Support NeoGAF

[NoblesseOblige]

Some people seem to think OP is calling for Witcher to have identical fighting mechanics to Bloodborne. I don't think that's the case. I think what OP wanted was the same feeling he gets from the combat in Bloodborne. That is, the satisfaction of a solid experience. That doesn't require the mechanics to be copy and pasted from one game to another. I would say I get the same satisfied experience I do from Bloodborne that I do from MGSV, a completely unrelated game. They both just feel good, and are satisfying to play for me, while being uniquely different from one another. They are games with polished well-refined mechanics.

 

[IvorB]

Dark Souls had all the answers for gameplay, Then Dragons Dogma came along and changed the questions.

I like this post. Dragon's Dogma showed us RPG combat we didn't even know we wanted.

 

[Nipo]

Soulsborne have interesting stories, but I would wager 90% of players will never know them because they don't care much about reading item descriptions and wiki sites. In any case it's a completely different approach to narrative, not inherently better or worse, or rather, it is subjective.

I am currently playing bloodbourne for the first time now. I didn't even notice there was a real story. If a video game requires me to read codex entries or anything external I am not going to bother. If I want to read a story I will pick up a novel. Story telling through text in video games just seems like a waste since it ignores all the advantages of the medium.

 

[Gbraga]

I'm enjoying the combat in Witcher 3 a lot more after installing some mods, so I highly recommend it if you're playing on PC.

It doesn't really fix the hitboxes and stuff like that, but just a rebalance to make it more challenging and put a much bigger focus on preparation is already enough to make it much better.

I still think Flotsam in Witcher 2 was the highest point of the series' combat. You actually had to research your enemies and prepare for each one with the right signs, bombs, potions and oils, or you'd get destroyed. Then by act 2 you can just kill everything mashing square and using Quen. Witcher 3 without mods is pretty similar. You have a bit of a hard time in White Orchard, learning to fight the Noonwraith is very very important and you being so short on money makes it all the more interesting that you can ask for more money on contracts, and gives a lot more weight to decisions like letting go of your money to help the people who hired you, because you actually need that money.

Then you get to Velen and it's mostly Quen + Square, with some Axii and Igni every now and then. I started a new save with a bunch of mods, I'm a bit early into Velen, in the werewolf sidequest, but so far it's so much more fun. Challenge isn't just for the sake of difficulty, it really helps to enhance the experience, making you have to actually work like a Witcher, knowing your enemies and preparing for the fights in order to beat them. Random contracts are much more interesting then they were before.

If there is a new Witcher after this one, I want either potions only out of combat or drinking potion animation, I want a much bigger focus on preparing for fights and knowing your enemies as well, with the actual quest design being built around that, with the possibility of doing research into what you're about to face and how to properly fight it rather than "kill one of thing, unlock the bestiary". Combat should be thought of as a fundamental part of the quest design, rather than just quest time/combat time.

I am currently playing bloodbourne for the first time now. I didn't even notice there was a real story. If a video game requires me to read codex entries or anything external I am not going to bother. If I want to read a story I will pick up a novel. Story telling through text in video games just seems like a waste since it ignores all the advantages of the medium.

The item descriptions are really really short. I also don't care about reading codex entries in most games because it interrupts the flow of the game, but it's definitely not the case in Souls.

And it's not just reading stuff, it's also talking to NPCs, quest progression, examining your surroudings and connecting the dots. I adore the storytelling in Souls, and the fact that so many people go through the entire game without even knowing there's a story is yet another plus, in my opinion. It never gets in the way of gameplay, making replaying it even more enjoyable.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

I am currently playing bloodbourne for the first time now. I didn't even notice there was a real story. If a video game requires me to read codex entries or anything external I am not going to bother. If I want to read a story I will pick up a novel. Story telling through text in video games just seems like a waste since it ignores all the advantages of the medium.

Bloodborne's story isn't limited to text. It's actually the accumulation of what you see in the world contextualized by text. If you're observant you piece it together from clues you find throughout the scenery, the enemies, the backgrounds, etc. The text helps piece them together and fill in the blanks. It's actually one of the best ways to tell a story in my opinion. I'm actually being autonomous in creating it rather than it being poured into my gullet. I guess if you were unobservant then it might be limited to text as you miss the clues sprinkled elsewhere.

 

[silvermember]

1. I'd still need to go look for the equipment I want.

2. Sadly, I'm on PS4 or I'd go that route in a heartbeat.



Game was offered on PS+ so I loaded it a few months ago and goddamit if it wasn't the most boring thing ever.

I saw videos of people escalating giants and whatnot but I picked a different class (mage) so the game was mostly a lock and shoot...

I doubt you played long enough to have a decent opinion about it. But you are free to like whatever you like. Just note that DD's combat is the best. It does far more than the souls series including bloodborne does.

I mean, he's not wrong about Dragon's Dogma being GOAT for action RPG combat. Unfortunately it falters in almost every other aspect.

That's why I specified combat. also why I specifically said my ultimate rpg is witcher 3+ DD combat+the dragon's voice.

Someone make it happen.

 

[SomTervo]

Bloodborne's story isn't limited to text. It's actually the accumulation of what you see in the world contextualized by text. If you're observant you piece it together from clues you find throughout the scenery, the enemies, the backgrounds, etc. The text helps piece them together and fill in the blanks. It's actually one of the best ways to tell a story in my opinion. I'm actually being autonomous in creating it rather than it being poured into my gullet. I guess if you were unobservant then it might be limited to text as you miss the clues sprinkled elsewhere.

It was bloody great, but I think I prefer the Shadow of the Colossus method, which uses many of the same techniques but also gives you 2-3 actual 'plot points' to hang the world on. It's the perfect blend between showing and telling. I love Souls but it's slightly too much on the 'show' side for me, to the point of obscurity.

 

[Durden77]

It's always weird when I hear Witcher 3 praises around here because it usually goes something like this.

"Witcher 3 is incredible.

______ sucks about it.

_______ REALLY sucks.

________ also sucks huge balls.

Really wish _______ didn't suck so much.

It's my GOTY."


I don't doubt that it's a great game, but it's weird to hear so many people that adore the game also straight up say so much sucks about it. It must have some REALLY cool shit in there.

I'm glad I didn't succumb and just think that it would be good enough to just make me inherently like it. I've learned that games like the Witcher 3 just aren't for me, and that's ok. I understand why others would like it, but it's not for me.

 

[SomTervo]

I don't doubt that it's a great game, but it's weird to hear so many people that adore the game also straight up say so much sucks about it. It must have some REALLY cool shit in there.

I'm glad I didn't succumb and just think that it would be good enough to just make me inherently like it. I've learned that games like the Witcher 3 just aren't for me, and that's ok. I understand why others would like it, but it's not for me.

Bear in mind the only real, major complaint is the combat. That's ubiquitous. The other complaints are generally more specific/more from a minority. For instance a lot of people say it has open-world bloat, which is something I get badly, from games like Skyrim/FO4/Far Cry/Ass Creed. But I haven't had it once with The Witcher 3. It's fantastically designed imo. There is one part where the pacing can collapse (not enough to do in the major city), but aside from that.

Broadly, though, it confuses me too when people go crazy about the combat. I think it's my GOTY (amazing year for me), and of course I'll admit the combat is flawed - but I'd never say it full-blown sucks.

The combat spends most of its time idling at 'servicable', and occasionally swings to the 'fantastic' side (when the rhythm really lands and you really feel like you're in Geralt's shoes) or the other way into 'bad' (eg when the encounter design has a mis-step or you play against a badly designed enemy type who can stunlock you with ease).

I'd say it's servicable 70% of the time, fantastic 20% of the time and very bad 10% of the time. I'd never say the whole system is bad, it is just flawed at a very low level. On top of the core movement/attack flaws, it gives you loads of strategies and options for dodging frustrations, so usually it's fine.

What's telling is also that you get people who say 'combat clicked for me straight away, beat the whole game quickly on Death March' then those who say they are big BB fans but say 'combat sucks, badly balanced, always too hard' etc. There is an overlap, but a lot of the time people just don't seem to get into the combat. TW3's combat is about being the character - about using the monster hunter clan's tools to swing fights into your favour. It's not about truly skilled moment-to-moment gameplay.

Out of curiosity, what makes you think it's not for you? I'm not a big RPG man and I have a lot of dislike for Skyrim and most other fantasy RPGs I can think of, but The Witcher 3 is more like a gaming equivalent of HBO's Game of Thrones. The world and mechanics are just compelling and intricate and real enough that it's a sublime world to immerse yourself in, minor gameplay qualms aside. That's why people (me included) rate it so highly.

When I boot up TW3 I feel more like I'm loading up a couple of great Game of Thrones episodes - I'm living in this great, holistic, realistic fantasy world for an hour or two, and it perfectly captures that feel. Even if my session just consists of progressing a quest or two through dialogue with characters (no combat or exploration) it is so well written and I like them so much that it's a really satisfying session.

 

[Karl Hawk]

Long ago, there were two individuals, CD Projekt RED and From Software. They were distant from each other and only talked a few times. But they were respectable to each other and to their strengths. As time went on, RED and From grew up and created a family.

However, with family comes problems, RED's child Witcher and From's child Souls often bickered to each other, spitting venom and bullying against each other while both argued which parent was the better parent. Witcher argues that his parent RED is better than From while Souls argued that his parent From is better than RED.

The bickering turned more tense until both RED and From decided to interfere. Both argued to their child that their parent have flaws and that it is okay to have flaws. Thus, Witcher and Souls reconciled and became friends ever since. THE END.

Spoiler

I was bored, so don't judge me

 

[Durden77]

Out of curiosity, what makes you think it's not for you? I'm not a big RPG man and I have a lot of dislike for Skyrim and most other fantasy RPGs I can think of, but The Witcher 3 is more like a gaming equivalent of HBO's Game of Thrones. The world and mechanics are just compelling and intricate and real enough that it's a sublime world to immerse yourself in, minor gameplay qualms aside. That's why people (me included) rate it so highly.

When I boot up TW3 I feel more like I'm loading up a couple of great Game of Thrones episodes - I'm living in this great, holistic, realistic fantasy world for an hour or two, and it perfectly captures that feel. Even if my session just consists of progressing a quest or two through dialogue with characters (no combat or exploration) it is so well written and I like them so much that it's a really satisfying session.

I have no interest in Game of Thrones in the slightest if that's telling. I came to the realization a few years ago that no matter how hard I try, 95% of sword and shield fantasy stuff just is not for me. A big part of games to me personally is spending time in a world. When I watched my friend play the Witcher 3 for a while and he showed me the map and all the potential things to do, I just felt like I wanted to barf. The idea of investing that much time into a world that I would have to force myself to try and get into just isn't going to work for me. I just finally stopped trying.

But I will say the world of the Witcher was more compelling than most from what I've seen. Some of the conversations and the ways they could split I witnessed watching my friend play were truly impressive. Felt like an interactive Tarintino flick.

 

[The Chef]

It's always weird when I hear Witcher 3 praises around here because it usually goes something like this.

"Witcher 3 is incredible.

______ sucks about it.

_______ REALLY sucks.

________ also sucks huge balls.

Really wish _______ didn't suck so much.

It's my GOTY."


I don't doubt that it's a great game, but it's weird to hear so many people that adore the game also straight up say so much sucks about it. It must have some REALLY cool shit in there.

I'm glad I didn't succumb and just think that it would be good enough to just make me inherently like it. I've learned that games like the Witcher 3 just aren't for me, and that's ok. I understand why others would like it, but it's not for me.

There is so much truth to this.
I dont know why I spent so much time playing it honestly. It wasn't even that enjoyable of an experience and in the end I felt like rushing to finish it.

 

[EmilioLargo]

This is your problem OP and I had the same issue. You came from a game with arguably some of the best combat in a game ever to a game with extremely mediocre combat systems.

I will say this though. If you keep playing it will pass and you will embrace WC3 for what it is.

Completely agree. At first I was pretty unimpressed with TW3. Especially the combat felt lacking in comparison to Bloodborne. As I continued to play TW3 i was quite immersed in it's world, characters and quests. All in all I still prefer Bloodborne to TW3 by a wide margin. Although, to be honest, we shouldn't compare both games in the first place.

 

[NHarmonic.]

Some people seem to think OP is calling for Witcher to have identical fighting mechanics to Bloodborne. I don't think that's the case. I think what OP wanted was the same feeling he gets from the combat in Bloodborne. That is, the satisfaction of a solid experience. That doesn't require the mechanics to be copy and pasted from one game to another. I would say I get the same satisfied experience I do from Bloodborne that I do from MGSV, a completely unrelated game. They both just feel good, and are satisfying to play for me, while being uniquely different from one another. They are games with polished well-refined mechanics.

What a stretch, let me tell you i really feel good playing the witcher 3, it's not devoid of flaws and the combat could be tighter, however, people here have clearly stated their desire for the bloodborne mechanics, something completely out of place.

 

[Shahed]

It's always weird when I hear Witcher 3 praises around here because it usually goes something like this.

"Witcher 3 is incredible.

______ sucks about it.

_______ REALLY sucks.

________ also sucks huge balls.

Really wish _______ didn't suck so much.

It's my GOTY."


I don't doubt that it's a great game, but it's weird to hear so many people that adore the game also straight up say so much sucks about it. It must have some REALLY cool shit in there.

I'm glad I didn't succumb and just think that it would be good enough to just make me inherently like it. I've learned that games like the Witcher 3 just aren't for me, and that's ok. I understand why others would like it, but it's not for me.

This is me. I read the books so I was invested in the story before even playing the game.

Combat is awful, poor level design (especially caves bar this one early one) traversal is awful, simple movement is atrocious. Then there's the random bugs and glitches with flying horses, getting stuck in trees making me reload, missions glitching and needing to restart, NPC's not relocating after saving them from cages and so many other stuff. menus that were so slow, badly organised and a chore to go through.

Despite all that I still think it's a fantastic game. So many little things to do but unlike other games they feel meaningful by giving all these little and not so little quests bits of context and dialogue that makes them feel important and just adds to the overall world. If only the aforementioned problems didn't exist. then i would rank it amongst the greatest games I'd ever played. Sadly it misses out on that due to flaws, but it's still pretty good

 

[NoblesseOblige]

What a stretch, let me tell you i really feel good playing the witcher 3, it's not devoid of flaws and the combat could be tighter, however, people here have clearly stated their desire for the bloodborne mechanics, something completely out of place.

Which part is 'a stretch'? Going off of the OP, which my post is clearly referencing, there is no indication for the calling of lifting Bloodborne mechanics to be transplanted into Witcher. And if you get the same feeling from fighting in Witcher 3 that you do from Bloodborne then that is great. Clearly not everyone does however.

 

[K' Dash]

I didn't have a problem with the combat, I did mix it up and had a lot of fun with it, also like the weight, it really feels like a man using a sword/you weapon of choice.

 

[SomTervo]

I have no interest in Game of Thrones in the slightest if that's telling. I came to the realization a few years ago that no matter how hard I try, 95% of sword and shield fantasy stuff just is not for me. A big part of games to me personally is spending time in a world. When I watched my friend play the Witcher 3 for a while and he showed me the map and all the potential things to do, I just felt like I wanted to barf. The idea of investing that much time into a world that I would have to force myself to try and get into just isn't going to work for me. I just finally stopped trying.

But I will say the world of the Witcher was more compelling than most from what I've seen. Some of the conversations and the ways they could split I witnessed watching my friend play were truly impressive. Felt like an interactive Tarintino flick.

Yeah, I'm not a big GoT fan and criticise it harshly - it's mainly the 'holistic reality' of it which I was referring to. How well-founded the world is, how well-developed it is.

Also totally fair enough re not having an interest in fantasy. I can see why and if you don't dig it, you don't. The mood takes me on occasion but I can go years without playing a fantasy game/reading a fantasy book/watching a fantasy movie.

FYI: The Witcher 3's map is giant, but it's not just a facade. It's not a load of checkboxes. There is a truly meaningful world built onto that map, like built into its DNA. It's initially overwhelming, but the more/longer you play the more you realise every 100 yards has story and lore embedded in it.

I'm at the stage where the game has convinced me it is wall-to-wall quality. Looking at that map, I don't have the "Shit, I bet half of this is just collectibles wasting my time" vibe I get from other open world games. I look at the map and think "This is a real place - if I walk 2 miles that way on foot and take every opportunity I can, there's enough content for an entire 20 hour game. I will meet people with problems, I will help remove those problems - and it might impact my larger narrative if I do so". This is totally different from, say, Skyrim, where the world is just a facade with a wall of text built onto top - where interacting with the world is a chore.

But yeah, if you have to force yourself to get into anything, just don't bother. Drop it. Chances are in a few years you'll suddenly be taken by the mood for a sword 'n' shield fantasy and then you'll think "Actually I feel like trying The Witcher 3" and you will and it will be glorious. If you try it now, you'll probably just get annoyed.

 

[kenjigreat]

It's always weird when I hear Witcher 3 praises around here because it usually goes something like this.

"Witcher 3 is incredible.

______ sucks about it.

_______ REALLY sucks.

________ also sucks huge balls.

Really wish _______ didn't suck so much.

It's my GOTY."


I don't doubt that it's a great game, but it's weird to hear so many people that adore the game also straight up say so much sucks about it. It must have some REALLY cool shit in there.

I'm glad I didn't succumb and just think that it would be good enough to just make me inherently like it. I've learned that games like the Witcher 3 just aren't for me, and that's ok. I understand why others would like it, but it's not for me.

The Best Side Quest of any open world game period.

 

[SomTervo]

The Best Side Quest of any open world game period.

One of the Best Main Quests of Any Open World Game

The Best Side Quests of Any Open World Game

The Best Looking, Large, Intricate World of Any Open World Game

One of the Best Examples of Game Mechanic–Character Symbiosis

One of the Best Adventures of All Time (imo, I think the ones above are a little more objective)

 

[Inferno313]

I can understand not being into the combat, but to say the quests are terrible blows my mind.

Witcher 3 has some of my favorite quests of any RPG ever.

 

[Durden77]

FYI: The Witcher 3's map is giant, but it's not just a facade. It's not a load of checkboxes. There is a truly meaningful world built onto that map, like built into its DNA. It's initially overwhelming, but the more/longer you play the more you realise every 100 yards has story and lore embedded in it.

I'm at the stage where the game has convinced me it is wall-to-wall quality. Looking at that map, I don't have the "Shit, I bet half of this is just collectibles wasting my time" vibe I get from other open world games. I look at the map and think "This is a real place - if I walk 2 miles that way on foot and take every opportunity I can, there's enough content for an entire 20 hour game. I will meet people with problems, I will help remove those problems - and it might impact my larger narrative if I do so". This is totally different from, say, Skyrim, where the world is just a facade with a wall of text built onto top - where interacting with the world is a chore.

But yeah, if you have to force yourself to get into anything, just don't bother. Drop it. Chances are in a few years you'll suddenly be taken by the mood for a sword 'n' shield fantasy and then you'll think "Actually I feel like trying The Witcher 3" and you will and it will be glorious. If you try it now, you'll probably just get annoyed.

That's why I'm intensely looking forward to CD Projeckt's Cyberpunk 2077 game. All of that stuff really does sound fucking awesome, and if they give it to me in a grimy cyberpunk setting that I am way, way more into I'm going to eat it the fuck up like so many people have for the Witcher.

And yes, every now, rarley, I do get an itch to check out fantasy stuff. If I do, the Witcher 3 will probably be the first thing I go for.

 

[Khayam]

1. Cosmetically you mean? That is a bit of a bummer. Surely on Easy you can rock whatever looks good, though?

Yeah, I never compromise fashion in an RPG. But I also need to feel powerful to fully immerse myself with the hero I'm playing.

That's why playing from the start with a tier 3 Witcher gear set would be nice

 

[SomTervo]

That's why I'm intensely looking forward to CD Projeckt's Cyberpunk 2077 game. All of that stuff really does sound fucking awesome, and if they give it to me in a grimy cyberpunk setting that I am way, way more into I'm going to eat it the fuck up like so many people have for the Witcher.

And yes, every now, rarley, I do get an itch to check out fantasy stuff. If I do, the Witcher 3 will probably be the first thing I go for.

Yeah, I never compromise fashion in an RPG. But I also need to feel powerful to fully immerse myself with the hero I'm playing.

That's why playing from the start with a tier 3 Witcher gear set would be nice

I see your dilemma. If it's any consolation, the base Wolf school outfit looks fucking badass? The one he's wearing in the menu screen when he's meditating.

Also, if it's on easy, use a guide to find the other Witcher school gears. They're all right there in the world, and most of them are easy to find. Just use a guide, travel to the appropriate point in the map, collect all the diagrams.

You might have to level a bit to use them but that shouldn't be too hard on Easy if you mainline the main quests for a bit.

 

[Timeaisis]

The Witcher 3 is an excellently written game with pretty mediocre everything else. The combat is boring and bad. Weapon degradation, as you said, is stupidly frustrating. The beginning of the game is not interesting in the slightest. It does get better, and the quests do get more interesting, but you have to put in the time. The first 15 or so hours were a struggle for me. Nothing interesting really happens. And The Witcher 2 is one of the favorite games.

 

[Denton]

Pulling off well Whirl feels immensely satisfying to me.

 

[Khayam]

Pulling off well Whirl feels immensely satisfying to me.

This is luck based isn't it ? It's not like you decide to pull it off ? right ?

 

[mnannola]

Is there a name for the Souls/Bloodborne effect of playing it right before playing another CRPG? You are almost guaranteed to feel disappointed when playing another CRPG right after playing one of these games just due to the combat differences.

 

[Denton]

This is luck based isn't it ? It's not like you decide to pull it off ? right ?

Well you have to move correctly and not get interrupted, as well as have good enough damage to pull it off like this. Sure, element of luck is definitely involved.

 

[MoogleWizard]

If you care about gameplay and combat, Souls/Dragon's Dogma/Bloodborne will ruin western RPGs for you. The same happened to me.

 

[Moon_frogger]

I don't blame you for your one word response, you couldn't think of a good retort. It's OK. Either respond like someone with grey matter or don't.

My time around DS/bloodborne fans have also indicate a cult like behavior. It is OK, you are free to like what you like but DS/bloodborne combat wish it was even on par with DD. DD does a lot of things that DD does not and cannot.

Not as if you gave a single reason why dd combat is better than bloodborne. You just declared it to be true without any reasoning whatsoever. I wouldn't be criticizing people's one word response to your substance less posting

 

[johnnydrama]

If you care about gameplay and combat, Souls/Dragon's Dogma/Bloodborne will ruin western RPGs for you. The same happened to me.

I care about gameplay a lot, and after having put 150+ hours into From games and 140+ into The Witcher 3, I'd say I have to disagree. I know how to keep my expectations in check and appreciate games for what they are trying to achieve. From games simply don't match up to CDPR's stories (actual story with character development, not lore), quest design, and player choice, and CDPR's games don't compare to From's games in combat. They're both trying to achieve very different things. If one ruins the other for you somehow, that's rather unfortunate because you'll be missing out on some of the best games ever made.

I can't recommend both The Witcher 3 and Bloodborne enough. Both are 10/10 games in my book.

 

[hipsterpants]

The Witcher 3 has major problems in gameplay (combat, too much Witcher sense, incredibly easy to overlevel and get the best equipment, etc.) and the story has some structural problems like where the Novigrad questline is bloated and way too long while Skellige seems to last like maybe a few hours? Or how the last couple quests are literally

Spoiler

checklists to complete before the big battle

.

However, I do think it's a pretty worthwhile experience and I'm going to start a second play through on the hardest difficulty pretty soon. The writing is a definite step up from other games and the ending (assuming you feel like you made the right choices) is pretty much perfect, an incredible feat for a basically 100+ hour game.

 

[BobTheFork]

I can't think of another video game I have ever WISHEd I liked more than I did than in the case of Witcher 3. I never played 1 or 2 and I was so hyped up for it but every time I play it I find myself just struggling to keep playing and finish. I have no issue with the combat either. It's hard but once you get into the groove you can really use the systems in place to do some skillful combat. It's just that every single thing you do in this game feels like it takes longer than it should. Every time you are presented with what should be a short and simple task, it's then broken down into 5 hours of tedious task and chains of quests.

I've been playing for so long and I'm STILL just looking for Ciri and trying to find people that might know someone that might know someone that might fucking know someone who has a totally useless piece of info about where she was weeks ago.

I nearly quit the game for good when I had to find Dandiloin. There was no reason at all for that to take so long or be a chain of 10 quests unless it really was the intention to just add filler content.

Again, I wish I loved this game but it is just driving me crazy and I don't know if I'll ever finish it.


Gwent is my favorite in-game card game ever I will say. It needs some kind of stand alone addition.

 

[MoogleWizard]

I care about gameplay a lot, and after having put 150+ hours into From games and 140+ into The Witcher 3, I'd say I have to disagree. I know how to keep my expectations in check and appreciate games for what they are trying to achieve. From games simply don't match up to CDPR's stories (actual story with character development, not lore), quest design, and player choice, and CDPR's games don't compare to From's games in combat. They're both trying to achieve very different things. If one ruins the other for you somehow, that's rather unfortunate because you'll be missing out on some of the best games ever made.

I can't recommend both The Witcher 3 and Bloodborne enough. Both are 10/10 games in my book.

I guess different players value different elements of games more highly. I care about gameplay first and foremost. If I'm not having fun playing, if the combat feels clunky and hollow, the best story won't keep my interest in the game. This is very important in RPGs because in most of them, combat is a huge part of the game. I'm OK with games like Dragon Age because the combat is different, it's more about managing your party and strategy, but more action-like, single-character combat like the Witcher is hard for me to enjoy if it's done poorly.

 

[matmanx1]

Having just jumped back in to The Witcher 3 after a false start earlier in the year I can understand why the OP says what he says. I'm finally well into Velen and as I close in on level 10 I feel fully engaged and interested in the game to a degree that I was not in the early going.

Most of White Orchard did not feel all that good to me. As a guy who's been there for all the games and all the books I didn't feel like I needed a "baby steps into being a Witcher" tutorial area (I totally get why its there, though) so the early going felt like a chore.

Once I made it through White Orchard and started to spend some time exploring Velen everything started to "click". The game doesn't really work that well as a hack n slash and it isn't designed to. It's true that Geralt is a master swordsman but his sword is only one of his weapons and to be a complete and functioning Witcher you need his full arsenal and you need to understand when to use each part.

At this point, I actually really like the combat. Using Quen, throwing down a trap or bomb and then using dodges and parrys to land well timed blows with my sword feels good and usually looks good also. It's not as tight or as precise as Bloodborne (since we're using that comparison) but neither does Bloodborne have the depth and breadth of options that The Witcher 3 does for questing, dialogue, crafting or world exploration.

At this point Bloodborne is still my GotY but The Witcher 3 is fast catching up. Both are amazing in their own ways and depending on how much I continue to enjoy the Witcher 3 it might actually end up on top. One thing is for sure, as much fun as I am having with it now, I can't wait to find out.

 

[RespectThySole]

I care about gameplay a lot, and after having put 150+ hours into From games and 140+ into The Witcher 3, I'd say I have to disagree. I know how to keep my expectations in check and appreciate games for what they are trying to achieve. From games simply don't match up to CDPR's stories (actual story with character development, not lore), quest design, and player choice, and CDPR's games don't compare to From's games in combat. They're both trying to achieve very different things. If one ruins the other for you somehow, that's rather unfortunate because you'll be missing out on some of the best games ever made.

Same here. Souls games didn't ruin a damn thing for me. The narrative that some spew about Witcher fans not "caring" about combat is absolutely ridiculous.

Two of my favorite genres are character action and fighters and yet I'm still able to enjoy TW3 for its own merits.

My top 5 games of all time

1. Bayonetta
2. The Witcher 3
3. Devil May Cry 3
4. Uncharted 2: Among Thieves
5. Metroid Prime

 

[megabytecr]

Can this be played in 1-2 hour sessions?

 

[Heimbeck]

Can this be played in 1-2 hour sessions?

I played the whole game in 1 or 2 hour sessions.
Only real problem is that you can't pause during dialog or cutscenes, and sometimes that stuff can go on for a while.

 

[ForsakenLotus]

If you dislike the quests because you don't like the combat, then it's understandable. Otherwise, I just think this game and likely the genre just isn't for you.

I'm glad I'm not apart of the "I played this game, so I can hardly enjoy any other games in the genre" aspect of the gaming community.

 

[allftw]

All this thread made me want to do is to replay both games.

Spoiler

And I guess I gotta buy Old Hunters as well.

 

[Khayam]

I care about gameplay a lot, and after having put 150+ hours into From games and 140+ into The Witcher 3, I'd say I have to disagree. I know how to keep my expectations in check and appreciate games for what they are trying to achieve. From games simply don't match up to CDPR's stories (actual story with character development, not lore), quest design, and player choice, and CDPR's games don't compare to From's games in combat. They're both trying to achieve very different things. If one ruins the other for you somehow, that's rather unfortunate because you'll be missing out on some of the best games ever made.

I can't recommend both The Witcher 3 and Bloodborne enough. Both are 10/10 games in my book.

The main difference is that you can have an RPG game without player choice and quest design. But you can't have an RPG without combat.

And since you're gonna have combat anyway, you might as well make it enjoyable and not just an afterthought. The player has to be enjoying himself during combat not being pissed off because of how frustrating the controls are (especially in comparison to Bloodborne, but even without comparison).

Forget combat actually, the simple act of walking forward is very enjoyable in Bloodborne. moving around is fun. It's absolutely not in TW3, it's a chore, whether on foot or on horse.

 

[His Majesty]

The main difference is that you can have an RPG game without player choice and quest design. But you can't have an RPG without combat.

In Age of Decadence you can complete the game without one single fight. And you won't find much more games deserving of the label RPG than that one.

 

[Khayam]

In Age of Decadence you can complete the game without one single fight. And you won't find much more games deserving of the label RPG than that one.

Well, combat is still there, even if you can do without it. My statement still stands.

 

[Leatherface]

Love it or hate it the fact of the matter is that Witcher 3 excels on a whole better than most other RPG's. It has an intricate story line, varied and meaningful quests, a huge world to explore with tons of ways to make the experience unique. Sure, the combat isn't as good as Souls etc., but it does get a lot more fun a you progress. Do yourself a favor OP and stick with it for a little while. The game gets a TON better. It's recognized as one of the best RPG's for a reason.

 

[Denton]

The quests have definitely gotten more interesting as I have progressed. I will say that this game has infinitely better missions than anything I've played in an Elder Scrolls game.

BTW OP, check out this video on combat mechanics:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPqKqTdkh4E

It's pretty good.

Also check out CDP's own video with some nice tips:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLNuFinOwpg

 

[Gustaf-4]

That kind of how I feel,demon's souls, Dark souls, and bloodborne's combat is sooo good and satisfying that by the time I got to the witcher 3 it felt bad (combat wise). I feel those games have changed my taste in "sword combat games"

 

[OrbitalBeard]

Worlds fucked. Help us oh hunter.

lol

 

[RocketRacoon]

Totally cool, you like what you like OP!

I loved the Witcher 3, but I'm sure theres stuff you love I don't. As long as you got some money's worth out of it.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

This is your problem OP and I had the same issue. You came from a game with arguably some of the best combat in a game ever to a game with extremely mediocre combat systems.

I will say this though. If you keep playing it will pass and you will embrace WC3 for what it is.

Thanks man. I've seen threads you've made praising both Bloodborne and The Witcher 3, so I'm gong to keep at it.

I've already put around 15 hours into the game and I definitely like it more than I did when I made this thread. I'll keep going!