Decided to go trough the withcer saga because I wanted to play the third one.
I going trough the second title right now.
I have to say it was very difficult for me to get used to the first one, expecially the combat, it felt a bit outdated but so far it's the one that left the best impression.
For TW2 tough I can't find a single redeeming quality,
the unresponsive movement make the combat slow and clunky, they just feel unfit for this type of combat mechanics,
I can roll away from combat but I can't take a step forward when I make a enemy stagger,
and if I try the enemy is on his feet before geralt even starts moving.
The locking system doesn't work very good and many times I find myself swinging the wrong direction and there's no way to break the chain of attacks leaving me exposed.
When the terrain is uneven and the enemy is on slightly lower position than geralt he just misses completely.
Then there's the whole thing about how the the journal/quest/story progression works wich is a clusterfuck that I don't even feel like talking about.
Overall I can't find anything good about it, the story is not even delivered that nicely.
Am I going to be as disappointed with TW3?
>>321419492
I personally started playing witcher-games couple years ago, and TW1:EE is still my favorite. It's just so comfy, open and atmospheric game, with plenty of ways to experience and act in situations. Literally played it 4 times in a row within the first couple months.
In the comparison, TW2 was a HUGE let down. The controls feel clunkier, UI design is a total (consolized) mess, the world's tiny and linear, there's goddamn QTEs, and even the plot / characters feel downgraded to Dragon Age's level.
TW3 seems like a small step to right direction again, but its console-roots still show.
>>321419492
>the unresponsive movement make the combat slow and clunky
>The locking system doesn't work very good
You're not going to like TW3 either.
Personally I'm not liking the journal related stuff either, it feels like the game assumes I already know everything about the lore and does a piss poor job helping me get into it.
>>321419492
Look up combat mods for TW2, there is one that gets rid of the soft/auto-lock and let's you slash precisely where you want.
>>321419492
Is disliking Witcher combat a meme or something? When I played Witcher 2 I very much enjoyed it. I don't know what games you are all comparing it too.
Witcher 2 was poorly designed and the engine wasn't mature yet.
Witcher 3 is a bit better but the overall design is still very flawed, Witcher 1 is still the best they made.
>>321420760
>I don't know what games you are all comparing it too.
Why would I tough?
I feel like a game should be able to stand on its own without being compared to other games,
TW1 combat was the hardest to get into, but despise that I grew to enjoy it because it took an interesting twist respect other rpgs, specially because it forced you to "get ready" for a fight.
If you want I can say that TW2 feels like a copy of dark souls, where they give you a combat gameplay that feels sort of similar but then you're not put in the condition to use it like dark souls does.
Well first time playing W2 I hated the changes from W1, but after some time I got used to it.
talk about Witcher 1 gameplay, it can litteraly be played with only the mouse, I prefer the 2 on this point, it's a bit hard to get used to it, but in the end, pretty fun, a lot more than the first one.
I never understood why people shat on TW1's combat, they're probably consolebabbys who didn't grow up with PC games where your only option was KB+M
I got the opposite problem, i played the second at a friend's house and i found it very engaging.
I bought both on steam and started playing the first.
I was bored to death in 5 minutes. The combat is slow, sluggish, even though it functions well i couldn't get any enjoyment out of it, the dated graphics were a pain for my eyes, especially during the cutscenes. Overall i didn't find it enjoyable, maybe if i had more patience i'd dig it, but... it just doesn't click with me at first.
>>321419492
Honestly you won't be OP. I found the Witcher 2 to be a 7/10 experience, it was good but nothing spectacular. However The Witcher 3 is a definite 10/10 experience, and arguably the best RPG in recent years.
>>321422317
> the dated graphics were a pain for my eyes
holy shit underage get out
>>321420760
I personally despised almost every moment of TW2. the only game I compared it to was TW1, which I loved.
>>321421578
>TW1 combat was the hardest to get into, but despise that I grew to enjoy it because it took an interesting twist respect other rpgs, specially because it forced you to "get ready" for a fight.
Huh, I always considered TW1's combat generic as hell for a CRPG titles. Maybe it's just the way I play these games.
>>321422195
>talk about Witcher 1 gameplay, it can litteraly be played with only the mouse,
Something I missed while playing TW2. That, and sword stances.
>>321422317
TW1 is not a game that can be judged by the first 30 minutes, and definitely not by the first 5 minutes. I actually hate this need for huge "instantly grabbing" spectacles in modern games, since it usually means linearity, scripted world, and slowing tempo towards the end.
TW1 is the total opposite. It expect the played to engage time into it, do his own adventures, and rewards you with a superb end-game content.
>>321422317
The first 5 minutes are not even a tutorial. The game actually starts when you leave kaer mohren, the first part is a shit tutorial that no one likes.
>>321422775
Sword stances ?
I laughed my arse off watching Geralt moving his sword above his head.
I know it's the same thing in the book, but god, he looks really dumb doing it in-game.
>>321420209
timing-based combat was fun. yeah I said it.
>>321423290
Hating on anything that requires timing has become a meme because people think that timing = QTE.
I think they actually toned down the aggressiveness of enemies in TW2. I remember playing it during release and the fucking elves in the forest will punish you hard if you make a poor attack. Combat consisted mostly of
>Rolling
>Rolling
>Rolling
>Stab
>Rolling
>Rolling
>Rolling
Worse, the forest was so densely packed, you have the tendency to aggro 2~3 groups of enemies with all that rolling action.
The other fucked up part of the gameplay was the leveling, as you level, you gain exponential power. Towards the end of the game, combat is joke since you can easily instant-kill many foes at once. The best comparison is the 2 Letho fights. The early one is one of the hardest fights in the game while the final was piss easy.
IMO, combat and leveling, CDPR never got these 2 elements right throughout all 3 witcher games.
>>321419492
>The locking system
Found your problem, you're playing with a gamepad you huge dumb casual.
Despite all the memers who will disagree TW3 actually has wonderful combat.
The problem in 2 was both enemy AI and rolling. Your only defensive technique was to roll and because the enemies would always ball up in a group you really didn't get anything done by rolling. The basic roll was too short and didn't get you any advantage where as the skilled up version rolled you too far and thus completely out of the combat zone.
In 3 you get a working parry AND a sidestep that fixes by itself 75% of the combat issues. The only real downside is that even though the AI won't ball up like TW2 they can sometimes be too passive.
TW1's combat literally put me to sleep. The timing was monotonous and unchanging, and the enemies were laughably easy. Even in harder difficulties it only translated to them taking longer to kill.
>>321419492
I'm about to start W1 but I hear the combat sucks.
Should I put it on easy and breeze through it with my brain turned off, or put it on hard so I'm challenged and stay stimulated?
I played them all the way through
In my experience people who played 1 unanimously agree that 2 did a lot of shitty design decisions. at least 3 went to great lengths to undo some of those design choices but it still has some problems. But if you liked 1 then chances are you'll like 3. Combat isn't the same but you'll enjoy the familiar atmosphere that was completely absent in 2
>>321426425
I tried putting it on hard and found it completely UNstimulating, so I personally suggest Easy.
There's no high skill ceiling or anything, there's nothing there to master.
>>321419492
yep, it only gets better once you have a few levels under your belt
CD project need to step their game up and let us side step and shit instead of mashing left click
>>321426625
you can side step in tw3 though. that's one of the main reasons its way better than 2, sidestep is way better than rolling.
Can I fuck either Succubi in Witcher 3
>>321427080
No, in fact, they both hate you for some reason.
>>321426425
Just play on normal and upgrade the fuck out of Igni as soon as you can.
Igni is overpowered as shit in W1:EE.
So long as you use the right sword stances and have Igni upgraded combat doesn't take too long
>>321427165
Wow what the shit.
>>321426298
The combat isn't really that great though. It's like an improved version of Batman's Arkham combat. The magic and potions make it better.
It's a great game and a great game series, but combat isn't its strong point. The story and choice and freedom is.
Well known copypasta
B8 thread
>>321426503
I still have to play 3 and this makes me very happy. I absolutely loved 1 but 2 felt so... dry.
>>321427427
Yeah, I think the best praise you can give the combat in TW3 is that it's "functional". It gives you the impression that if you use the correct signs, oils, bombs and moves on specific enemies, you can defeat them more effectively. There isn't really much depth to it though.
>>321423107
>>321427427
It's literally the best combat in the WRPG genre.
Think about that for a minute.
>>321423107
I suppose you're an expert on swordfighting?
>>321426298
Witcher 3 combat needed more variety since it boiled down to the same shit every time.
Smoothest combat despite that. I also didn't like how most of the decoctions were useless and you could get infinite of bombs and so forth with alcohol.
>>321419492
I found TW1 combat annoying and meh
I found TW2 combat (with pirouette mod) meh but not in the way
I found TW3 combat to be very pretty, meh as far as "feel" goes, but not in the way at all
All in all - I don't care for either, since the games are really not about it, TW3 is my GOTY for sure though.
Still the same lackluster action, but extremely pretty to look at.
>>321428357
Yeah I liked the Witcher 3 combat, but after awhile it kind of all felt the same, kind of the reason I didn't want to do NG+. Still really enjoyed W3.
>>321419492
>Overall I can't find anything good about it, the story is not even delivered that nicely.
The main story and character writting, while beggining as a bit of a clusterfuck, are probably best in TW2 out of the entire series. Definitely characters - there are some neat characters in TW3 for sure, but nothing really on par TW2. Other than that, I'd argue it's the weakest game in the series, felt like a practice they made for TW3 rather than as a meaningful progression of the series.
I still did like combat in TW2 more than in TW1 - when you don't abuse Quen and take good use of all the tools the game gives you (bombs, signs, traps etc...) it can be at times surprisingly satisfying. But then you run into some awful encounter in a level with poor geometry and it turns into an exercise in frustration.
I still think it's worth persisting through it, if for nothing else than for the story and for some of the most beautiful locations in the entire franchise.
TW3 felt like a flat out improvement on TW2 in just about every respect, aside from the alchemy, main story line and arguably the characters. The combat is still not great, but the main issue with TW3's combat is not that it's in any way broken, or weak - it's simply the fact that it's complexity does not support the games actual lenght. In other words, you'll see everything the combat has to offer in 20-30 hours max, and the remaining 100 hours of the game it will feel like going through the motions.
TW3 also has a particularly weak loot reward model. But that should only bother you if you explore for trinkets only. The alchemy is sadly as bad as it was in TW2, but then again there is a mod which basically implements TW1's alchemy into the game, if you want.
Still can't believe people had/are having trouble with TW2's combat, even without the tutorial it's simple as fuck, unless you're playing on the highest difficulty level
>>321428357
Definitely, the asstastic alchemy watered (or "alcoholed") down sucked ass.
>gajillion lootable ingredients
>no reason to EVER loot them after the first few (hell you could just buy from herbalists and never harvest a single thing)
Makes me feel like they just decided to cut it short at the end of development and made this babby shit.
>>321428604
>The main story and character writting, while beggining as a bit of a clusterfuck, are probably best in TW2 out of the entire series
I disagree, it's better in TW1.
In TW2 the writing not only is a clusterfuck, but it's also lacking on any level.
And I have to say that even if it was any good it would be behind a wall of fucking stupid bullshit that is the clusterfuck of delivery that this game is.
>>321423107
go back to dark souls
>>321428604
I played W2 on hard the first go and dark the second go and another thing I liked more about it than 3 was that the combat remained consistently challenging through the game.
Sure in Loc Muinne the arachas and endregas are easy to kill but the dragon and operator/lizardmen cave are both very difficult. 3's combat just became really easy after level 15-20.
Boss fights needed some work in 3 as well, Eredin's spells were so hilariously easy to dodge that I don't know what there were thinking. His spell animations should've been 2-3 times faster so you can't just roll twice at hit him before he can cast more than once.
>>321423107
He doesn't use his sword like that in the books, it's just made up for TW1. If W3 had more pirouettes it would be how he fights in the books.
>>321428975
I can understand why it would be a clusterfuck if you've played it once, but if you play both paths I don't see why it wouldn't make sense. 3 had a lot more asspulls and holes in the story/choices than 2 did.
>>321428975
agreed
tw2's story was good but the loc muinne chapter just felt shit
tw1's feels very well paced once you get over the fetch quests and first chapter. does well to keep you engaged and there are great callbacks like seeing the old castle in the intro and then going there in chapter 5, or getting to do the striga fight you saw early on, or the numerous appearances of the wild hunt throughout. definitely felt like a lot of thought went into the game. and the more i think about the content in that game, and the way the world looked whilst using the decrepit NWN engine, never ceases to amaze me
>>321428975
>I disagree, it's better in TW1.
It really, really isn't. That is actually not even up for a debate. The story in TW1 is really kinda silly, and the characters are frequently lacking, not to mention a whole bunch of really clumsy writing and even entire segments pointlessly taken word-for-word from the original books, which serves as a perfect testament of how much they did not know what to do with the game. I love TW1, god knows I do, but it's painfully obvious that it was the developers maiden voyage, and that they never actually made a definitive decision on how the game should work (particularly in terms of it's relationship to the books).
The story of TW2, the somewhat iffy motivation for Geralt to get endgaged not withstanding, makes easily most sense of the the games, and actually does not go basically full on retarded, unlike TW1 and TW3. Letho is easily the best character in the entire franchise (including the books), and just about every character in that game is absolutely amazing. There are really no equivalents to characters such as Roche, Iorweth, Foltest or Henselth in either TW1 or TW3.
TW1 about two really good characters (Vincent, Sigfried), TW3 has a bit more, but neither game shows such consistency in quality of writing as TW2 does. Not even close.
>>321419492
Despite its flaws, TW1 had the best atmosphere out of the 3 games.
TW2 you can tell they had consoles in mind when making that game. From the combat to the UI, it just felt very consolized. Thankfully they didn't downgrade the graphics on the PC and instead downgraded it when porting to the 360.
>>321429506
I would love it if they remade the witcher 1 with modern graphics and combat system.
>>321429545
>TW1 about two really good characters (Vincent, Sigfried),
Thaler, Carmen, Shani, Zoltan in TW1 was great, Kalkstein, Foltest, all his advisors, Berengar
Hearts of Stone alone is better than anything in the first 2 witchers
>>321429951
Kalkstein was annoying as fuck, Foltest was utterly forgetable, especially compared to TW2, Zoltan is equally good in every single game and TW1 actually has nothing that would compare to the "Getting drunk then going hunt monsters undeground with dwarves" segments, Carmen was on the scene for like 15 mins of time total, and was really only made interesting by proximity to Vincent. I'll give you Thaler, even though he had very little time on screen either.
The primary difference between all of these characters (sans aformentioned Vincent and Sigfried) is simple: none of those actually go through any kind of relevant character ark. Unlike Iorweth, Roche, Letho and others in TW2 . That is what makes TW2 so good, writing-wise. You don't just follow great characters, you follow them through a great character ark. And that is something that TW1 did not really deliver.
>>321430481
>Foltest was utterly forgetable
how? the minute you meet him in game he goes on about how his city is a brothel that needs to be purged. and then makes you lift the curse from his daughter again. he has way more characterisation in chapter 5 and epilogue than he does in tw2. unless you think being cocky and spouting shit while geralt gets his ass handed to him in a courtyard is somehow more interesting.
>TW1 actually has nothing that would compare
inviting carmen/siegfried/zoltan to shani's party
>none of those actually go through any kind of relevant character ark
really?
>>321429545
I hated how the story in tw2 was generic political schemes. I don't give a shit about that and the good thing about tw1 is that while the world around geralt was full of that, he didn't give a shit either. TW1 story felt much more personal, TW2 story felt like political drama shit.
>>321431246
>the minute you meet him in game he goes on about how his city is a brothel that needs to be purged. and then makes you lift the curse from his daughter again.
Yes. That is literally the opposite of what the concept of "characterization" means.
>unless you think being cocky and spouting shit while geralt gets his ass handed to him in a courtyard is somehow more interesting.
Except that is not what is happening in the game. And this is really the problem: you people, you and this >>321431258 moron literally don't know what you are talking about.
>really?
Yes, really. Do you actually understand what these words, like "character ark" or "characterization" actually mean? Because I doubt you actually do. They are not actually empty words, you know.
>>321432339
>why is everyone but me wrong? I must be a genius and everyone else is a retard!
>>321432597
Keep saying that to yourself. I'm sure it's much more convenient than learning the meanings of words that you use without actually understanding them.
>>321432339
just because you watched star wars doesn't mean you're an expert on 'characterisation' and 'character arcs' you fucking moron. plenty of well written characters out there that don't have an 'arc'
