What did you all think of the Witcher 3?

[Trunkage]

Loved the game till Viking Island. That was the pits. I got into a groove with the game so much, Id deliberately sought out enemies that where ten levels higher just for a challenge. Group fight were way trickier than individuals, even on low levels. I'd have like to see more of a change with stances for group fights like in earlier versions.

The actual environment is not that interesting. Being based more realistically, there is no incentive to visit places. Village look exactlt the same and are just places to get quest. I know its supposed to be in the same country but all the cities I lived in have all felt different. Not the case in the Witcher.

Now, the Capital are different and something to behold. They actually feel like cities and are way better than the average fantasy game (eg. Skyrim.) Many of the quests are way fleshed out but are ruined but some utterly stupendous final decisions. Should a woman die or go back to a known, repeated, confessed Domestic Violence perpetrator. Should you let a whole village die or a couple of kids, when you KNOW there are Witcher friends around that will help you. Some calls out rape, you step and you find out that it's a prostitute doing rape fantasy. In public. Who criticizes you for stepping in when calling out rape.

But that drunken scene. Awesome. Some of the best bits in ANY game.

Also, just to make sure its clear, Skillege. It turned a really good game into a 9. Still the best game of the year. Still have plenty to improve on

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Also, just to make sure its clear, Skillege. It turned a really good game into a 9.

I loved Skellige even more than Velen/Novigrad. Every time I replay the game I can't wait to get to Skellige. It's really weird how even among the fans of The Witcher 3, there are so many different opinions about it.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Great character and writing, boring everything else. Calling the combat shallow is overpraising it, you can get trough every encounter by just doing "attack, attack, dodge", 100% of the time it works 100% of the time. I killed enemy that were so over leveled compared to me that they had a skull instead of level indicator on the highest difficulty this way. I did that because the enemy distribution is complete crap in the game and you'll have high level stuff right next to low level for no reason whatsoever. Side quest are insanely repetitive, most of them follow the exact same pattern where you just follow red mist around, plus you always end up fighting a color variant of the same 4 enemy, the game even makes fun of that, taunting you at one point with a dragon fight before, nope color variant of an enemy you fought 20 time already. Looting/skill is pointless, no matter how you develop Gerald you have to use the sword, on higher difficulty you can use literally every grenade you have on an enemy and it'll just tickle them. Environment lack variety, hope you like forest cause that's like 70% of the game.

And while the writing is great, the main story is awful, it's just a poorly reasoned justification to stitch a bunch of unrelated side quest together, 2/3 of it is useless like the entire bloody baron portion which literally serves no purpose other than having you randomly encounter a character that will be useful later on. I keep hearing people praise the consequence in the game, but I freaking killed the king and nothing changed.

Almost exactly this, solid writing with below average gameplay and poor/repetitive quest structure.

 

[Trunkage]

Almost exactly this, solid writing with below average gameplay and poor/repetitive quest structure.

Oh forgot about this. How does needing to use the Witcher senses added to the average Fetch/Kill quest make them so much better then Skyrim? It doesn't. I makes them longer. Also, most quest involve you HAVING to talk to someone to figure out what it is. Your a god gamn Witcher, surely your smart enough to figure it out by yourself. Give the option to talk, sure. Dont make it mandatory.

Also, dont make me go to town before spawning events. If I happen to fix a problem just on random adventuring, let me finish the quest. The amount of times I had to retread the game because it doesnt reward any exploring, especially before picking up quests.

 

[Ravinoff]

Couldn't get into it at all, thanks to the utterly godawful controls. Everything is lurchy, ungainly and overcomplicated not only by comparison with my third-person fantasy action benchmark (the Souls games, particularly DS3) but even compared to its direct predecessor. Witcher 2 had numerous issues, but it handled faaaaar better than 3 IMO.

 

[dscross]

Couldn't get into it at all, thanks to the utterly godawful controls. Everything is lurchy, ungainly and overcomplicated not only by comparison with my third-person fantasy action benchmark (the Souls games, particularly DS3) but even compared to its direct predecessor. Witcher 2 had numerous issues, but it handled faaaaar better than 3 IMO.

Doesn't sound like you gave it much of a chance to me. You have to get through white orchard before it clicks for most people. It's definitely not overcomplicated.

 

[Dalisclock]

Never played it. I tried playing the first Witcher game many years ago, found the voice acting, plot and combat incredibly dull and frustrating. Uninstalled it and never bothered with the series again. The amount of dislike I had for Geralt in just the introduction content was so massive that I had zero interest in ever experiencing his story.

The first Witcher is incredibly clunky and honestly I don't blame you(or anyone for that matter) for not digging it. After playing through the first one, I was relieved to see the 2nd game relieved a lot of the issues the first one had and the 3rd game improves a lot on the 2nd after that.

I pretty much tell anyone to just skip the first game in favor of he second or even the third. Almost nothing from Witcher 1 is so much as mentioned in Witcher 3 anyway and it's more useful to know the events of 2 then of 1.

 

[dscross]

Probably most overrated game released this gen.

yeah it has nice lore and nice universe but its another boring open world game with terrible combat and controls.

now im so glad Cyberpunk is First person. it wont have bad controls like witcher 3 and probably be a successor of original Deus Ex. and thats why it looks like best CDPR game.

Why do you only seem to like FPS games? It's very narrow.

 

[dscross]

I guess this isn?t all that surprising. [https://www.engadget.com/amp/2019/08/30/cyberpunk-developer-will-keep-making-witcher-games/] We can only hope the series moves forward in a meaningful way, and only when the time is right.

 

[dscross]

I guess this isn?t all that surprising. [https://www.engadget.com/amp/2019/08/30/cyberpunk-developer-will-keep-making-witcher-games/] We can only hope the series moves forward in a meaningful way, and only when the time is right.

Hmmm, the issue is that the combination of the main game and the Blood and Wine DLC ended it in such a definite way that it's going to be hard for the story not to feel forced. But saying that, Geralt died at the end of the books and that didn't stop them making the games (non-canon) sequels.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

It can be a prequel and it can be a spin-off. I wouldn't mind a Witcher game set during the golden age of witchers, before Geralt and even Vesemir were even born. That could be a lot of fun.

 

[MrCalavera_v1legacy]

I guess this isn?t all that surprising. [https://www.engadget.com/amp/2019/08/30/cyberpunk-developer-will-keep-making-witcher-games/] We can only hope the series moves forward in a meaningful way, and only when the time is right.

Hmmm, the issue is that the combination of the main game and the Blood and Wine DLC ended it in such a definite way that it's going to be hard for the story not to feel forced. But saying that, Geralt died at the end of the books and that didn't stop them making the games (non-canon) sequels.

It's only an issue if they plan to stick to Geralt as main protagonist. Which they aren't.

 

[Dalisclock]

It can be a prequel and it can be a spin-off. I wouldn't mind a Witcher game set during the golden age of witchers, before Geralt and even Vesemir were even born. That could be a lot of fun.

I haven't played it, but they did do Thronebreaker, which takes place alongside the main series, appaerently. I'm cool with seeing other types of games use the same setting.

 

[dscross]

I guess this isn?t all that surprising. [https://www.engadget.com/amp/2019/08/30/cyberpunk-developer-will-keep-making-witcher-games/] We can only hope the series moves forward in a meaningful way, and only when the time is right.

Hmmm, the issue is that the combination of the main game and the Blood and Wine DLC ended it in such a definite way that it's going to be hard for the story not to feel forced. But saying that, Geralt died at the end of the books and that didn't stop them making the games (non-canon) sequels.

I haven?t read the books or even finished 3 yet, but I?ve heard the games kinda pick up after the books, and in the original Geralt is discovered practically dead in a ditch and *brought back to life*.

It can be a prequel and it can be a spin-off. I wouldn't mind a Witcher game set during the golden age of witchers, before Geralt and even Vesemir were even born. That could be a lot of fun.

Any of those really would be welcome. I like those types of stories where well-established characters are alluded to as legends of sorts. It would be cool to run across Geralt while playing as another character, or at least hear and see evidence and effects of some of his other good deeds we?ve never heard about.

 

[Dalisclock]

Hmmm, the issue is that the combination of the main game and the Blood and Wine DLC ended it in such a definite way that it's going to be hard for the story not to feel forced. But saying that, Geralt died at the end of the books and that didn't stop them making the games (non-canon) sequels.

I haven?t read the books or even finished 3 yet, but I?ve heard the games kinda pick up after the books, and in the original Geralt is discovered practically dead in a ditch and *brought back to life*.

I haven't read the books either, but from what I've read, apparently Geralt was dead for reals in the final book and the games found a way to bring him back to life(with some shenanigans with the Wild Hunt happening between the books and the first Witcher game).

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I'd be pretty disappointed if the sequel takes place in the standard medieval Witcher world as W3 basically setup Ciri as Doctor Who where she can basically go to any world imaginable.

 

[dscross]

I haven?t read the books or even finished 3 yet, but I?ve heard the games kinda pick up after the books, and in the original Geralt is discovered practically dead in a ditch and *brought back to life*.

That's true, but he's definitely dead in the books. The games are a continuation of it for game's sake but the author has said his last book is the canon ending.

 

[dscross]

I guess this isn?t all that surprising. [https://www.engadget.com/amp/2019/08/30/cyberpunk-developer-will-keep-making-witcher-games/] We can only hope the series moves forward in a meaningful way, and only when the time is right.

Hmmm, the issue is that the combination of the main game and the Blood and Wine DLC ended it in such a definite way that it's going to be hard for the story not to feel forced. But saying that, Geralt died at the end of the books and that didn't stop them making the games (non-canon) sequels.

It's only an issue if they plan to stick to Geralt as main protagonist. Which they aren't.

Who will be then? It doesn't explicitly say they won't use Geralt on that link in the post.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

I haven?t read the books or even finished 3 yet, but I?ve heard the games kinda pick up after the books, and in the original Geralt is discovered practically dead in a ditch and *brought back to life*.

That's true, but he's definitely dead in the books. The games are a continuation of it for game's sake but the author has said his last book is the canon ending.

Yeah, but the author is kind of a self-important ****.