So this is like £22 on the Xbone store at the moment, is it worth my hard earned shekels? Fallout 4 left a bitter taste in my mouth and now I wanna play a real RPG. Basically is it fucking good or what? I never much cared for it earlier in the year and don't even know that much about it other than its an RPG and the third Witcher game.
Personally I bought it and played for like 2 hours and was BORED as FUCK. The combat is repetitive and just so much goes on and it's hard to keep track. I'm sure others will love it but I just thought it was too boring to waste my time on. IMO
>>321881798
Lemme guess, you haven't even played TW1 and 2?
why do fags wanna skip entire series just to play the latest, over hyped crap?
TW1:EE is the best game in the series, and literally just couple bucks now. Get it, stop whining, and play it. It's super comfy. The end game will make you regret any early whining you may come up with.
>>321884638
After playing witcher 1 and 2 I had no desire to slog through witcher 3.
I found gameplay and plot kinda weak in the first two, and witcher 3 had the same problems imo. Sidequests and worldbuilding were pretty good, again just like the first two. I feel like 3 just didn't offer anything substantial over 1&2.
But back to the question, it'd be okay for people to start at wild hunt, they'll miss out on a few characters and references but it'd be ok
>>321885775
...and the only great game in the series.
>>321881798
Is the expansion pass on sale? HoS was apparently very good, and I'd rather just get both for cheap if I can.
>>321881798
If you're not a Witcher fan already, either from the earlier games or the novels, it could be hit or miss. Can't you rent it or something?
>>321881798
>Basically is it fucking good or what?
yes. GOTY tbqh
I got this on release by a friend, never touched it until 3 days ago, have been playing nonstop.
Do not listen to anyone who talks down on this, if you like RPGs, WESTERN Rpgs then you will love it.
Weebs are a bunch of faggots anyway ( I realize the irony on being on a chan and calling you faggots)
>>321886757
I want to be friends with your friend.
>>321884638
I played Witcher 1. It's very overrated. It has a nice atmosphere and start. Mid game is boring, except for the women you get to fuck (the interactions with them felt very realistic), end game is better than mid but not as good as the first except for the side quests which were better than main quest.
The last fight was alright and overrated.
The problem with the first game main quest for the most part is that it wants to make you care about characters you don't care about. I don't give a shit about the order, I don't give a shit about the elves (save for the hot elf chick you can fuck). I haven't played Witcher 3 yet, but I think that's why people like the game better since the main quests heavily affect characters you care about.
Again, I couldn't care less about the whole non-human vs human thing.
>>321881798
I played it after putting around 60 hours in Fallout 4, I personally liked it a lot more than Fallout 4. It felt like actual effort and care was put into the story, voice acting, and dialogue. I ended up putting 86 hours into the game between the main game and Hearts of Stone, was a really enjoyable experience, my personal goty. I didn't really mind the combat that much, the only issue in my mind is that it does become a bit repetitive and samey, but I didn't hate it or anything.
>>321887496
sounds like you played the first game a bit... odd.
It never really forces you to take any sides, and there's a lot of stuff you can miss on the first playthrough.
I enjoyed TW1 a ton because I like just exploring and living in its world. And doing the Witcher's job. I also dig the gameplay much more than the consolized crap the sequels have.
>overrated
uhh... nope? Most people seem to plain out dismiss its existence and call it 2outdated.
>>321884638
I tried Witcher 1, but the combat just seems so shitty right out of the gate.
Does it get better, or is it always "swing your sword, pause the game when the enemy is swinging at you, change your stance, parry, repeat?"
>>321888190
The game improves tremendously towards the end. Unknown to myself, many rookies seem to have problems staying interested for the first couple "introduction" arcs.
I'd also argue a bit that the game's not exactly about combat per se. There's so much more things to do.
Also you're seriously pausing the game to switch Sword stances? And don't you have any "magic" (signs) yet?
>>321887951
I didn't take any sides and I didn't imply that I did. Again, I couldn't care less about the whole elven vs human thing. Playing neutral was the only "good" option (as in quality).
>>321888631
I have a few but I had to stop playing for a bit to run some errands, and never really got back into it.
I'll get into it again and see if it clicks for me.
>>321888927
>I didn't take any sides and I didn't imply that I did.
your loss. I honestly think that more than half of the appeal of Witcher games were their side quests, some that actually DO evolve into bigger quests that can affect the storyline as well. That, and just being there, enjoying the world and its atmosphere.
I've often compared Witcher to the STALKER trilogy. Both have kinda similar mood, and both have problems with greenhorns either getting raped hard or getting bored of the game within the first few minutes (in goddamn 20+h games!).
>>321889158
As usually in RPG games, the early gear and overall content pales in comparison to late-game items and missions. But like I already implied, Witcher 1 is also very much a "create your own adventure" kind of game, with lots of content to unfold if you so desire.
