So we went from Witcher 3 combat has some flaws, which it does, to CDPR should just go make adventure games. Sounds legit.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
How I learned to love The Witcher 3
- Thread starter OrbitalBeard
- Start date
So we went from Witcher 3 combat has some flaws, which it does, to CDPR should just go make adventure games. Sounds legit.
Skyrim's combat is serviceable (definitely lives from the perk system, though), Witcher's is very good for what it is. Those games are comparable. Hardly the game's fault people for some reason compare it to combat systems of games that are all about combat.
There are all those open world/decision making RPGs that I already listed that have terrible combat in comparison. There are all those JRPGs, AAA games among them, with their terrible, terrible turn-based copy and paste combat that requires no skill in any way or by any means, wastes so much of your life time. They even have to insert random mini games (FFX) so reflexes at least play a little role. No idea where all those people suddenly come from that expect huge RPGs to have amazing, deep combat.
Gh0stlyMostly
Banned
with this logic, half-life 2 is a bad game, shenmue is a bad game, Bioshock is a bad game, uncharted 2 is a bad game, Dreamfall the longest journey is a bad game and the majority of single player story driven experiences are bad games.
With your logic, because I play Soul Caliber IV to this day, it's the best game of last generation for me.
it's almost as if this argument isn't processing the idea that there are different categories of games. BB is cool, but it's cool in a DMC/Soul Caliber kind of way, of course it has more replay-ability, that's the nature of the beast, that doesn't mean it's a better game.. There are experiences that the Witcher 3 and games like it provide that Blooborne will never provide.
and also, The Witcher 3 holds it's quality for near 200 hrs....BB lasts about 60-70 tops the way most people play it, you're honestly going to compare the replay-ability of those games?
and why are you putting Skyrim and the Witcher in the same category? Skyrim was looked back upon negatively because of the downgrades and actual shallow nature of the RPG experience. Poor looting, poor leveling support, scaling, ho hum quests. That was not the case for the witcher 3 at ALL. You speak as if they have the same problem when they do not.
krameriffic
Member
It's a game that I have tried and failed to get into several times now. I've never found any aspect of the world of The Witcher to be interesting in the slightest, so it doesn't grab me on a story level. It doesn't grab me from a character building, item-acquisition angle either. The combat always feels bland and tedious compared to even Assassin's Creed. The dialog/quest choice systems pale in comparison to what you get from something like Pillars of Eternity. And it just doesn't grab me the way that Bethesda's games tend to in spite of their numerous flaws.
It does feel like The Witcher 3 suddenly is getting all this flack for something I don't think it deserves. I just can't see how the combat is considered terrible. It isn't amazing but it's on par with Fallout 4's in terms of their genre (Fallout 4 isn't a great FPS but it's a decent one). I understand not liking the quests if you don't pay attention during them or don't have an understanding on the how the world works like how I did when I first played the game. The Witcher 3 is very much something that isn't as easy to jump into despite what reviewers say.
I blame Batman, thats what Witcher 3 combat reminds me of with the dancey ness and the shitty camera, ya not what im looking for in a game that a ton of it rests on combat system being fun and challenging. everything else like story and setting was awesome for me in witcher 3 tho. the one that hurt for me was dragon age, i pretended i was having fun for like 20 hours, till the graphics stopped carrying it and i realized i was bored as fuck of the combat.
Gh0stlyMostly
Banned
I don't have a problem with you saying that, just don't get arsed if I respond to it refuting why that's not the case. and you're free to continue as such.
this mindset acts as if when I respond to you at all, saying otherwise, i have a problem with your opinion.
This "it's my opinion so leave me alone" is the most beta cop-out I've seen lol
Why is it a better RPG? explain. And if i find holes in the logic, don't be SHOCKED if I respond.
There's debates between atheists and theists daily, in formal occurrences. Ultimately it is an "opinion" or belief, but with the Gaf logic, neither of them should argue because it's just their opinion man.
you can respond to me all day disputing my points as to why BB is a better RPG, and I'll never sit here and say to you "well it's just my opinion so back off". That shit is weak, and no fun, and stops any interesting squabble.
Gh0stlyMostly
Banned
He's right, the foundation is similar. noticed it pretty immediately.
for some reason there are a lot players too potato to see it.
There are similarities for sure, you can try to play it like Bloodborne(this would work so much better if Geralt was fast like Ciri) but the awful controls and movement feel more like Assasins Creed or Batman.
This is me and Witcher 2. Tried at least 3 different times to enjoy it, but the gameplay is too bad. I find Witcher 3 gameplay to be tolerable. So they're back to Witcher 1 level except with a more AAA approach to gameplay. Witcher 1/3 gameplay is tolerable, but not the reason I would play the game all the way through. At least it won't deter me from playing it through like Witcher 2 does.
DizzyCaffeine
Member
I'm about 20 hrs in on the PC (with alternative movement on), and while I love the game, the combat feels weird. I never really feel like I'm in complete control.
Yeah, i'm sure that one interview is why people are comparing them.
Not the fact that Souls games get compared to anything these days.
So, your theory is that games that don't have their focus set on complex combat, gungame, platforming or whatever you consider core gameplay are bound to be despised in the long run? Most RPGs have bad or almost non-existent combat, the predecessors of Witcher 3 would be two examples which are still loved. Decision making, economy and skilling your character is gameplay, basically everything you can examine and control in a game and that somehow affects the general course of events is gameplay. Skyrim is mostly hated because of all those copy and paste dungeons (which Fallout suffers from as well), an almost non-existent main quest, the most generic overworld done to this day. No one would care how bad the combat is if the rest would be great. New Vegas is praised by everyone and considered one of the best RPGs ever made and its combat is of course pure dog shit and the animations and controls are terrible with constant stuttering. This alone basically nullifies your theory.
People are looking forward to their next Witcher 3 playthrough because this time they can ignore all the boring quests with a clear conscience and just do what they remember is awesome. They're looking forward to all those story events, making different decisions, trying to not
get their Baron and Keira Metz killed again
At least we compare RPGs here. I'm so tired of people bringing up Souls in Zelda threads. Doesn't help when you're tired of Souls and think it's actually kinda terrible.
Upgrading your light attacks to combos, upgrading your signs, and playing the excellent encounters and bosses in the Hearts of Stone moves the combat from "bad" to "pretty good."
I don't think there's anything flawed in TW3 beyond lazy encounter design in the base game. The tools for interesting combat are there, they just aren't utilized fully.
I don't think there's anything flawed in TW3 beyond lazy encounter design in the base game. The tools for interesting combat are there, they just aren't utilized fully.
Heres the other time. Any bets they'll claim Bloodborne inspiration for Witcher 4? It'll be a good thing too.
Psychoward
Banned
Who cares about which is more RPG, I don't think anyone would dispute you that Witcher 3 is the better RPG. The problem you have is you can't grasp that being a better RPG doesn't equal a better game.
You want people to argue with you yet you're being more passive agressive than anyone else in the thread, demeaning people who prefer Bloodborne by saying the only thing it does better is "derp it feels better to hit things",making broad stupid stereotypical generalizations like "frat boys don't level" and are a seeming expert on game design because clearly From Software made it possible to get through the game at level 1 to accomodate non-gamers.
Plus it's a thread mainly about Witcher 3 yet you're constantly the one bringing up Bloodborne comparisons and then bitching that people are comparing the two games because they're not comparable. Lol
Mr.Fletcher
Member
As someone who completed The Witcher 3 before a host of updates were made I must applaud the developers for continuing to support the game.
General performance, combat and movement have all improved significantly. The alternate control option makes it feel as snappy as any of its contemporaries if you ask me.
General performance, combat and movement have all improved significantly. The alternate control option makes it feel as snappy as any of its contemporaries if you ask me.
Gh0stlyMostly
Banned
first off, most of you aren't THAT good. quit fooling yourselves lol
anyway, The new DLC takes say near half my vitality at level 200 from a hunter hit, meaning, that if all this is logical, someone with half my vitality should die instantly from the same attack. yet from my friends, to much of the let's plays I'm seeing, that's simply not the case.
If i'm wrong about this, then please tell me.
Denton
Member
Oh hey, look what Danny O'Dwyer from Gamespot just posted:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sAxDM6Jm6g
That's a guy with good taste who is able to see and appreciate a game as a whole.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sAxDM6Jm6g
That's a guy with good taste who is able to see and appreciate a game as a whole.
Psychoward
Banned
I thought the fact that leveling up wasn't required was to appease non-gamers though? So you're saying non gamers can get through the game easier (because frat boys and your non gamer don't level up) than regular gamers can? Also, they could be playing in a different playthrough or have different armor. There isn't level scaling in the game and I'm not sure why you're convinced there is or why even if there was if that would be a reason why the game is worse than W3
Every one and their mother mentioned "Souls-like" this and "Souls-like" that.
It's trendy and it's what people want to hear i guess, but the combat in The Witcher, as flawed as it is, definitely has its own identity, rooted in Witcher 2 for one (which is not really owed to Assassin's Creed, either).
The comparison though jumps out because it always does.
Whatever, i understand that Dark Souls was a big game, i mentioned before how i think it actually was the best game to come out in the last gen. so to a degree i understand the obsession, but it has become a really obnoxious occurrence, to bring it up at every other turn, as some sort of golden standard for any aspect of a game, even when it's not really clear how the hell it'd adapt to the subject at hand (like in this case, really).
texhnolyze
Banned
As I said earlier, I'd love to see From's take on open world game.
Psychoward
Banned
Ill be honest, I disagree pretty heavily. The kotor games are considered classics today yet arguably every Bioware game since has had a better class system and much better gameplay just to name one example.
swearing-circle
Member
Throwing my two cents in even though nobody asked for it. I enjoyed The Witcher 3 and it was probably the biggest surprise of 2015 for me but I don't think it would win my personal GOTY.
My main gripes with the game come from the core mechanics (bearing in mind I haven't played since I finished around launch).
Movement and the inventory was all sluggish and very meh. Combat was serviceable at best and never really provided much challenge on the default difficulty. I was so overpowered by the end of the game that all the challenge was lost.
I also didn't really care for the plot or characters. Geralt was never that interesting to me and although, the script and some of the quest lines were genuinely really interesting, everything else just failed to grab me. I will also admit that the last act of the game really picks up and does become interesting, purely because of what's at stake. However, this is purely subjective because the writing is fantastic. The world just didn't personally pull me in.
Where the game succeeded though was in creating a genuinely interesting open world. Although the ? marks were annoying, discovering new areas and random quests was really exciting. The downside of this was that I hated traversal and travelling due to the core mechanics.
The game definitely succeeds in creating a sense of awe and I genuinely felt like I was on an adventure and for that, the game genuinely deserves praise. I know it sounds like i'm being super negative but for all the game's many faults it's probably the only game that captured the feeling that the LOTR movies gave me as a child.
My main gripes with the game come from the core mechanics (bearing in mind I haven't played since I finished around launch).
Movement and the inventory was all sluggish and very meh. Combat was serviceable at best and never really provided much challenge on the default difficulty. I was so overpowered by the end of the game that all the challenge was lost.
I also didn't really care for the plot or characters. Geralt was never that interesting to me and although, the script and some of the quest lines were genuinely really interesting, everything else just failed to grab me. I will also admit that the last act of the game really picks up and does become interesting, purely because of what's at stake. However, this is purely subjective because the writing is fantastic. The world just didn't personally pull me in.
Where the game succeeded though was in creating a genuinely interesting open world. Although the ? marks were annoying, discovering new areas and random quests was really exciting. The downside of this was that I hated traversal and travelling due to the core mechanics.
The game definitely succeeds in creating a sense of awe and I genuinely felt like I was on an adventure and for that, the game genuinely deserves praise. I know it sounds like i'm being super negative but for all the game's many faults it's probably the only game that captured the feeling that the LOTR movies gave me as a child.
Hilarious.
Fair enough, but as I've said this dismemberment can happen without the 'finisher' animation.
SaganIsGOAT
Junior Member
RespectThySole
Member
Excellent video. I've always liked O'Dwyer.
Gh0stlyMostly
Banned
Nikka, i've been gone since last night and people are STILL talking about BloodBorne, and i certainly didn't start it lol, so what on earth are you talking about?
The man I quoted (not you) said it's a better RPG, numerous people here had said it "brings other western RPG's to shame". Thus, it's clearly being compared as an RPG aswell, people have only backed off that statement conveniently once someone had to detail how that couldn't be the case.
And since people here want to act as if storytelling and direction is a separate entity from a game these days, We don't get speak on the comparison of those categories. Thus the only thing being compared between BB and the Witcher 3 is....the combat. Which is an unfair comparison as it implies that all other aspects of the Witcher 3 are not what a "game" entails.
and what, did my frat, and cousins from compton, and "hitting things" comments upset you? i'm sorry.
I was being a big meanie I know.
JudgmentJay
Member
None of the Soulsborne games have enemy scaling. Any variations you're seeing in damage coming from a particular enemy on the same NG cycle could be attributed to armor, runes, or the game's counter damage system. If you get hit when running, attacking, jumping, etc, you'll take considerably more damage. Also how much damage you take can depend on which part of the weapon the enemy hits you with. A counter hit that connects with the most damaging part of the weapon is going to do vastly more damage than a non-counter indirect hit.
Also, if you're level 200 I can only hope you played the DLC on NG+ or NG++. And of course enemies do more damage with each NG+ cycle.
Memorabilia
Member
It's not an either/or thing for me. Love Souls games, love western RPGs too. It's easy to shift gears and enjoy both.
plasmawave
Banned
It really is one of the worst games ever made.
Like, sure, I could appreciate the story and the writing (even tho I had the same feeling of "what is going on? Who are these people??" like I did with Game of Thrones), but the actual game part is just the worst.
Can't even imagine what the game was like before the Enhanced Edition update.
They have tried it. It's called kings field 3, and its massive, but also its a big drag because the traversal is a pain in the ass, it lost a lot of the crazy inter connectivity crawling, and the dungeons suffered a bit in their design. I think if they were to make a modern open world game they would get the same complaints as that game did.
My biggest complaint with Fromsoftware games is their npc interaction are really bad. You can argue that sure, they are people in this fucked up world, so being vague only adds to the atmosphere, and I'll say bullshit. It's a fromsoftware cliche at this point. There are npcs in dark souls 1 and 2 that are straight carbon copies of npcs from Eternal Ring and kings field. The only normal fucking people are the blacksmiths, everyone else are too broken, or too weird. Of course you gotta have that sad guy. "I tried to do what you were doing, but I couldn't do it because it was hard. Best just wait for death"
Gh0stlyMostly
Banned
I never said that, I'm saying the game softly gauges levels and adjusts stats of impact or enemies or the even the amount of BV's you pick up accordingly. It's not easier for a lower level character, it that the difficulty remains about the same despite the level later on, it only initially makes you feel as though your leveling matters.
need I find a video of someone in the low 100's playing NG+ old hunters? which is what i'm playing aswell at level 200. I wonder how much the impact of hits will differ (I'm willing to bet not much lol)
but then again it could be because the level 100 character is soooo skilled at BB right? lol that's right, it's because your that good, that's why you're on NG++ at level 85 *rolleyes*.
and it's fine if these things don't matter to you, but don't compare it as an RPG then..
It still isn't Souls combat though. The only game where the comparison should be made and criticized for is something like Lords of the Fallen.
His Majesty
Banned
The Witcher 2 succeeds on many fronts, ranging from an amazing cast of characters (Letho, Roche, Iorveth, Dethmold, Saskia, Philippa,...) to the excellent implementation of choice & consequence. You might not like the combat or the inventory management but calling it one if the worst games ever made is just plain hyperbole.
plasmawave
Banned
CDPR should just drop the combat and make a game that's more like telltale games.
I'd be down for that. The story is the reason why I'm playing their games after all.
Shut the hell up. No one wants to play a game like that.
I don't see why Bloodborne controls can't be brought into a game like Wtcher 3 ?
Or why a world like TW3's with quests, large open maps can't be brought to a game like Bloodborne ?
I really don't see how they are incompatible.
Or improve on combat. A lot of what makes the Witcher is the monster hunting.
No, Lords of the Fallen copies the whole style of the game, not just the gameplay.
And you're right, it isn't combat souls but it's definitely in the same category, I don't see how anyone can argue the opposite.
JudgmentJay
Member
Dude, you're insane. Reading through this thread now, it's pretty clear you have no idea what you're talking about. There is no enemy/drop rate scaling of any kind in Bloodborne or any of the Souls games. If you're going to make claims like that, you're going to need to post some proof besides anecdotal evidence. I'll save you the time though, you won't find any.
The way you criticize people for beating the game at low levels is hilarious. I hate to break it to you, but those people are better at the game than you. Level 80 by the time you get to Cathedral Ward... you've gotta be kidding me. Am I getting trolled here?