Witcher 1 Combat

[Jiffex]

1. Well, actually, over the time you learn some more sword skills and Signs. That helps make it somewhat more interesting. Plus more potions and poisons and needs to use them, so if you're not playing on easy you have to actually think it through. But the core principle doesn't change, of course.

Over all, I actually find this combat system a lot more tolerable than the piece of shit that is TW2 combat. Not a masterpiece, but rather well done.

2. The character dialogue? Cringe-worthy. The plot itself? Actually pretty good. The world and the atmosphere? So thick and delicious you can mistake them for ice cream. Would be totally worth it even with TW2 combat.

3. More or less, although you might find yourself questioning a lot o things. "Who's this crowned fella that likes Geralt so much? Why's Geralt sleeping with this redhead girl? What's the issue with the elf guys anyway?"

I find it interesting how people decide they should go play Witcher 1 first...

Dammit Charcharo, most of The Witcher books are wastepaper, so stop advertising them. We talked about this!

The games are only an adaption of the books not a sequel or follow on. That's like saying it's depressing that people
watch Game of Thrones instead of reading ASOIAF.

And you sir CLEARLY never read any of them. The games are an adaptation of the SETTING, not the books themselves. There is literally not a single scene or plot thread that takes place both in the game and in the book. All the events of all the games are taking place long after Geralt's "death". There is only this one time when Geralt has to again lift a curse from the Kings daughter, just like in the very first short story. But it's explicitly a different occurrence and all the issue is filled with deja vu and all the character take it like "what, she got cursed AGAIN?"
So no, the games are not following plot of the original source, like the GoT show tries with the books.

Shame on you.

I've read the Last Wish and Blood of Elves and I'm getting the others soon. And the only comparison I was making between GoT and The Witcher was that saying not reading The Witcher series before playing the games is like not reading ASOIAF before watching the show, but I guess a better series would be Tales of Dunk and Egg as that happens before the events in the show.

 

[Beliyal]

I saw both The Last Wish (The first book)and Sword Of Destiny (the most recent English translation) in a popular UK bookshop today. All English translations are available on both the UK and the US Amazon sites as well. They're at least as available as any other popular fantasy series from where I am. I can't speak for translations to other languages and what not of course, but if you're looking for the English ones they're looking for you as well

That's true, I'll probably get them from Amazon one day. The only problem is shipping. Damn shipping prices sometimes get higher than the product itself.

We have books in English in some bookstores here, but so far I haven't seen The Witcher. Maybe we'll get it one day, we have a popular bookstore/gamestore with tons of foreign books, I think it would probably be possible to order through them instead of Amazon. I just went to check their site and two books from the series are listed, but they are not in stock in any of the physical stores or online. I'll think about ordering from them, maybe the shipping won't be as high.

Problem is, reading books as a past time is on a decline

Unfortunately true as well. A shame really.

 

[TheSlothOverlord]

Disclaimer: I'm a huge Witcher fan, so take my words with a pinch of salt.

1. The combat doesn't really change but I actually liked it - especially the group style. There's just something satisfying about Geralt nonchalantly hitting everyone around him with a sword. That said Igni is just overpowered. If you max it out then you should be able to breeze through the rest of the game, even on hard difficulty.
2. I think the story is fairly good, although for me the main draw was getting to meet all the characters again. There is a nice twist at the end of the game, although I don't know how much you are into twists...
I have to say though, that in the first game the devs are incredibly heavy-handed with the references. The game is kind of like an overexcited puppy constantly yelling "REMEMBER THIS?! REMEMBER THIS?!" Yes game, I remember, I read the books. Some of them twice.
3. In general yes. While there is an overarching plot in between the games, the first Witcher kind of acts more like a setup. THere are some references to the earlier title in Witcher 2, but it's honestly not that strongly connected. If you skip to Witcher 2 immediately you might be a bit confused at first, but you should figure things out well enough. If anything there's probably some summary on the Internetz.
4. I would certainly recommend the books, but the thing is, that not all of them have been translated into English yet. So far five out of the seven are translated: The Last Wish, Sword of Destiny, Blood of the Elves, Time of Contempt and Baptism of Fire (this is the chronological order of the plot).
The ones still left are The Tower of the Swallow and Lady of the Lake (roughly translating). The Last Wish and Sword of Destiny are the two first books. They are collections of short stories which act as a setup: the main characters, their relations and the setting are introduced in these. The latter 5 books are the Witcher Saga "proper".
And well, one of the strong points of the original was Sapkowski's writing style: flowing between poetic and downright vulgar Sapkowski really liked to play around with the language. However, I have no idea how well that was translated into English.
If you wish at some point to read the books then let me warn you: In Witcher 1, in act 4, in the little village the bartender can tell you a "little story". Do not ask him! He'll spoil you the entire saga!
Well, that's enough fanboying for now I guess ;P.

 

[iLikeHippos]

1. No. It'll remain a headache until the end of the game.

2. If it was a terribly good story, you'd be better off buying the book the game was based on, or watch a Letsplay of it. That way, you don't need to be hassled by the game interfering.

3. No idea - never played those two, in fear that they'd be as monotonous as the first one. I hear somewhat good news about them, however.

Sucks to disappoint you, mate. Welcome to the club.

 

[Denamic]

I actually kinda liked The Witcher's combat. You had to know which sword to use with what style against any kind of group of enemies.

Not really. Silver for monsters, steel for everything else. Just focus on the group style. It's accurate enough for fast enemies and strong enough to take down heavy enemies if you put all your points into it. An additional benefit is that swarming enemies quickly get reduced into paste with that much focus into the group style.

 

[MysticSlayer]

1. Does combat evolve beyond monotonously clicking on the enemy in time with the mouse thing, occasionally changing stance to suit the type of enemy you're facing?

Depends mostly on difficulty. Signs and potions will mix things up, but at least on the lower difficulties, they aren't necessary in most fights. Some of the later fights do require you to consider your position in relation to all the enemies, as simply running in with group style won't always get you out alive. For the most part, though, the actual swordplay stays the same throughout.

2. If combat does remain this boring, would you say that the story and world of the first one make up for it? I mean, Mass Effect 1's combat was arse as well, but the lore and characters gave me enough motivation to slog through it at least twice.

For what each of them do, I would say that The Witcher and Mass Effect are on the same level in terms of world and story. Just don't expect The Witcher to be Mass Effect, as it works on a much smaller scale.

3. Would the latter games be at all playable/comprehensible if I skipped straight to Witcher 2 or 3?

I can't say anything for The Witcher 3, but you should be able to make it through The Witcher 2 without much trouble. Just don't expect the gameplay to improve that much. I would even say the first game was better. The first game had at least some appeal with needing to understand what weapon, stance, signs, and potions to use, and it served its purpose of complementing the world. The second game was just awful with practically no redeeming factor, especially if you've played plenty of action games.

But The Witcher has never really been about the gameplay. It is about the world and story, and if you can focus on that, then you should be good. Considering you said that you were able to slog through Mass Effect's gameplay for how great the world and story are, I would say that it shouldn't be too hard for you to enjoy The Witcher games.