Guilty_AI
Member
I mean, its not like story and exploration are exemplar either.TW3 is like 33% of talking, 33% of walking/riding horse/exploring and 33% of combat.
It's not the most important element of the game, unlike ER for example.
I mean, its not like story and exploration are exemplar either.TW3 is like 33% of talking, 33% of walking/riding horse/exploring and 33% of combat.
It's not the most important element of the game, unlike ER for example.
I mean, its not like story and exploration are exemplar either.
Thats also your opinionThat's your opinion of course. Game as a whole is among best games ever made.
Rebirth
Thats also your opinion. Exploration is 80% about finding random loot that's completely boring or useless because the combat sucks in the first place. I stopped getting excited about legendary swords after getting the 17th just laying around somewhere. Story has tons of low points.
I can't say you explored anything then, there's almost nothing worth of seeing off the beaten path that isn't a big marker on the map already, with the vast majority of question markers just being random loot points. It's a very ubisoft-y game in this sense.I wasn't bored in TW3, maybe in some parts of Novigrad main story questline but it get's on track after that. I still heaven't seen a game with better (side) quests than TW3, I wanted to do all of them because I was curious how creators will surprise me this time - there is ton of amazing stuff in this game.
Loot is useless but in this game I didn't really cared about it, my main focus was on doing quests and exploring the world story/characters.
I can't say you explored anything then, there's almost nothing worth of seeing off the beaten path that isn't a big marker on the map already, with the vast majority of question markers just being random loot points. It's a very ubisoft-y game in this sense.
In terms of story, the high point was the Red baron quest-line, Novigrad felt like fan-service most of the time, Skillege was a bit mid with good moments and other not-so-good ones. End game post-Ciri was just kind of bad, especially when the game reveals its hand and shows almost nothing you did before mattered and only a few decisions now will determine the actual ending, which i usually don't care much about but people sold others on this game under premises of "decisions matter" or "difficult moral choices", all of which i found the game severely lacking in.
I always find it amazing because i see people shitting on Cyberpunk due to these exact same points... then the same people go on to praise The Witcher 3. This genuinely felt like a case of rose-tinted glasses, it even taught me about general public perception and the influence of social media.
Wow I found BG3 so large due to the choices and customization available.i found Witcher 3 shorter maybe because it was easier to go through?Surprising since W3 is the longer game... HLTB has them pegged at:
TW3 Main: 51 + 15 + 10 (expansions) = 76 hours
TW3 Main + Extras (side quests which are A++) 103 + 28 + 14 = 145 hours
BG3 Main: 64 hours
BG3 Main + Extras: 108 hours
So BG3 is a good 30%+ shorter than TW3.
"pls don't criticize my favorite game"The core of games like Cyberpunk and Witcher 3 is maximum immersion in a perfectly-crafted world. People moaning about loot, combat, reactive quest structures or whatever are missing the point of those games. Which is fine, but please don't act as though you're operating on a higher tier of understanding because you find those factors lacking. Nobody is playing CDPR games for the loot.
They're more like picture books than games.
Perfect postThe core of games like Cyberpunk and Witcher 3 is maximum immersion in a perfectly-crafted world. People moaning about loot, combat, reactive quest structures or whatever are missing the point of those games. Which is fine, but please don't act as though you're operating on a higher tier of understanding because you find those factors lacking. Nobody is playing CDPR games for the loot.
They're more like picture books than games.
An, the good old "joke's on you, I was just PRETENDING to be retarded".So easy to rattle folks cages on this forumSoppy twats
Ok, Witcher 3 by an absolute country mile because it doesn't have turn based combat.
Being too easy even on the hardest setting is ALREADY one of the major flaws of TW3.BG3's story and writing are honestly extraordinarily bad which is a big problem for an RPG
Witcher 3's combat is extraordinarily bad but that's less of a problem since you can just kick it down to easy and play for the story
I just bought the PS5 version a couple of days ago myself. I think it runs and looks great in performance mode. For a 10 year old game, she's still a beauty. The ray tracing mode however, was choppy and unplayable for me. FYI…the Complete Edition with all the dlc is currently on sale for $14.99 in the PlayStation Store. A great deal for the amount of content you're getting. Having a blast so far. No insight on the Xbox version.Sorry to ask this year but I'm ready to start Witcher 3. I own it on both series X and ps5. Which console runs it the best and/or looks better?
Thanks!
An, the good old "joke's on you, I was just PRETENDING to be retarded".
I'm not "triggered". I just think you are clueless moron.Oooh, you've read that wrong. No jokes intended. I called you a soppy twat for getting triggered that I think turn based combat in games is absolute shit.
Sorry to ask this year but I'm ready to start Witcher 3. I own it on both series X and ps5. Which console runs it the best and/or looks better?
Thanks!
What a master of repartee you are!I'm not "triggered". I just think you are clueless moron.
I KNOW for a fact that (good) turn-based combat is great.
It may be?What a master of repartee you are!
If good turn based combat is great, is great turn based combat excellent?
I would read your reply but after being called a moron and a dimwit in two successive replies from you, Im really struggling to give a shit.It may be?
The point is that turn-based combat has its own appeal even if dimwtis like you seem to think a genre can be INHERENTLY superior or inferior.
That doesn't mean that EVERY turn-based combat is automatically good, as there are a lot of stinkers out there.
In the same way not every third person combat is Sekiro/Elden Ring and one can have TONS of middling, insipid shit like ELEX, the Spiderweb stuff, etc.
Damn, I guess I'll live with that knowledge.I would read your reply but after being called a moron and a dimwit in two successive replies from you, Im really struggling to give a shit.
Narratively (both main and especially side quests/DLC) and graphically (including art direction) Witcher 3 is amazing. Not sure what major flaw you're referring to.Being too easy even on the hardest setting is ALREADY one of the major flaws of TW3.
"Kicking it down to easy" doesn't really do the game any favor.
That aside, while its combat system is underwhelming on a good day, it's not even the game's major flaw.
Not sure why you are arguing the merits of TW3 writing with me when I said the same thing in a previous reply. But since we are on topic: the quest design in TW3 despise being framed in an excellent narrative context, on a mechanical level suffers way too much of of the "follow-the-dotted-line syndrome", where the UI itself draws most of the conclusions and makes most of the decisions for you.Narratively (both main and especially side quests/DLC) and graphically (including art direction) Witcher 3 is amazing. Not sure what major flaw you're referring to.
A good combat system is improved by difficulty, but a bad combat system is not.
This is mostly a good criticism of the game, i think i can let the quest design one slide because you can interpret it as the vision of the quest creator, they probably wanted it to be as thematically and narratively coherent as possible and having immersive-sim like mechanics is probably going to break them from this way, so instead of doing it Bethesda style they probably went to this route, still you are right that it becomes too reliant on certain mechanics like Witcher senses, but despite that i would say the side quests are still one of the best and most well crafted in gaming as a side quest, ofcourse im not talking about the Monster Contracts, people love to complain about those but in reality they are just the witcher job, they are supposed to be a routine.Not sure why you are arguing the merits of TW3 writing with me when I said the same thing in a previous reply. But since we are on topic: the quest design in TW3 despise being framed in an excellent narrative context, on a mechanical level suffers way too much of of the "follow-the-dotted-line syndrome", where the UI itself draws most of the conclusions and makes most of the decisions for you.
Then there's the progression system which is all kinds of flawed (and the leveling system feels completely vestigial and redundant... Not a rare problem these days, I'm afraid). he game would literally be improved just by removing explicit LEVELS from the core system and having just equipment and talents drive the progression.
On top of that, there's the itemization (that ties strongly with the previous problem) with its excessively steep scaling that almost manages to kill any sense of immersion and believability in a non-linear world. Any open world where the early game items do (or defend from) damage in the single digit and then their end game replacements go up to the THOUSANDS has a poorly thought system at its core.
Not sure why you are arguing the merits of TW3 writing with me when I said the same thing in a previous reply. But since we are on topic: the quest design in TW3 despise being framed in an excellent narrative context, on a mechanical level suffers way too much of of the "follow-the-dotted-line syndrome", where the UI itself draws most of the conclusions and makes most of the decisions for you.
Then there's the progression system which is all kinds of flawed (and the leveling system feels completely vestigial and redundant... Not a rare problem these days, I'm afraid). he game would literally be improved just by removing explicit LEVELS from the core system and having just equipment and talents drive the progression.
On top of that, there's the itemization (that ties strongly with the previous problem) with its excessively steep scaling that almost manages to kill any sense of immersion and believability in a non-linear world. Any open world where the early game items do (or defend from) damage in the single digit and then their end game replacements go up to the THOUSANDS has a poorly thought system at its core.
BG3 I couldn't put down. It was an amazing immersion into DND.
I would say Witcher 1 was better than both for me.
Witcher 3 just never hooked me, through 80 hours. Who knows.
Well said. I am rediscovering the game now in next-gen mode on my Series X and goddamn. I put 50 hours into it back in 2015 on Xbox one when it had just come out and I had barely scratched the surface. Playing now by turning off the main quests and starting at lvl 30 where the first DLC expansion starts, and all of the entire game's side quests and Hunts are available. What an amazing game. I've got like 200+ hours of ahead of me, and I've never touched Blood & Wine.Witcher 3 by a country mile. The music, the characters, the atmosphere, the lore... BG3 feels like a slapdash cartoon. There is nothing holding that world together. There is no charm or soul. The Witcher 3 is the greatest game ever and I don't even really like the gameplay. That is how much more of a sum of its parts it is. It is a triumph.
I dont really count talking as gameplay tbhTW3 is like 33% of talking, 33% of walking/riding horse/exploring and 33% of combat.
It's not the most important element of the game, unlike ER for example.
This. It holds it back a pretty significant amount and made me sadThe combat is janky as hell and Geralt's basic movement feels awful. For an action RPG, these are major flaws.
I dont really count talking as gameplay tbh
Theyre different games. Its like comparing Persona 5 to Dark Souls, only because they both are rpgs. Ridiculous. Both are amazing in their own way. There is nothing to compare.