The Witcher series should be much more popular
- Thread starter Zing
- Start date
Recommended Videos
What, complete and utter shite?Darth IB said:
Nah, I like my sequels to retain an ounce of credibilty and deliver on what fans expect, not squeeze out a turd of a game in less than 12 months, then expect everyone to lap it up and call it icecream.
Oh and for the record, I had every intention of treating Dragon Age 2 as a standalone game and tried my best to objectively not judge it against Origins. So comparisons aside it still felt rushed, incomplete, lazy and completely unfulfilling.
Eh.
I think The Witcher series is about as popular as it should be - IE Popular amongst Hardcore PC-only gamers who love overly complicated gaming mechanics.
Personally I -really- tried to get into the first game but I was just.so.fucking.bored.
ZP really hit the nail on the head in both reviews and -thats- why it's not as popular as you think it should be.
I think The Witcher series is about as popular as it should be - IE Popular amongst Hardcore PC-only gamers who love overly complicated gaming mechanics.
Personally I -really- tried to get into the first game but I was just.so.fucking.bored.
ZP really hit the nail on the head in both reviews and -thats- why it's not as popular as you think it should be.
Love the series myself but it does seem to be one of those love/hate things. Pity, whether you personally like the series or not there's no denying there are some things that the Witcher series does better than most any other developer out there. Bioware should be taking notes when it comes to moral ambiguity and choices that have genuine consequences. As much as I love most of Bioware's work, they really aren't very good at dialogue options. Most choices come down to being evil, boring, or saintly. There's no genuine roleplaying there, no ambiguity, no situations where you're forced to really think it over. It's just a matter of deciding whether you want to max your good or your bad for those neat stat bonuses.
Which is kinda boring. Witcher really does do it better. And despite the undeniably stupid card thing in the first game, both also deal with adult situations and subject matter in a way that puts most other developers to shame.
Ah well.
Which is kinda boring. Witcher really does do it better. And despite the undeniably stupid card thing in the first game, both also deal with adult situations and subject matter in a way that puts most other developers to shame.
Ah well.
Thinking about it, I don't think I've ever actually seen you being positive in a post truth be told. Not often anyway.Zhukov said:
Nope: Fun, and engaging.Kurai Angelo said:
As I said in my post, I really really enjoyed DA2. I know lots of people don't, and that's cool. It was far from perfect, and I was more than a little annoyed with the maps, and
fucking zevran
I'm not going to get into the rushed/cash-in debate, because frankly I'm sick of it. Opinions, man.
Uhhhh actually, fun and engaging is an opinion. Rushed cash in is a fact... Just thought I'd fix that for you. Not much of a debate to be had to be honest. Regardless of whether you enjoyed it or not, that's exactly what it was.Darth IB said:
I'd love to know how you found the same 4 rooms spawning endless waves of mindless fodder to be engaging. Perhaps it was the accompanying unintuitive, button mashing, shitfest they wheeled out as an excuse for an "improved" combat system. Or perhaps you found yourself engaged in the enthralling, epic yarn of the Hero of Kirkwall in which nothing fucking happens.
I'm sorry, but I'm having a hard time hearing you over how shit the gameplay, controls, UI, polish, story deliverance (fact it's a translation isn't an excuse) and just about everything else is in Witcher and Witcher 2.
Sorry, but I just can't stand the game. It just feels awful and trudging through it for the mediocre story just isn't worth it.
Sorry, but I just can't stand the game. It just feels awful and trudging through it for the mediocre story just isn't worth it.
I'm a pretty big fan of the Witcher and the Witcher 2. The latter is so far my GOTY, although Skyrim might well change that.
That said, neither of them are anywhere near 'perfect' games. The first one had repetitive combat and the hilariously juvenile sex cards. The second one had a much better told story and characters, but an inverted difficulty curve and a majorly disappointing Act 3 and end-fight.
I think the thing about the Witcher series that really stands out is how different it feels from other games in terms of atmosphere and setting. Characters are quite well fleshed out, and the supporting cast makes 'sense'. There is poverty and stupidity and evil, just like in the real world. Most importantly, they spent some real effort into making Geralt gruff, complex, but ultimately very likable. The guy who voices him should get an award of some sort... the last time I remember such a great performance was either Garrett in Thief or, of course, Jennifer Hale in Mass Effect.
I'm amused by all the people in this thread saying the second game was hard, though. It was hard up until about the end of the first act. Once you realize that Quen (the blue damage shield) is ridiculously overpowered, the game becomes a cakewalk. The fight on the castle walls at the end of Act 2 became a total button mash: Swing sword, build up adrenaline, unleash combo for auto-kills, while keeping Quen up to stun NPCs that actually hit you (thus building up adrenaline). The tactical challenge of the earlier levels completely disappears.
That said, neither of them are anywhere near 'perfect' games. The first one had repetitive combat and the hilariously juvenile sex cards. The second one had a much better told story and characters, but an inverted difficulty curve and a majorly disappointing Act 3 and end-fight.
I think the thing about the Witcher series that really stands out is how different it feels from other games in terms of atmosphere and setting. Characters are quite well fleshed out, and the supporting cast makes 'sense'. There is poverty and stupidity and evil, just like in the real world. Most importantly, they spent some real effort into making Geralt gruff, complex, but ultimately very likable. The guy who voices him should get an award of some sort... the last time I remember such a great performance was either Garrett in Thief or, of course, Jennifer Hale in Mass Effect.
I'm amused by all the people in this thread saying the second game was hard, though. It was hard up until about the end of the first act. Once you realize that Quen (the blue damage shield) is ridiculously overpowered, the game becomes a cakewalk. The fight on the castle walls at the end of Act 2 became a total button mash: Swing sword, build up adrenaline, unleash combo for auto-kills, while keeping Quen up to stun NPCs that actually hit you (thus building up adrenaline). The tactical challenge of the earlier levels completely disappears.
Did you just list polish as being a reason not to play this game? Seems a little contrived. Also, I'm sure there are plenty of games that come out of places like Japan with shittier translations than this that don't get as much flak. For some reason people just tend to find those funny rather than game breaking.Vrach said:
Fixed.Heroic One said:
Seriously though, this is what bothers you? What about the abhorrent racism towards non-human characters in the game? Oh, I suppose that doesn't bother you because elves and dwarves aren't real... OH WAIT, neither is anyone else!
The mistreatment of characters in the context of a story isn't something to be offended by. It highlights these issues and says "THIS IS BAD" "PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE TREATED LIKE THIS". Also, yes, a lot of women in the game are potrayed in a rather unsavoury manner, but some of the most powerful poeple in the story happen to be women too.
I was kind of hoping you meant the book series. Certainly worth a read if you're a fantasy fan, although I can't vouch for the quality of translations.
As for the games, the first one is, in retrospect, not really that fun to play and my laptop is just short of minimum requirements for the second one. However good The Witcher 2 may be, I'll have to get a job before I can play it.
As for the games, the first one is, in retrospect, not really that fun to play and my laptop is just short of minimum requirements for the second one. However good The Witcher 2 may be, I'll have to get a job before I can play it.
I still need to pick up Witcher 2, but I've been playing the original (well, DCEE technically) and I really like it. Combat finds a happy medium between stat based and entirely your own skill based, the story is pretty cool, and Geralt is one of my favourite characters ever. I've been recommending it to people left, right and centre since I started.
He did say 'this kind of game'. JRPGS and whatever others you care to include are often quite far removed from their Western counterparts once you get past the very basic RPG mechanics that often cross over.Legion IV said:
EDIT: Also, Elder Scrolls, linear RPG?
Really? I think linear is the last word I would use to describe any Elder Scrolss game.
I didn't. I hated the shameless recycling of maps. I wrote this in my last post though, so I'm sure you knew that.Kurai Angelo said:
I found the characters, and their stories, to be engaging. I also found the faster pace, reduced focus on micromanaging, and cooler looks of the combat quite pleasing. I liked the new, more distinct look of the Qunari and the Elves. I liked how your companions would have homes of their own which you were encouraged to visit. I liked the implementation of the conversation wheel (even though more than a few of Hawke's lines were a bit on the awful side).
And so on, and so forth.
While I adore the witcher series, the game has no inherent right to be more popular than it is now. Especially when the presented project is in many ways deeply flawed as a game and largely fondly remembered because of a few narrative points.
As an example, why does the witcher insist that the correct way for the game to play is to be at its hardest from the start? Even if I learned nothing about how to play, the game you play at the end is, simply put, easier to play.
As an example, why does the witcher insist that the correct way for the game to play is to be at its hardest from the start? Even if I learned nothing about how to play, the game you play at the end is, simply put, easier to play.