My Witcher 3 Revisit

[CritialGaming]

When The Witcher 3 came out, I played it pretty much non-stop until I beat it. I fell absolutely in love with the game, the characters, the setting, everything. It quickly earned a spot on my Top 5 greatest games of ALL TIME list. The thing is I beat the game so quickly that I never got to see any of the DLC that came out for it. Steam says I put in 78 hours in about five days, so I easily beat the game before most, or maybe all, of the free dlc came out and I was lightyears ahead of the expansions.

I had been fairly busy the last two years and when the DLC's came out I didn't get a chance to play them.

Recently time has freed up for me and I now have the complete package of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt. So I thought I would revisit the game and see if it still holds the magic that it did the first time.

I could have just made a character at level 30 and played only the DLC's, but i decided that I wanted to do the whole thing again, crafting a whole new Geralt and see if this game holds up to the experience it gave me two years ago.

TLR It was even better a second time around.

God the game is a fucking masterpiece. Just outright masterpiece. The second playthrough I was able to see even more things that I never saw the first time, because I got better at Gwent, got better at exploring, I knew how to make certain choices to see extra content, so I got an even bigger and better experience than the first time. I didn't look up guides either, one of the things that astounded me was how much I remembered from the last time I played the game. I remembered small quests, I remembered a lot of the '?' marks on the map, I remembered a lot more than I would remember had I returned to any other game two years later.

It just reinforced it's place in my Top 5 list.

And the DLC's are just as amazing. I haven't gotten through Heart of Stone fully yet, but even this quest has yielded memorable moments.

I know some people had problems with the game, and I can understand that everyone has different tastes. But to me The Witcher 3 feels like Breath of the Wild does to a lot of people you know? There are things that people hate in TW3 that just don't bother me, or I don't even notice. Just like things that pissed me off in BotW, don't seem to bother other people. It's funny how much personal taste can color an experience.

Anyway that's just a ramble I wanted to get out. Have any of you guys played through TW3 more than once? What about the DLC's? How do you compare those with the experience of the base game? I'm curious.

 

[Cycloptomese]

I played through the main game once and like you, I thought it was fantastic. It was a competent enough RPG to be certain, but the way it handled the bleak and brutal violence of it's world was something to behold. I should really give it another go and check out the DLC. People talk a lot of smack on DLC (justifiably in a lot of cases), but I've never heard anyone talk any smack on Witcher 3 DLC.

 

[CritialGaming]

I played through the main game once and like you, I thought it was fantastic. It was a competent enough RPG to be certain, but the way it handled the bleak and brutal violence of it's world was something to behold. I should really give it another go and check out the DLC. People talk a lot of smack on DLC (justifiably in a lot of cases), but I've never heard anyone talk any smack on Witcher 3 DLC.

Well because unlike other DLC's that are maybe a few maps, or a small 2hr campaign, TW3's DLCs are epic sprawling games on their own. I don't know about the second DLC, but the first DLC has me 12 hours into it and I'm like half-way or 75% of the way through it. The content and the story is easily on par with what was in the main game.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I started playing it on May 19th of 2015 and I haven't stopped since. I don't even know how many times I played through the game. I'm now in Skellige again. It's the writing and the atmosphere that the setting evokes that gets to me. It feels amazing every time. It doesn't matter how well I know the map either. For some reason the exploration doesn't get old even if there's nothing new to see. It's like a favorite book or a movie. It captures my attention completely. Two years later and it still feels fresh to me.

The content and the story is easily on par with what was in the main game.

The story in The Witcher 3 and the two DLC's are actually quite simple. It's the execution that's remarkable and the writing of the characters. It is so well done that it leaves me speechless every time.

See, there are narrative driven stories and there are character driven stories. The Witcher 3 is an example of a character driven story. Ultimately the story is just an excuse for characters to do their thing. That's where the focus truly lies. A few examples of TV shows that are like that are The Sopranos and Deadwood. I'm sure people would agree. An example of a narrative driven story would be something like Game of Thrones, where it's the underlying plot that matters. But the characters, as fun as they are, are quite disposable and irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

More often than not I prefer character driven stories.

 

[DoPo]

Anyway that's just a ramble I wanted to get out. Have any of you guys played through TW3 more than once?

I only played it once and I only beat the base game and the Heart of Stone DLC. I started Blood and Wine but I never finished it, because by that point I felt burned out on the game.

Steam says I put in 78 hours in about five days

And this is probably why - I think it took me something like 120-140 hours to finish the base game. I didn't even do a lot of exploring (by my reckoning, anyway). When I did finish it, I installed the DLCs[footnote]For some reason they didn't install, even though I had them. I didn't actually notice until I finished the game.[/footnote] and kept on but the game had already taken up so much time, that I finally decided to jump on something else.

What about the DLC's? How do you compare those with the experience of the base game? I'm curious.

For what it's worth, I absolutely loved the mutation system in Blood and Wine. One of the annoyances I had with the base game was actually the levelling system - it felt completely out of place. However the mutations were really cool and I think they should have been the replacement to levelling.

Heart of Stone I think was a really good expansion as well. Not as big as Blood and Wine (the former expanded the map, the latter introduces a whole new one), but pretty good overall. I probably have two minor complaints about it - Master Mirror is just too...omnipotent. I get that he's an evil...thing and he does like you to know this, but stuff like stopping time is over the top. The second complaint is the enchanting system that was introduced - it just...wasn't very substantial. It served as a money sink, but the benefits you could get weren't that amazing.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Heart of Stone I think was a really good expansion as well. Not as big as Blood and Wine (the former expanded the map, the latter introduces a whole new one), but pretty good overall. I probably have two minor complaints about it - Master Mirror is just too...omnipotent. I get that he's an evil...thing and he does like you to know this, but stuff like stopping time is over the top.

Well, y'know...

Spoiler

He IS basically the Witcher's equivalent to the Devil. Makes sense he'd have the powers that he does.

OT: Revisited the game recently to play the two expansions. I thought about doing a full playthrough but I wanted the game to feel fresh by the time I got to the expansion material.

And my reaction was similar to OP, as I was coming in after playing Andromeda. Was like a blast of fresh air in the face, and I was actually kind of taken aback at just how *good* the writing and directing was. I feel pretty confident in saying it's the single best RPG ever made.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Still haven't finished it. And when I went to continue I discovered my save file got corrupted due to a data transference. So now I gotta start... all... over... again. Which isn't terrible since the game is still wonderful, but still, this'll be my third attempt from scratch, and I only have maybe another forty years to live.

The only DLC I played was Blood and Wine, and after coming to terms that everything in it was going to kick my fucking ass I had a grand ol' time with it. It does have the dumbest sex scene trigger though.

 

[distortedreality]

I'm in exactly the same boat as the OP.

Started a new playthrough a month or so ago, mainly to play through the DLC's which I hadn't gotten around to earlier.

And yeah, it's still fucking excellent. I'm currently running through blood & wine and absolutely loving it. Hearts of stone was great as well.

I actually decided on starting a new playthrough after getting becoming frustrated with Mass Effect Andomeda, which I didn't find quite as bad as everyone else did, but TW3 is just on a totally different level. Easily up there with Chrono Trigger and Deus Ex as one of the best games I've ever played.

 

[DoPo]

Heart of Stone I think was a really good expansion as well. Not as big as Blood and Wine (the former expanded the map, the latter introduces a whole new one), but pretty good overall. I probably have two minor complaints about it - Master Mirror is just too...omnipotent. I get that he's an evil...thing and he does like you to know this, but stuff like stopping time is over the top.

Well, y'know...

Spoiler

He IS basically the Witcher's equivalent to the Devil. Makes sense he'd have the powers that he does.

I know, but it still felt quite over the top for what I've seen in the Witcher games so far.

Actually, I remembered something else I found annoying in that expansion. The two things I mentioned were mere slight annoyances, but this was single handedly the worst thing about the entire game. No, I will say all three games. I can't believe it so foolishly slipped my mind.

Spoiler

Those fucking spiders were really frustrating to fight because they keep their distance ant they web you, so you can't move.

 

[CritialGaming]

I found it good, not great. 3/5. Gameplay was crummy and full of tedium. I might replay it when I have a better graphics card, but I'm in no rush to upgrade.

You thought the gameplay was crummy? In what way sir? I'm curious to what you felt was wrong with it.

 

[sanquin]

Let's be honest. The gameplay isn't perfect at all. Swordplay is a little clunky, and the heavy/light attacks with dodging is nothing new. The way the menus work is also a little more confusing than it needs to be. I can still clearly feel that CDPR isn't a seasoned veteran in the AAA RPG making business.

That being said, yes the game is simply incredible. The complete stories side-quests tell. The way the world feels more alive than any other rpg that came out around the same time. The personality given to each and every character you deal with (apart from randoms walking around cities/towns.) I understand that the working conditions haven't exactly been favourable for the people working on this game, but goddamn did they make a masterpiece anyway. A lot of other companies can really learn from W3 in my opinion.

Which reminds me, I should really get back to W3 some time soon. I've played only about 1/3 through the main story so far, doing plenty of side quests in the mean time. And still want to play a lot more of it.

 

[jademunky]

Anyway that's just a ramble I wanted to get out. Have any of you guys played through TW3 more than once? What about the DLC's? How do you compare those with the experience of the base game? I'm curious.

Well, I've gotta say that, having finished the game for the first time roughly 6 months ago, I do have to give kudos to CDProject Red for their storytelling. I don't think I've hated a video game character with the kind of aggressive passion that I've ever felt for

Spoiler

King Radovid of Redania, seriously, from his obnoxiousness in the middle of witcher II to his murderousness at the end, finally landing with his paranoid bigotry where I was just itching to kill him. Then we finally did! And fucking Philippa Eilhart got to deliver it! And we got to restore Temeria! And that was not even the main plot of the game

So yeah, really loved it. Kinda clunky combat but still loved it.

As for the DLC, I've only played Heart of Stone but once you get passed a really badly designed first boss fight, the storytelling gets somehow even better. And this time with a villain I liked rather than hated.

 

[Remus]

I didn't know until after I beat heart of Stone that O'Dimm was based off the man in black from Dark Tower. That extra bit of lore actually made his motivations make even more sense.

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

I just finished the game for the first time. I overall really like it. Looks great, good writing and characters, as well as excellent world building, but I have some small issues with the game, mostly little gameplay annoyances such as:

- Geralt can be slammed across the room by a troll or giant, but dies instantly from a 10ft drop? Apparently gravity is the greatest monster of all.
- Stamina and travelling. One of the first things I did was install a mod so Geralt/Roach had infinite stamina outside of combat and didn't need to slow down for a breather every 200ft. Probably saved me several hours of extra transit time.
- Roach, you can be summoned to me across miles of ocean, but you can't jump a knee-height fence? Also, why do you sometimes stop dead for no discernible reason?
- No Geralt, we're not stopping to massacre our 500th pack of wolves, you don't need to turn around again to face them. Just keep running.

These are minor nitpicks tho.

Spoiler

Those fucking spiders were really frustrating to fight because they keep their distance ant they web you, so you can't move.

Honestly, I think most of the new enemy types introduced in the DLCs are pretty annoying to fight.

Spoiler

Beside those Arachnomorphs and their little keepaway game, the Archespores, Kikimora, Bruxa and Giant Centipedes all have their little annoying gimmicks like spammy attacks that stunlock, being pretty damage spongy or moments where you can't attack them and you're just waiting for them to pop out again (seriously, fuck Archespores popping up on a ledge you can't jump or climb on). Also, some of them don't actually seem to be hampered a lot by their supposed weaknesses.

Nothing that can't be overcome with some tactical planning, but I don't enjoy fighting any of them, but just made me think "Great, more of these. Welp, time to slog through them".

 

[DeadProxy]

I love this game. I've done a couple "complete" playthroughs, but every playthrough has something new, and it's always wonderful. My most recent run was just a couple weeks ago where I had 4-5 days off work and I just lived in the witcher world for like 12+ hours a day.

To talk briefly about the DLC, it's amazing quality. The Heart of Stone story takes place in the base area's of the game, and to me, serves as the more emotional piece as you're dealing with a character who is the sum of the phrase, "Be careful what you wish for," with a couple quests in there to lighten the mood a bit. The Blood and Wine DLC though is a whole beast by itself. It's a whole new zone, full of bright colours, emotional side quests, tons of nods to the Witcher series as a whole, a whole bunch of laughs either at Geralt's expense or just because the situation is too absurd...It's a great trip. And the ending to the BaW DLC, (each dlc has multiple, HoS has 2, BaW has 3) is a fantastic send off, I say.

Not enough freedom of movement. Sluggish animations. Geralt is a terrible martial artist. He moves like a guy of seventy. He understeers, doesn't stop fast enough and often runs even when holding Ctrl.

I don't have much to say about your other issues, cause they are pretty valid. But this issue has more or less been dealt with, depending on the last time you played. Shortly after the games release, they patched in an alternate control thing where he stopped controlling like a tank and moved like an actual person, you just have to go turn it on in the options. As for the use of Heavy attacks...like in The Witcher 1, you had to use the appropriate style for how many people you're dealing with, and the Heavy was always most useful against only a couple enemies and/or big slow things, while light and fast attacks were always for groups. It's just that in W3 you can build Geralt so that fast attacks are lethal as hell and don't need heavies.

- Roach, you can be summoned to me across miles of ocean, but you can't jump a knee-height fence? Also, why do you sometimes stop dead for no discernible reason?

This gets addressed in a side quest hidden away in the Blood and Wine dlc and I missed it on all but my most recent plays, and it's great.

To anyone who can't see themselves spending hundreds of hours playing through this game multiple times to see everything you possibly can, I recommend [link]https://www.youtube.com/user/XLetalis[/link] cause he's got so many damn video's about TW3 and it's where I found out about so many side quests I never knew existed.

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

- Roach, you can be summoned to me across miles of ocean, but you can't jump a knee-height fence? Also, why do you sometimes stop dead for no discernible reason?

This gets addressed in a side quest hidden away in the Blood and Wine dlc and I missed it on all but my most recent plays, and it's great.

I know, ran into it too. Though funny, I'd say fixing the problem would've been preferable to lampshading it. But again, its a minor nitpick.

 

[stroopwafel]

The Witcher 3 is a game I thoroughly enjoyed but the story is still too fresh in my mind for a replay. It's really good(for the most part) but could also get a bit long-winded in the dialogue department. The Witcher 3 has one of the most 'lived in' and authentic game worlds ever created which is genuinely intriguing to explore(with also one of the best bestiaries of any game ever) and with a simple yet fun combat system. But the story is really front and center and there is simply so much of it that it's like reading a book as thick as a fist for the second time. That's just personal taste though as I can definitely see the lasting appeal of The Witcher 3. As someone who prefers minimal and/or 'to the point' story in a game it's actually testament to how good the story of The Witcher 3 is that it held my attention all the way to the end and searching for every side-quest and question mark I could find. The writing and how various side-stories interlock is genuinely superb. Few years down the line...I'll probably replay it.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I found Witcher 3 to be a failure of a game meaning the gameplay part of the game was horrid. Even movement itself is extremely poor and had to be patched to allow for an "alternate movement" setting. The combat is really bad with blatant overpowered beginning signs, both base Quen and Axii make combat so very trivial. The hit detection and hitboxes are pretty poor. Geralt doesn't even have any i-frames until you get the skill that makes the entire dodge animation all i-frames, which is pretty broken in itself. The combat system is a mix of like Arkham and Souls combat that just doesn't work. Just conceptually I think Witcher's combat system makes no sense for the type of combat it should be as Geralt is a monster hunter and the combat should designed for fighting monsters first and foremost but it's obvious the combat was designed for humanoid enemies instead. For example, how Geralt animation-wise flows from enemy to enemy ala Arkham and how there's a block/counter system (for humanoids) and monster fights are just dodge and spam attack or just put on Quen or use Axii and spam attack. Whereas a game like Horizon or Dragon's Dogma were designed for monster fights first and the human fights are the ones lacking. The monster fights should be the highlights of a game about a monster hunter (aka witcher).

Now to the good parts, the non-game parts. The writing is really solid with good characters and questing. However, the main story arch is pretty disappointing with the story devolving into not just a "save the world" storyline but save literally ALL the worlds because stories are only as good as how high the stakes are I guess. Though, most of the other stories on your journey are really solid. I'd love a Ciri spin-off game or a freaking TV show that's sorta akin to Doctor Who where every "week" she's going to a new world and having a different adventure basically where she's the fish out of water whereas The Doctor really never is.

In conclusion, I can only give Witcher 3 as high as a 4/10 because the gameplay is just plain bad. I can't give a game even an average score (5/10) where I didn't enjoy most of my time with the game as gameplay is the majority of your game time. I would've much preferred Witcher 3 to be akin to a Telltale game where it's just a straight adventure game with the gameplay basically removed as then I wouldn't have had to suffer through any bad stuff (gameplay) to get to the good stuff (writing).