The Witcher 3 | Review Thread

So I just read that these review copies are essentially with the day one patch. I don't have time to read the reviews, so can anyone please tell me if any reviewer mentioned anything about frame rate drops?
 
Awesome reviews, great start for the game. I hope it's amazing. I wish i wasn't so jaded because I don't believe anybody anymore.
 
I'm surprised the combat wasn't more divisive among early reviewers.

Anywho, I always wait for the dust to settle to really start taking reviews seriously, and even then, I think just the general idea of "this game isn't broken and is somewhat enjoyable" is enough for me to feel good about going and buying the game.
 
I'm going to use this moment to interject here and suggest that we not do crap like this. Whether complaining about scores being too high or too low, let's not fall down the trap of acting like there's an objective metric by which we can or should rate games. Because there isn't. There just is not. This may not be very inviting for discourse, but I'm not even remotely interested in a rebuttal to this statement.

While you certainly have a point, saying that in a thread dedicated to reviewers putting numbers out and generally hyping people around seem fairly counter-intuitive, don't you think?
 
Don't wanna read any reviews in case of spoiling myself, but the IGN quote about fetch quests and an uninteresting story have me a tiny bit worried.

I tend to get easily bored of most recent RPGs, but loved the previous Witcher games.
 
tumblr_nnusksEabc1srbyoyo1_400.gif


Can't wait for the 19th :D
 
From the Gamespot review...

"Kevin VanOrd has played all three Witcher games and read several of the novels. He spent about 100 hours with The Witcher 3 on a PlayStation 4 debug system, a version that included the games' day-one patch. He uses the word "ploughing" in everyday speech. "

100 hours is enough to pass judgement on anything that isn't an MMO.

So his version had great framerate? Or the kind of framerate we saw in that tweet saying its not good??
 
Don't wanna read any reviews in case of spoiling myself, but the IGN quote about fetch quests and an uninteresting story have me a tiny bit worried.

I tend to get easily bored of most recent RPGs, but loved the previous Witcher games.

Never ever trust IGN for reviews. Remember the Alien Isolation review, last Pokemon...
 
From the Gamespot review...

"Kevin VanOrd has played all three Witcher games and read several of the novels. He spent about 100 hours with The Witcher 3 on a PlayStation 4 debug system, a version that included the games' day-one patch. He uses the word "ploughing" in everyday speech. "

100 hours is enough to pass judgement on anything that isn't an MMO.

Ya, he did his due diligence
 
tbh i expected more 10's but this shows again another overhyped game.

Don't get me wrong, i'm sure it will be an amazing game but i personally kept my hype in check since the other two previous Witcher games were far from being masterpieces.

This post makes no sense.
 
tbh i expected more 10's but this shows again another overhyped game.

Don't get me wrong, i'm sure it will be an amazing game but i personally kept my hype in check since the other two previous Witcher games were far from being masterpieces.

How do you know if it's overhyped when you haven't even played it?


That feeling that everyone else is wrong, and you're the only one that's right.

I'm pretty sure the combat remark was sarcastic. I hope so anyways.
 
Sounds like a bad video game.
 
tbh i expected more 10's but this shows again another overhyped game.

Don't get me wrong, i'm sure it will be an amazing game but i personally kept my hype in check since the other two previous Witcher games were far from being masterpieces.

Sarcasm right?
 
How spoilery is the Gamespot video review? I saw the first 2 mins and it showed a lot of new monsters/characters. Does it spoiler any more than that?
 
Why are people flipping about the 10 from Gamespot?

They gave it to Bayonetta 2 last year. Even GAF's most overrated game award winner MGS4 got a 10.

But, i'm very confident that the game will be fantastic!
 
lol @ these reviews, it's like everybody reviewed a different game. There's proabably every combination of these out there: great strory/shit story, great open world/awful open world, meaningful sub-quests/boring fetch-quests and colectathons, amazing combat/crap combat.
 
I'm really hopeful for the combat in this because the second game was a chore but I went ahead and took a leap of faith while the game was still cheap.

Curious for the Playstation Magazine review, can't access it atm.

8/10



So great story, bad open world

Meanwhile IGN says the opposite.

I don't think IGN has ever badmouthed a game's open world. To them its just a plus no matter what from what I've read. It seems like the main story stuff is good which is what I really care about though.
 
Does he have a history of bad reviews?

He pissed off some people by giving Pillars of Eternity an 8 instead of a 9, pointing that the game was way too heavy on the reading and he gave Alien Isolation a 6. Other than that, I generally afree with his taste in video games.
 
Do any of these reviews explain if your Witcher 2 save will carry on and if so, how much it affects the game? Things ended kinda fucked in my game
 
So I just read that these review copies are essentially with the day one patch. I don't have time to read the reviews, so can anyone please tell me if any reviewer mentioned anything about frame rate drops?
GT says that there are often framedrops in more dense areas, swamps or whatnot. You could actually see drops in video.
 
lol @ these reviews, it's like everybody reviewed a different game. There's proabably every combination of these out there: great strory/shit story, great open world/awful open world, meaningful sub-quests/boring fetch-quests and colectathons, amazing combat/crap combat.

Well I would hope several different outlets each have their own unique opinion about the game
 
Top Bottom