Vire
Member
Let's see.. PlayStation exclusive or multiplatform game with literally three times the potential audience.
Grand Theft Auto V out beat The Last of Us on that site as well. I'm not interested in popularity contests.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
How I learned to love The Witcher 3
- Thread starter OrbitalBeard
- Start date
Grand Theft Auto V out beat The Last of Us on that site as well. I'm not interested in popularity contests.
Except it also emphasizes combat and is a significant chunk of the player's interaction with the game world. Just because it is narrative heavy does not mean combat is not a huge focus. When you have combat has a huge focus then it is not unreasonable for people who have experienced sublime combat in rpg's before to want the same quality in the game this highly rated. Hence the comparisons to BB and Souls. When they say they want it to be as good as BB and Souls they usually mean it should be as mechanically satisfying as it is in BB when the player kills an enemy or a boss. I mean it is not like Witcher 3 is a Tell Tale game where we focus on the narrative instead of the mechanics.
Hmmm, that sucks. I never had problems with the weapon degradation, since there will be a point where you have so many swords that even if one needs repair, you can just switch to the next set until you go to a blacksmith.
darkslayer101
Member
Play it on deathmarch... I really liked the combat and this is someone who loves souls type games. Its all about perspective, I used to hate souls games after playing character action games like DMC, the less options and clunky combat in comparison turned me off. But then ones you understand how the game functions, the combat warms up to you.
I feel like most people who complain about witcher combat have the same experience where they don't spend time learning the combat and instead wishes it was the combat system of a game which they are familiar with. Trust me, to a layman who has no souls experience, they will find the combat to be the clunkiest game ever.
But in regards to other aspects of the game, if you are not enjoying it then this game may not be for you. No reason to hate it, similar to how I don't like skyrim/fallout but i understand the appeal
I feel like most people who complain about witcher combat have the same experience where they don't spend time learning the combat and instead wishes it was the combat system of a game which they are familiar with. Trust me, to a layman who has no souls experience, they will find the combat to be the clunkiest game ever.
But in regards to other aspects of the game, if you are not enjoying it then this game may not be for you. No reason to hate it, similar to how I don't like skyrim/fallout but i understand the appeal
A GOTY award from GameSpot and Gametrailers is in the horizon if those are the "big names" sites you care about
A GOTY award from GameSpot and Gametrailers is in the horizon if those are the "big names" sites you care about
Bloodorne is actually very likely GT's GOTY.
It is a lock in for GT's GOTY. They just worship BB.
Why are we suddenly discussing GOTY's though? It is not like Souls games ever won a significant chunk of GOTY's. It is the usual accessible mainstream games like Witcher, Skyrim, ME, Fallout etc which have historically always won. It is not some major revelation nor is it relevant when discussing the quality of a game.
It's a fucking videogame. Everything we do in games is bullshit.
Unless they have changed how they give awards, Witcher 3 is a lock since is their highest rated game of the year. That's how they have operated in the past.
Vire
Member
lol ok.A GOTY award from GameSpot and Gametrailers is in the horizon if those are the "big names" sites you care about
Honestly, the only sites that I care about are Giant Bomb and GAF. Even then, I don't really care. I'm sure Witcher 3 will win on here because a lot more people will have played it than the other nominees.
Tomb Raider tragically probably won't even make the top ten on here because no one bought it.
RespectThySole
Member
Yeah Gamespot I can see, but Gametrailers will probably give it to Bloodborne or MGSV since they're huge fans of those series.
MGSV is shit 
Newtype-001
Member
Hasphat'sAnts
Member
None. Because what's "cool" to some is unbelievably lame to others. So why get hung up on what other people think?
The only reaction I get when people don't enjoy the same game as I do is "man, that's too bad, sorry you're not having fun like I am"
Much healthier way to treat things.
Heartstone was their highest rated game in 2014? Either way, they wouldn't have GOTY deliberations, if that was the case.
But they do, and they have a lot of people who are crazy about BB in the staff, whereas i think just Bloodworth is a stan for Witcher 3.
Yeah weapon degradation is very rarely worth a damn, design wise.
I guess you can have some gimmick weapons like crystal weapons in Dark Souls, but it's hardly worth it.
In D<rk Souls 2 especially was a pain in the ass, and completely useless as an element of challenge.
It doesn't stimulate creativity, just busy work.
Mister Wolf
Member
So you hold more value in a group of journalists telling you whats game of the year than democratic voting by a huge(9 mill+) group of gamers on whats their game of the year?
Combat certainly isn't the best thing about The Witcher 3, that's for sure. Still though, I can't wrap my head around people who say that the combat is "shit" that's just massive hyperbole.
What similar RPGs have better combat then Witcher 3 besides Bloodborne? Dragon Age: Inquisition? Don't make me laugh. Does it need to utilize the Batman/Shadow of Mordor system in order to be good? Honestly curious what the bar is here. It takes some getting used to, but once you get into it Witcher 3's combat offers a good amount of tools that you can utilize to come out of almost every fight unscathed if you play well. The Souls series beats it easily but that's the only thing that the Souls series has going for it. Not that it's a bad thing, but it's easier to achieve when you focus so entirely on one gameplay aspect. The Witcher 3's combat is very solid considering that it's really not even the main focus of the game.
What similar RPGs have better combat then Witcher 3 besides Bloodborne? Dragon Age: Inquisition? Don't make me laugh. Does it need to utilize the Batman/Shadow of Mordor system in order to be good? Honestly curious what the bar is here. It takes some getting used to, but once you get into it Witcher 3's combat offers a good amount of tools that you can utilize to come out of almost every fight unscathed if you play well. The Souls series beats it easily but that's the only thing that the Souls series has going for it. Not that it's a bad thing, but it's easier to achieve when you focus so entirely on one gameplay aspect. The Witcher 3's combat is very solid considering that it's really not even the main focus of the game.
John Kowalski
Banned
can you even trust the clock these days? mine says i played for 15 days, which.... maybe? but i doubt it
Hmmmm. I used to follow GT until around 2014 and every year, without exception, the GOTY went to the highest rated. Maybe they changed that since all the firings and new staff, so who knows.
I don't think comparisons to Bloodborne are necessarily unfounded. A lot of the time during the combat I was thinking, 'wow Bloodborne does this a lot better'. Hitboxes in TW3 are annoying, as are enemy attack animations that have almost no windup. It's not like TW3 is a walking simulator, there's a lot of combat in the game.
The Baron Quest sparked my awe and so I'm going to do what others did and drop difficulty and go on a story ride. I've been playing other games because I wanted to avoid having to do that. Im just not interested in the combat this time and its hurting what I think is an otherwise beautiful atmosphere.
NHarmonic.
Member
Agree here.
Stop acting like the souls games are the second coming of christ, smh. i'm getting to Skellige on TW3 and i've had such a blast with the game, even though i agree with the criticism about the combat. I use lots of signs and i've managed to do great in normal.
If you're like me you'll find a lot to enjoy in TW3 beside the battle system.
Even then the combat itself isn't that bad, as long as you make the necessary preparations for each monster type.
The in-game counter is glitched, and massively underestimates the amount of time spent playing.
Vire
Member
Yeah probably, because those journalists don't have budget constraints and play pretty much every big game of the year. I'm not really interested in hearing why Grand Theft Auto V is the best game of the year when the person hasn't even played The Last of Us.
Well, you can compare it to the combat in Demons Souls as well. The speed isn't the issue, more the game mechanics of how to handle sword gameplay in real time.
I have to say, souls has done a really good job there, one that hasn't been adopted by others yet AFAIK.
BlitzerRadic
Member
TW3 combat would be more tolerable if the rest of the game wasnt so clunky. Geralts movement animations in particular looks very odd to me.
EGOMON
Member
Sorry English is not my first language i don't know the word to describe it but for example when i push the stick forward a bit the character move way more than i intended also turning around on the horse is kinda stiff and difficult i dunno how to say it but the character movement isn't smooth btw am not talking during the combat
.
Anyway thanks for the suggestion i should enable the alternative movement option it might be the reason
Newtype-001
Member
Lol didn't know that.
I wonder how long I actually played then, didn't feel that long.
Nice try man, I guess you have never watched history channel documentaries about war.
It doesn't matter that there is a truce- 10000 men need supplies wheather they are licking their wounds or fighting on. At least one third would be busy going hunting or collecting fruits. No, your explaination does not help - the world in context of the story is anything but authentic. Please note, I'm not hating on the game - I just want W3 fans to change the terminology, because W3's world is as authentic as Ass Creed 1 and to be honest, the latter was more plausible when it comes to world-building and context.
Papacheeks
Banned
I own both games, though I will say I played witcher 3 on PC which had a better button response than I would believe PS4 would have.
I did not sink that many hours in bloodborne. But it did not spoil me loving the shit out of witcher 3. But I might be a little bias in not being so critical of it's combat mechanics because I enjoyed Witcher 2 a lot.
I think there's a great balance to the combat in witcher that works for how the constructed world, enemies, and monsters. Like anything that flies can be brought down for an instant kill using the cross-bow, unless it's a quest monster.(it will work though on any flying quest monster to bring them to the ground instantly)
Almost all the flying monsters can be stunned, if harpy comes at you hit it with teh bow, it falls to the ground and hover over it, you hit one button to finish it off.(if you get the horn from skellige, you can equip it, when you use it, every harpy falls to the ground stunned)
In my opinion you are given all the tools to take out multiple people at a time. In bloodborne it's more precise and deliberate to have one-on-one encounters.
Just my 2 cent's OP, sorry From Software spoiled your fun for witcher 3.
Yes, because democratic voting on culture always makes what is popular equate to what is best. So Adelle will win album of the year, but if one of my favorite records of the year is Blood Incantation - Interdimensional Extinction, a democratic vote on album of the year isn't going to be much use for me in terms of finding something to listen to.
I'm vastly more interested in what a particular critic or fan thinks, in context of their other opinions, than a blurred average of all tastes, because then at least I have something useful to work with in contrast with my own tastes.
Alpha Phoenix
Member
The Witcher series has never been for everyone, although Witcher 3 was designed to be relatively more accessible compared to 2 and 1.
RespectThySole
Member
If you're basing your knowledge on history channel then you have bigger problems lol. You can see early in the game Nilfgaard is requisitioning grains and other supplies from many of the villages in town. Foraging is very important in war when you're deep in enemy territory, but in this game these armies are not very far off their respective borders. Supply lines are most certainly established from their home territories and they're requisitioning the rest.
Hello no. The Witcher 2 was incredible
You can use it as a meter to pinpoint some things that are wrong with the combat, but if you compare the two games as a whole, they're doing very different things, and it becomes a pointless comparison, both in terms of how much development effort was spent on every single aspect (Bloodborne is JUST combat) and also in terms of what any given player will get out of it (hence why all the "this game is not for you" suggestions).
Apples and Oranges are also both fruits.
Well yeah, comparing the two games as a whole isn't going to work.
Steve Youngblood
Member
I don't think the endgame is to suggest that there's literally no basis of comparison or that one can't fault Witcher 3 for not having good enough combat if the game's combat is hindering your enjoyment of the title. I think the point people are trying to make is that when fans are pitching this to you as to why it's one of the best games of the year, they're not doing so on the basis of its stellar combat. Almost everyone concedes that it could use work. But people love it in spite of that.
If someone else would rather play a From game, great.
At least you think it's decent, I thought it's a pile of shit in almost every way. I mean... Just thinking of the bow mechanics alone, how you can't even look all the way up or down and the invisible walls... Jesus fucking Christ.
Denton
Member
Seriously, try it out. There is some inertia with default system, but the alternative makes Geralt react much quicker. CDP should have made the alternative the default, frankly. We could have been spared of many "clunky trash controls!" posts.
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
I played it right after Bloodborne too and liked it way better. Such great writing, graphics (on PC), voice acting, music, quests, etc. If you're seriously complaining about the quests you must have gotten nowhere in the game.
My first sentence was an (maybe not so) obvious joke.
No, this makes the scenario even more unrealistic, because approximity to home-turf would mean that the Nilfgardian army was able to resupply and recover in short time.
How many days are you spending in the game? Does anything really change in the game-world? No!
10000 people is a big city by medieval standards. My point is, an army of this size occupies a far bigger area than the fort no matter how much you quote the lore.
Accross 50 square miles much smaller armies would engage in some form - or you could at least witness Nilgardians fighting Drowners, wolves or bandits. Please, stop defending this obvious flaw in the game. All events in W3 are displayed through triggers namely starting quests and dialogues - the world itself is not dynamic! I haven't seen one supply convoy in 100 hours.
In comparisson: thestory in FO4 is shit, but yet I get the authentic impression that this world is inhabited by several factions who can engage in combat randomnly. Man, I witnessed fights between Raiders, Mutants and the Brotherhood. You don't see anything like that in W3.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
I am always amazed when somebody posts a thread about not liking a popular game and how many pages it goes with arguments.
The Last of Us ones are the best:
"its just another third person shooter with weak gameplay"
I guess I should be glad that I never made a thread about how much I hated Platinum games and specifically Bayonetta.
The Last of Us ones are the best:
"its just another third person shooter with weak gameplay"
I guess I should be glad that I never made a thread about how much I hated Platinum games and specifically Bayonetta.
Psychoward
Banned
But TLOU does have weak gameplay?
TeddyShardik
Banned
Sounds like a textbook case of "played souls, everything sucks now."
It will go away.
Maybe give the game a break for now and try again later. The combat won't improve of course but it at least okay imo. Just don't compare it to BB where the focus is the combat.
It will go away.
Maybe give the game a break for now and try again later. The combat won't improve of course but it at least okay imo. Just don't compare it to BB where the focus is the combat.
If you generally hated Witcher 2, of course not. If you still liked the quest design, characters (Geralt in particular), OST and art direction, of course. Just play on easy and breeze through the fighting sections. The combat is a lot better now and in my book probably the best open world/decision game combat there is. The combat really isn't the reason people play those games, though. You should also play Witcher 1 first if you haven't already (which basically has no actual combat), it's an amazing RPG.
Of course, but the implicit statement that started the chain was that one game had *cool shit* and the other didn't. The absolute length of a game doesn't necessarily predicate how much *cool shit* there is in a game to any given person.