The Witcher 3 vs. Bloodborne
- Thread starter .Pennywise
- Start date
Rock And Roll
Member
I tried really hard to like The Witcher but the controls were pretty poor. Bloodborne takes it for me just because it plays a whole lot better.
That being said, I am very interested in Cyberpunk since CDPR said they felt the controls in TW3 were lacking and they want to improve on that aspect of their gameplay. If they recognize there was a problem with their game and they want to fix it, that makes me very optimistic about them knocking it out of the park with Cyberpunk. Maybe that will end up being the buzzbeater game of the generation.
That being said, I am very interested in Cyberpunk since CDPR said they felt the controls in TW3 were lacking and they want to improve on that aspect of their gameplay. If they recognize there was a problem with their game and they want to fix it, that makes me very optimistic about them knocking it out of the park with Cyberpunk. Maybe that will end up being the buzzbeater game of the generation.
DelireMan7
Member
mcz117chief
Member
The biggest problem I have with Witcher 3 is Witcher 1. I just can't get through that game. The story is pretty uninteresting, the combat isn't anything special and the quests are very generic. The only really good thing about Witcher is the music which really helps with setting the mood, but I feel like by the time I beat Witcher 1 and 2 I'll be one foot in the grave.
Last edited:
Komatsu
Member
You can ignore W1, which was developed with the rather janky Aurora engine licensed from BioWare, and go straight to Witcher 2, which is an amazing game. 3, however, is in a class of its own.
Last edited:
mcz117chief
Member
But then I feel like I am missing parts of the story, callbacks and won't understand relationships and such. Like playing Mass Effect 2 without playing 1 would be an incredibly lesser experience.
S
SLoWMoTIoN
Unconfirmed Member
2 is better in everyway outside the combat.
Gandih42
Member
I was completely enamored by The Witcher 1's very own weird flavor of jank. Kept me going right up until the end. I thought it had a fairly interesting conclusion, which if I recall correctly does have some minor ties to TW3 (although it's been ages, and I still haven't played TW3).
Can't blame anyone for not wanting to go through TW1, though that game is a dinosaur, albeit a fascinating one.
That being said, my vote goes to Bloodborne. Love that game to bits. Although I don't doubt TW3 is equally deserving of winning!
Senua
Member
Witcher 1 is so damn good, you just gota get past the lame intro part at Kaer Morhen
Kadayi
Banned
Votes for TW3 not TW1.
Last edited:
KungFucius
King Snowflake
This is silly. One is a game that has a fanatical following that most people don't really enjoy and the other in a best seller enjoyed by millions on all platforms. I wonder how much the Bloodborne vote is tainted by PS console war BS.
Senua
Member
I'm sure there's a part of that, but Bloodborne is fucking amazing
mcz117chief
Member
Which is why I voted for Bloodborne, I don't need to play 2 other games the get the most of it.
Kadayi
Banned
You don't need to play the other two to play TW3.
rofif
Banned
debatable
Senua
Member
You're right because I'm sure most people have only played 3 and look how revered it is.
I personally couldn't get into TW3 after playing a couple of hours or so so I said fuck it and went through 1 and 2 first, I had tried TW1 before but hated the intro part and gave up on it, but this time I forced myself through it and the series as a whole became one of my very favourites. The world/atmosphere in TW1 has yet to be topped IMO, i felt like I was actually in Vizima. 2 was more cinematic but still brilliant in it's own right, had the best antagonist too, god damn Letho. 3 is an incredible achievement but I really do think there is too much to do, slightly overwhelming. The main story/sides and DLC are all incredible though. 10/10 would plough again.
I don't know why I wrote all that
Touch fuzZy. get BizZay
Member
git gud scrubs
This poll should say: are u a newb Y/N
(manly tears)
This poll should say: are u a newb Y/N
(manly tears)
S
SLoWMoTIoN
Unconfirmed Member
I honestly thought you were talking about the Witcher series here.
mcz117chief
Member
I never said you have to
Kadayi
Banned
A debate requires you to make an argument. Sure there's a certain amount of call back between the titles, but the sales perspective alone demonstrates that most players have very little problem getting to grips with the game without any active knowledge of the previous ones.
And yet, that's your entire argument against TW3? What gives.
mcz117chief
Member
That isn't my entire argument, it is, however, my main reasons why I prefer Bloodborne over Witcher 3. One can be played as it is without reading or playing anything else so each and every person has the chance to experience it in the same way but to enjoy Witcher 3 fully you have to know the backstory and the previous games. An extreme example of this is Halo 5 which is just one huge "in media res" that makes no sense to anyone aside from those who read all the (comic) books, played all the games (and DLC for Halo 4), watched all the TV shows and movies. Witcher 3 is obviously not as ridiculous, but you will never "get" everything unless you played Witcher 1 and 2, which isn't an issue with Bloodborne.
Last edited:
DonJorginho
Banned
Two amazing games that defined a generation who sadly have slightly toxic communities who will screech if any other game is considered even slightly better than their crowned jewel.
This thread is showing a prime example of it, quite personal back and forths over who has the most votes, I don't get why we can't just enjoy both of these masterpieces for what they are.
That being said, I will screech like a goodun if MGSV loses to BOTW.
This thread is showing a prime example of it, quite personal back and forths over who has the most votes, I don't get why we can't just enjoy both of these masterpieces for what they are.
That being said, I will screech like a goodun if MGSV loses to BOTW.
Kadayi
Banned
Halo has a plot? Who knew?
Still, I find this idea of docking points because 'I won't get all the references' inane. I mean on that basis fuck BOTW or MGSV as well right?
Last edited:
mcz117chief
Member
Well, the original three you could easily play by themselves, all the major plot points were in the games but the moment 343i took over they desperately tried to make it into a "mega franchise" so they started to spread the lore and story into every conceivable media which made it a total mess. Have you played Destiny? The game's lore is told via "grimoire", an online only library which you unlock as you play, so also a terribly way to tell a story. When I play a game I like to have everything I need to understand it available at least through some "the story so far" option that gives you the most crucial information or by playing the previous games.
Last edited:
I couldn't get into Witcher 3 because of combat and main character.
As for Bloodborne, I consider it a piece of art. Setting is done masterfully, art direction, lore, subtle storytelling, some npcs like doll, eileen, chapel dweller and gehrman are really moving, combat is addicting and works well, weapon variety is great, music is fantastic and it has one of the best dlcs to boot too. Only issues I can think about this game is the performance issues and optimization of arcane/bloodtinge paths (especially in early game).
For the sole reason of making such a great game with a Lovecraft setting in it, I cannot vote anything over it.
As for Bloodborne, I consider it a piece of art. Setting is done masterfully, art direction, lore, subtle storytelling, some npcs like doll, eileen, chapel dweller and gehrman are really moving, combat is addicting and works well, weapon variety is great, music is fantastic and it has one of the best dlcs to boot too. Only issues I can think about this game is the performance issues and optimization of arcane/bloodtinge paths (especially in early game).
For the sole reason of making such a great game with a Lovecraft setting in it, I cannot vote anything over it.
Last edited:
John2290
Member
Since I played Tw3 for the third time in January I decided to boot up Bloodborne and, oh lad, it has aged like milk. While TW3 was getting update after update and Pro enhancements to refine it to fine wine this got ignored and I'm really rather sad about it. The frame rate is, ass. There is ailiasing all over the shop and the characters movements now feel so dated like playing DS remake after playing DS3 or Sekiro. While TW3 now holds up with later gen games on PRO, this still feels like an early gen release. That said, I'm having fun and getting my ass absolutely handed to me, near as badly as the first dozen hours I spent with this in 2015. I really wish FS or Sony would enhance this for PRO and don't do that PS5 remaster shite.
EDIT, jesus, the frame rate is so bad it gets you killed. Is this 24 fps or something.
EDIT, jesus, the frame rate is so bad it gets you killed. Is this 24 fps or something.
Last edited:
borborygmus
Member
How can you cite this as an example of how TW3 holds up and Bloodborne doesn't when Geralt controls like a gorilla. Movement is definitely not one of TW3's strengths and your post is just unconvincing.
John2290
Member
This fixed all frame rate issues, made the image crisper on PRO, added HDR and so on aswell as fixing all the mistake they made and refined the UI, items, balancing etc, playing it this year on PRO it felt like a remaster over what I played in 2015 plus one of the expansions blends into the base game and there are 16 extra little DLC missions amongst other stuff. And I never got this bad combat nonsense, if you play the game on Death march the way it is intended to be, it's pretty fucking good as all the systems, signs and rpg stats come into play. It may not be the best but it's fun.
Bloodborne feels like it's 20fps and the frames are uneven, the graphics while never it's strongest suit are now terribly aged. I'm really hoping I can get used to it because this thread has made me crave it.
Captain Hero
The Spoiler Soldier
"A hunter is a hunter even in a dream"
vaibhavpisal
Member
I think God of War could have easily bested Witcher 3, had it won against Bloodborne.
It matches Witcher on every aspect while easily surpassing it in combat.
Bloodborne is more of an acquired taste that has just as many naysayers as fans.
Works both ways.
It matches Witcher on every aspect while easily surpassing it in combat.
Bloodborne is more of an acquired taste that has just as many naysayers as fans.
Works both ways.
Saber
Newd Member
When Geralt engages in a battle, he enters in this kind of lock-on mode. It makes moving around just robotic. And thats if you want to battle, because if you don't its just looks weird just trying to flee from combat.
Portugeezer
Member
Bloodborne is better. But Witcher 3 is multiplatform.
mcz117chief
Member
It is also more accessible and is a power fantasy, which is always appealing.
Trogdor1123
Gold Member
Absolutely, there is the simple "get the monsters" part but there is so much more if you put in just a tiny effort. The lore is crazy deep. I'd encourage everyone to check the lore videos on YouTube. Will send you back with a new appreciation.
I picked Bloodborne.
Denton
Banned
I love Witcher 1, but you are actually not missing anything if you skip it, narrative-wise. Sequels have their own story and if anything, the books are much more important anyway. And you are no doubt way too lazy to ever read those, so you might as well just play TW3. Or TW2 if you want to give it a chance.
Bloodborne is also a power fantasy. The only difficult boss was Cleric Beast which took me about 10 tries. The rest...it is just murdering monsters one after another.
Last edited:
Thats what I said God of War would easily beat TW3.
Senua
Member
Doubt it.
Captain Hero
The Spoiler Soldier
Last edited:
Bladed Thesis
Member
I love everybody coming in here and telling people what should be winning.
As if the Witcher 3 is some awful game with a cult following and not a massively celebrated title in its own right.
As if the Witcher 3 is some awful game with a cult following and not a massively celebrated title in its own right.
Mozzarella
Member
I kind of agree with this, I played through the games from start to finish because i wanted to get the highest potential from them, if i just played Witcher 3 i would have absolutely enjoyed it, but not as much as if i played it after 1 and 2.
The thing is i understood the world and characters better, so when Triss gets introduced in Novigrad in Witcher 3 I already knew her and had shared memories with her, so it was much better than a new player who never heard of her meeting this weird red haired woman talking about relationships. Same for Letho quests, and many other characters Geralt meets and interacts with.
A good amount of people enjoyed fighting monsters in Witcher 3 and thats probably a reason why they found it great, but if someone is there just for the world and story then playing the prequels and being familiar with what happened will most definitely enhance their experience and make it much more enjoyable.
Another thing about playing the prequels is you get to appreciate the jump in technical quality between the games, each sequel feels like a massive jump for CDPR. Hell even the DLC is an improvement over the main game, which is a reason why im excited for their upcoming game.
In short: it is nor required to play Witcher 1 and Witcher 2 before 3. But it is recommended.
If you cant play Witcher 1 (i dont blame you) because its old and outdated, then at least watching the story or a recap is acceptable, at least to know what happened and who is who. Witcher 2 i recommended playing as its still good.
With all that said, Witcher games peak is at its 2 DLC. Hearts of Stone and Blood and Wine, (in my opinion) as some people would argue its Velen/Skellige/Novigrad.
DonJorginho
Banned
I know right! We all know Death Stranding should be winning this, I'm glad we agree amigo.