designed NPCs to a dank ol' cave in the middle of nowhere.
I just unfortunately feel the shift to the more open-world was really detrimental to the main story, not only with Geralt's motivations, but just the pacing itself. (W2 is so damn impressive in that regard, especially considering the plot/character variations.) In W3, I constantly felt like I was being being stalled with the main plot. I stopped the game for a few weeks because of the Novigrad sub-plots, as it just felt like continual filler. Well-written filler, mind you! The inventory is also atrocious, and the the inventory/map lag is painful on console, especially considering how much time you spend using the damn things. The combat is serviceable, but again, playing on a harder difficulty I spent so much time in inventory/bestiary/etc dealing with organisation hell and lag that it really put a d(r)owner on the whole experience. Really, I should just put it on the easiest difficulty and move on with my life so I don't spend as much time in the inventory screens.
I took a break from W3 to play AC:S when it came out, and was surprised by how much enjoyment I immediately had with Syndicate - and I realised how sluggish I was finding W3 in comparison. I'm in awe of the Witcher 3, and it's absolutely a masterpiece, but I bizarrely find I don't always have much fun playing it.
That's basically my take on it.
I would say, though, that it's the swordplay in particular that's bad. The way you use your 5 signs is actually pretty cool, and it's the one thing that kept the combat engaging enough to me for me to be able to continue through the game. They just need to fix the basic swordplay and make enemies' attack animations far clearer so you know where their hitbox is and when it's active, and therefore when you're being hit.
The stretch of Novigrad quests is utterly ridiculous and the low point in the game, but I'm not sure you can blame that on the open world. It was just poor plot-planning, imo. To be fair the entire main storyline of TW3 is terribly paced and thought out. You feel like the search for Ciri will surely be simply the opening fifth or so of the game but it stretches on for, well for far, far too long.
Sorry, but I'm really mindblown on this. The tutorial is bloody simple what it teaches that I feel you have to be blind or not paying attention if you still don't understand the basics
You might find those kind of people in the official Witcher forums
criesofthepast
Member
I don't get the complaints about the combat but I played on the easiest difficulty because I have no time to grind...and I still put 150 hours into the game. I probably would have never finished if I played on higher than easy.
I don't think I had many issues with the game. Roach is an idiot though and his AI sucks. I want to murder him.
You'd be missing out if you give up so early.
I don't think I had many issues with the game. Roach is an idiot though and his AI sucks. I want to murder him.
You'd be missing out if you give up so early.
Murdering a mare? Why, I never!
By that logic,people would say "hey,you didn't give the game a chance! you only played 1hr of a game that lasts hundreds,you're so dumb OP"
In my case,i loved W1 and W2 and completed each one like 6-7 times but i gave up on W3 after reaching Velen.
btw i'm not talking about the combat specifically,obviously W3's combat is superior in every way compared to previous games but the game simply didn't click with me,i was really forcing myself to keep playing after reaching Velen.
It's hard to full on hate a game in only an hour thought. Sometimes a game doesn't click at first but it's a long shot from full on hating it.
But if people don't say I hate X not as an hyperbole but genuine hate, why would you keep playing, it never made sense to me.
Not really.
It's trying to be the witcher.
Peculiar use of potions, signs, oils, a rich bestiary with its quirks, environmental interactions.. It has its distinct identity, it's just lacking in execution of some elements (hitboxes and animations, mainly), and it wouldn't even take that much to fix it.
It has almost nothing of AC, in fact.
It doesn't have auto riposte, it doesn't have visual signaling of attacks, it barely has cinematic finishers (they happen rarely).
You could say that to some of the posts in this thread
Game is great imo. Every AAA game is not meant for every single person on the globe. This weird notion that every game you buy will appeal to all the things you enjoy most is baffling. Trade it in buy something more suited to your taste. Any game can be picked apart, that doesn't mean it's garbage.
mickcenary
Member
Apologies. I was more making a sweeping statement with regard to the usual pitfalls of ambitious, open-world games. If TW3 keeps up a high level of quality throughout concerning its quests and writing, then power to it. I've not played enough to be an authority on that and there are aspects of the game that I legitimately enjoy, BUT...
I have played enough of it and other games to know that TW3 is to some degree - depending on your susceptibility/sensitivity - objectively mechanically bad; and I really don't think that's such an outrageous assertion.
We're all aware of how mechanically solid games feel and TW3 is simply not one of them. It's painfully apparent from the first input. Whether you care or not is another matter entirely. Obviously, I'm obstinately in the camp that no game wherein you engage that heavily in combat/traversal/etc is deserving of such glowing reviews considering its shortcomings in these areas are that glaring.
It's akin to giving a hypothetical CoD a 10 because of its peerless suite of game modes, incredibly balanced weapons, unprecedented visuals and flawlessly written campaign even though its shooting mechanics are quite off, no matter which way you cut it.
Look, TW3 is definitely deserving of praise, which it most certainly received, but it is also definitely deserving of scolding criticism, which I'm not so sure it received in appropriate measure.
Acquiescence
Member
I don't know if a game having too much content is a legitimate thing to criticise, but for the first 30 hours or so I was in love with the game. Now I'm 60 hours in and tedium is creeping in, even though I'm still on Act 1 and a long way from seeing the end of the main quest. It's that OCD factor of wanting to complete all the side-quests, but there are so many of them and some of them take so long to complete that I think by the time I've accomplished everything I'll be sick to death of this game.
Gwent is the bomb though. I love it.
Gwent is the bomb though. I love it.
Since the comparison has been made I must ask, are there any larger RPG kind of games like The Witcher 3 but which have combat more like Bloodborne? Is that a thing anyone is doing. I like the visceral nature of the combat in Bloodborne. It's simple in a way, makes sense, there's logic to it and a rhythm you can find. Other games I've played by comparison feel incredibly opaque in their combat. Just hack and slash away, there's no finesse to it, there's no skill other than rush in and keep hitting buttons, which is why it's always put me off. Then there's all the magic and turn based combat that many RPG's use which I just don't like at all but that's another story.
I'd love an open world game where you can journey about, use a horse or whatever, explore areas, speak to people, but when combat comes around it basically works like Bloodborne, and isn't dumbed down or over-complicated. Big ask I know.
I'd love an open world game where you can journey about, use a horse or whatever, explore areas, speak to people, but when combat comes around it basically works like Bloodborne, and isn't dumbed down or over-complicated. Big ask I know.
I wouldn't say I hate it but there is something about the series that turns me off. Every time I start playing I get bored so quickly and I just close the game. I've not played more than 30 minutes of Witcher 3 and those 3o minutes are split into 2 separate tries (I restarted). The crazy thing is that the same thing happened to me when I started Witcher 2.
This series just isn't for me clearly and it sucks because I want to enjoy it but I just can't.
I think a lot of people gave a lot of criticism (especially on the official forums) towards the game, namely the combat, graphics downgrade scandal, numerous issues at launch, bugs and glitches that still persist to this day, CDPR not being completely upfront about the downgrade scandal, the absence of REDKit 2, rushed Act 3, undeveloped main villain, I could go on.
Exentryk
Member
These are the issues with Witcher 3's combat system:
- Inconsistent dash dodge (i-frames don't work in specific cases like immediately after dealing damage, taking damage, casting a Sign, and after another dodge.)
- Some fast attack animations are as long as heavy attack animations
- Enemy hit boxes are too big
- There is no insta-casting control method for Sign casting by default
- There is no sense of progression in the combat apart from the abilities Whirl, Rend and alt Signs. Need more active abilities.
You can minimize these issues if you fight enemies from a distance. Signs are great for doing this, but using the radial menu is an annoyance in itself.
Personally, since I play the game with a more Sign focus, I quite enjoy the combat. Overpowering and destroying groups of enemies in Death March feels great. I haven't played Dark Souls or Bloodborne games, and don't intend to either. As much as I enjoy combat in games, I don't want to play games that are 99% combat. I need my towns, inns, story cutscenes, relaxing atmosphere etc.
- Inconsistent dash dodge (i-frames don't work in specific cases like immediately after dealing damage, taking damage, casting a Sign, and after another dodge.)
- Some fast attack animations are as long as heavy attack animations
- Enemy hit boxes are too big
- There is no insta-casting control method for Sign casting by default
- There is no sense of progression in the combat apart from the abilities Whirl, Rend and alt Signs. Need more active abilities.
You can minimize these issues if you fight enemies from a distance. Signs are great for doing this, but using the radial menu is an annoyance in itself.
Personally, since I play the game with a more Sign focus, I quite enjoy the combat. Overpowering and destroying groups of enemies in Death March feels great. I haven't played Dark Souls or Bloodborne games, and don't intend to either. As much as I enjoy combat in games, I don't want to play games that are 99% combat. I need my towns, inns, story cutscenes, relaxing atmosphere etc.
TheLegendOfMart
Banned
I hated the first two Witchers but I loved The Witcher 3 so much I put over 60 hours into it.
It is the first game I played that felt like the world was organic and each individual blade of grass was placed by hand rather than a world generated by algorithms.
I'll never forget the first time I was walking through the forest and a wind was blowing the trees from side to side it felt like I was actually walking through a forest.
Making me want to play it again now....
It is the first game I played that felt like the world was organic and each individual blade of grass was placed by hand rather than a world generated by algorithms.
I'll never forget the first time I was walking through the forest and a wind was blowing the trees from side to side it felt like I was actually walking through a forest.
Making me want to play it again now....
Deceitful-Fox
Neo Member
Uhh... I think Dragon's Dogma is as close as you're going to get.
I think the slow pacing of the game can be a legitimate criticism.
Im just up to the barran quest as i just got the game from the sale.
Me and the wifey love it. The combat isnt the best, agreed, but so far its still servicable.
I guess for me, having a game where the story and characters and dialog actually interests me, is a fine trade off. Not every game has to have the next best combat system ever made,
Oh and i looove the visuals.
Me and the wifey love it. The combat isnt the best, agreed, but so far its still servicable.
I guess for me, having a game where the story and characters and dialog actually interests me, is a fine trade off. Not every game has to have the next best combat system ever made,
Oh and i looove the visuals.
Strife In a Teacup
Member
Strange, 2 is the only one I actually played all the way through thus far.
I will admit that Witcher 1 I've tried to play numerous times but Chapter 2 just...ugh. By the time I hit Chapter 3 I just give up because of Chapter 2.
The Witcher 3 I've really tried to play, I keep coming back to it but I just can't manage it. I also dropped the difficulty down to easy just to enjoy the game. Maybe I'm bad at games these days or just think Geralt should be more of a badass now like Dante/Gabriel Belmont/Neo/someone. The combat is definitely a problem, but also the other problems people mention.
The world is awesome, the game looks great, the lore is cool, but for some reason I just don't want to play it.
I guess Witcher games have that thing to me, where they seem so cool, I love the lore/idea/story, but playing the games...ehhh. I still support CDPR/Gog immensely, but I'd be lying if I haven't struggled playing through the Witcher games.
You don't need to do all side-quests in the game (Though there are some that can affect your ending)
I believe there are a lot of players who went sour after doing the Novigrad main questline and didn't fall in love with the game again until visiting Skellige.
If you don't mind, what region are you at so far?
JehutyRunner
Banned
haha, sometimes on GAF I get the feeling that everything not made by From, Naughty Dog and Platinum is the worst game ever made
Fixed.
Thanks for your long and interesting argument.
sublimit
Banned
It's definitely better than the combat in TES games.
Lanrutcon
Member
Putting bread in my toaster has a better combat system than TES games.
So you think that the game should get a lower score in general because you didn't like it? That holds no water at all. The people who gave it 10 like Kevin Van Ord at Gamespot, felt it was a 10. that is the only criteria that matters, what the game reviewer feels. I think alot of games gets scored to high. but that is just my opinion and I won't say that those games are undeserving of its acclaim. I'll simply say that the game in question isn't for me and move right along
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
You can say that about pretty much ever highly rated game ever.
I got into souls and I think souls suck. Only bloodborne has got my attention till the end. Never tried Demon Souls though.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
While true, I also think it'll be pretty significant new territory for CDPR. For better or worse, Cyberpunk is likely to heavily emphasise gunplay over melee encounters.
I've tried really hard to love this game, I came off bloodborne too and can't deal with the witchers combat. He is so fucking floaty. The quests, story and world are cool. It has all the markers of a game I should love but I really dislike it. So, I can confirm playing bloodborne before the witcher ruined it for me. I never expected them to have the same system... But I can't enjoy the witcher ;(
Why.
Anyways, Hearts of Stone is bloody awesome, so enjoy it
already finish it. it very good combat are very challenge.
im just realize how weak my character are. im never invested in any witcher gear. it would take at least 20 minute to finish the boss. i use the money cheat though.
texhnolyze
Banned
I hope FromSoftware make an open world RPG next..