I don't know why I don't like the witcher

[nomotog_v1legacy]

Everyone loves the witcher games. You can't go long without someone talking about how good the last game is. It's game of the year over and over. People love it. In theory, I should love it too. I enjoy a good RPG and everything I read about the game makes me think "oh ya I like that". I even own the game, but any time I sit down to play it, I don't like it. I can't get too far into it before I say "I hate this". I don't think I can parce out why. It's just kind of funny.

Anyone else feel the same way? Anyone hate the game and know why?

 

[Eclipse Dragon]

Eh it happens sometimes, I have this issue with basically every game Bethesda makes. I played about fifteen minutes of Oblivion and Fallout 3 before I lost interest, Skyrim got about 20 hours because it has dragons and that's really the only reason. By all means, I should like them, they have most things in them that I enjoy, I just... don't.

 

[Barbas]

Maybe it's the aesthetic and tone. It's certainly darker than most RPGs I've played, not holding back on the savagery.

 

[Erttheking]

I DO! (At least the first two, I hear the third one improved the franchise and I haven't played it yet)

Geralt can't emote to save his life.

Combat is clunky and boring.

It falls into the same pit fall as many dark fantasy stories do. More focusing on showing how dark and bleak the world is instead of giving you a reason as for why you should care about it. Also racism, swearing and sex all stuffed in with no subtlety or grace. Because "mature".

Characters are flat and forgettable.

The first game was horribly designed and confusing and could be very frustrating at times (That FUCKING SECOND CHAPTER!)

This is all just off of the top of my head.

 

[MysticSlayer]

Haven't played the third game yet.

The first game is one of my favorite RPGs of all time. Unlike most dark fantasy, including its successor (more on this shortly), it got an incredible balance between showing a bleak, dying world and fun, lighthearted moments. The end result was a dark yet still relatable world and story that was hard not to care a lot about.

As for the second game, bleh. I'm not going to list all its gameplay flaws (I'd be here all day), but it felt so much like they got a list of dark things, over-the-top humor, and "good RPG stuff" to throw into the game and found a way to tie it all together after the fact. Whereas the first game felt like the developers had immersed themselves in their own world while building it, the second just felt like they read a lot on what they should do and put it together without ever experiencing it themselves (except when drunk). It all just felt soulless and lifeless, and I couldn't help but feeling the developers were constantly taking a break to ask me, "Have we passed Good RPG Design 101 yet?"

So, overall, definitely can see why people don't like at least the second. I can even see why people don't like the first even if I disagree with them. Still need to find time for the third, which will require me to first get something that can play it.

 

[sXeth]

I dunno, I never found it interesting enough to finish the first two games. Or start the third one.

Its had struggles with nailing decent gameplay, and the story's never done much for me but seem like a "Historical Romance" novel with told from the male side with the occasional monster thrown in. I haven't read the actual books, before Poland rises up to burn me at the stake, just poked my head into the games.

I suppose it dabbles in the "Grey and Grey", "Grimdark" etc, as well, which has rarely ever impressed me, particularly in escapist pursuits like gaming. Lightsaber-wielding Jesus Knight vs Demon Vampire Hitler is cartoony, but so is a society somehow existing despite an antithetical lack of cohesiveness and co-operation between its members.

 

[Ten Foot Bunny]

Sometimes this kind of thing just happens. You don't have to automatically love something because it's receiving near-universal praise, and that's okay! Doesn't matter whether or not you can pinpoint a reason (or reasons) why you aren't gelling with a certain piece of media - the fact is, if it's not doing it for you, it's not doing for it you.

You say you've given it a few tries and that's commendable. Perhaps you can play some other games right now and give Witcher 3 another shot later if you feel so inclined.

This kind of thing happened to me with The Exorcist. First time I saw it was during my freshman year of college, and I thought it was a boring piece of crap. Ten years later, I was reading a lot of articles about horror movies and, since The Exorcist almost always ends up at the top of every list of the best horror movies of all time, I gave it another shot. Nope. Still hated it. A few years after that, once again engrossed in articles about the horror genre, I thought that maybe, just maybe, there was SOMETHING I missed the first two times I watched The Exorcist. Nope. Couldn't even finish the movie. Boring as shit. I don't understand its appeal.

But then there's Mama, a horror movie I saw a few years back and didn't care for. About two weeks ago, my brother asked if I had seen it and I replied that I had, but I wasn't overly impressed. Then, just last night, I was watching movie reviews on a few YouTube channels, and I stumbled across a video analyzing Mama. Turns out it wasn't really analysis... this poorly named video did nothing more than show every scene in the movie in which the Mama character appeared. But something about that video made me think I should give the movie another try. Maybe, just maybe, there was SOMETHING I missed the first time I watched the movie! I turned it on this morning, and I was blown away. I really had missed something. Damn, that was a good movie.

These kinds of things happen. Don't kick yourself over it.

 

[Burgers2013]

Have you tried liking it instead? That could work.

I didn't really enjoy the first couple of hours or so of the 3rd one (or the 2nd actually), but I was already pretty invested from the 2nd game. I absolutely loved the 2nd and 3rd games (quit the 1st game in under an hour; hated the combat). For me it was getting used to the combat mechanics. In the 2nd game, I hit some sort of difficulty curve early on that took forever to figure out. So, when I started 3, I was ready for that sort of thing. It wasn't nearly as bad as the 2nd game, but I still had to get used to the combat again. Once I got past that (and the slight irritation of how much seemingly unnecessary cleavage there was) I loved the 3rd game even more than the 2nd.

I can definitely see why not everyone would be into it though. The combat can get really repetitive, and it's very narrative-heavy.

 

[LetalisK]

Geralt can't emote to save his life.

I feel like CD Projekt figured having a middle aged white male that had white long hair was unique enough from the industry standard that they didn't need to risk anything other that a piece of cardboard for personality.

 

[The Madman]

I think you'll find plenty of people dislike The Witcher franchise. In fact now that Witcher 3 has achieved some success it's practically in vogue among many to dislike the game, as is usually the case with anything remotely popular.

You're not wrong, no one thing can appeal to everyone.

I feel like CD Projekt figured having a middle aged white male that had white long hair was unique enough from the industry standard that they didn't need to risk anything other that a piece of cardboard for personality.

Geralt has plenty of personality. You might not like it and it might not appeal to you but it's definitely there in the books and comes across quite well in Witcher 3, though admittedly much less so in Witcher 1 and 2.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Also racism, swearing and sex all stuffed in with no subtlety or grace. Because "mature".

Ah yes, I miss the subtle graceful racism from games of yore.

As I say every time these Witcher conversations come up, if you define "maturity" as profanity, racism and sex, you are likely to be persistently underwhelmed no matter what the property.

Characters are flat and forgettable.

Best NPCs in any RPG of the last 10-15 years. Easily. Helped that they were all rooted in their literary beginnings though, so it's a bit like cheating.

First game did kind of stink though. Like you, I just threw my arms in the air halfway through the second chapter and shouted "Why am I doing this to myself!?".

 

[EHKOS]

I'm kind of having the same problem. My beef is with how complex the alchemy is and the clunky combat. I don't want fifty items that I-don't-know-what-they-do in my inventory. Plus my sword is always breaking.

Other than that, I do have a good time with the game, but it's mostly hour-long sessions. I just can't get super into it.

 

[MrCalavera_v1legacy]

Maybe it's the mechanics? Or the plot that didn't catch you. I assume it's not the atmosphere, since you've read about it before and expected grimdark, a bit more down-to-earth fantasy.
Or maybe it's just not a game for you?

Everyone and their moms used to praise Skyrim, and i've dropped it soon after finishing my first quest, for example.

 

[BreakfastMan]

Well, the combat in 3 is definitely underwhelming and dull, and Velen (first major area of the game outside of the tutorial area, White Orchard) is a boring mud-hole (except for the Baron quest-line, which kills). And the pacing really shits the bed in spots (fucking Dandelion, god damn). But the story really makes it all worth it in the end, I thought, and the game definitely picks up once you go to Novigrad and Skellige, and start doing the quests there.

Can't really comment on the other two, haven't really played either that much.

 

[IceForce]

If you're talking about the first game, then that's completely understandable, because that game was rubbish.

 

[Spider RedNight]

On the "haven't played the third one yet" boat but I couldn't get into the second one to save my life, even when it was free on XBL. Just... something about the tutorial and I had this feeling in my gut like "I'm not gonna enjoy this" so I put it down and haven't cared since.

Then again, I don't really share people's enthusiasm for what they think should be game of the year because Undertale, contrary to everyone whoring it out saying it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, WASN'T ENTIRELY AS ENGAGING AS YOU THINK.

But yeah no, I get it. I just chalk it up to not being for everyone. I like Dragon Age and Skyrim and all the other fancy dark fantasy games but I couldn't get behind Geralt. Also I heard it was crazy sexual and that stuff is just REALLY boring to me.

 

[Trunkage]

Geralt can't emote to save his life.

The lore is that the process of becoming a witcher deletes emotion from that person

OP: As to the witcher series, the first one was pretty good, the second one was slightly worse and the third was really good. But playing Fallout 4 has raised so many issues for the witcher. It has no exploration mechanic, its map turned into a far cry map indicator hunt. I realised after 40 hours that I would actually like a different weapon than a sword. Why couldn't we be an axe or an effective crossbow. I remember entering a place called Skelliege saying "Crap, I have to do this all over again" talking to my friends, the game would have been significantly improved by removing the whole area. Also, you don't get enough experience from side questing but heaps from the main quest. There isn't much point going off the beaten track. Fallout you usually get a level every couple of hours.

Plus why do you have to like what other people like?