Poll: 35minutes of Witcher 3 gameplay demo (E3)

[endtherapture]

Is it true that most players quit the first Witcher in the first act's swamp lands, almost exactly at the point the story starts rolling?

The second chapter is fucking horrible dude, and I say this as someone who loved the game. Its tedious and even when I played it for the third time I got confused.

Not only am I looking forward to it, but I also believe its going to still the RPG crown from the Elder Scrolls series. (I am NOT referring to ESO, just so we are clear!!)

I cannot wait to play this game!

Don't think so, what won Elder Scrolls the "RPG crown" is its insane mod community. Maybe I'm wrong because CDProjekt have announced mod tools but I can't see this game getting the same size and talent in its modding community.

TW2 had a fairly big mod community for such a closed game. With the open world of TW3 I expect a lot more modding, especially if it gets bigger sales than TW2 and it is easier to mod.

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

It was my most anticipated game of the year, now that it's delayed until 2015 it's my most anticipated game for the rest of this year and next year. Honestly, I'm expecting this to be the action RPG that all other games of the genre in the future will be measured against.

 

[Riff Moonraker]

Is it true that most players quit the first Witcher in the first act's swamp lands, almost exactly at the point the story starts rolling?

The second chapter is fucking horrible dude, and I say this as someone who loved the game. Its tedious and even when I played it for the third time I got confused.

Not only am I looking forward to it, but I also believe its going to still the RPG crown from the Elder Scrolls series. (I am NOT referring to ESO, just so we are clear!!)

I cannot wait to play this game!

Don't think so, what won Elder Scrolls the "RPG crown" is its insane mod community. Maybe I'm wrong because CDProjekt have announced mod tools but I can't see this game getting the same size and talent in its modding community.

For me, the reason they hold the crown is because of how much it feels to me like I am playing some old school D&D that has finally been brought to life. I am sure there are mods out there that even further improve on the RPG aspect of the game, but other than that, mods have no weight on my decision whatsoever. Also, I play on the xbox, so mods arent really an issue, anyway. (Although I do remember some really awesome ones with some of the Star Wars games on the PC, but that was a loooong time ago)

I never played the first Witcher, but had heard about it, so I picked the second one up on the 360, and loved it. I really like the Geralt's universe, and the lore associated with it, and with this one being open world, I think it will take the spot at my top RPG.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

I have the first game installed and the second for my Xbox, but haven't played either of them for more than an hour. I can't really say why, because the setting alone is right up my alley. I enjoy my dark magic medieval stuff, mature stories and Game of Thrones as well, so yeah...

Seems I should give them another try, I am reading a LOT of praise from people who played the games and are interested in the third one. In contrast to other fan bases the community has valid, well rounded arguments for loving the games that I can comprehend. I just need that final kick to start playing.

Is it true that most players quit the first Witcher in the first act's swamp lands, almost exactly at the point the story starts rolling?

PS: Nevertheless, the graphics for the 3rd game look amazing! My PC is so old it can barely handle the first Witcher on 1080. But I can accept low graphics as long as story and atmosphere suck me in.

the first game is ROUGH as shit, and it can get bloody dry right at that second part, so yeah, it's quite understandable when people put the first game down...

that being said, I still enjoyed it once I got the hang of it, HOWEVER, they have a little tidbit in the witcher 2 that catches you up on the story if you didn't play the first game. so if you can't stand it then feel free to jump to the second which is, for most people, leaps and bounds better.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

The voice acting is still wooden, but if they fix the godawful combat I might give this series another try.

Well, Geralt is supposed to be at least slightly autistic(raised by warrior monks, no outside contact, infertile, outcast, etc.), but the other stuff still is on the same level as the witcher 2.

How long did you play into 2 btw? The combat at the beginning is pretty crap, but that's because the levelling early on is piss poor. Getting to about level 11 or so allows you to stop levelling Geralt for him to be a less-shit fighter, and level to turn him into an actually good fighter.

 

[Morgoth780]

I have the first game installed and the second for my Xbox, but haven't played either of them for more than an hour. I can't really say why, because the setting alone is right up my alley. I enjoy my dark magic medieval stuff, mature stories and Game of Thrones as well, so yeah...

Seems I should give them another try, I am reading a LOT of praise from people who played the games and are interested in the third one. In contrast to other fan bases the community has valid, well rounded arguments for loving the games that I can comprehend. I just need that final kick to start playing.

Is it true that most players quit the first Witcher in the first act's swamp lands, almost exactly at the point the story starts rolling?

PS: Nevertheless, the graphics for the 3rd game look amazing! My PC is so old it can barely handle the first Witcher on 1080. But I can accept low graphics as long as story and atmosphere suck me in.

the first game is ROUGH as shit, and it can get bloody dry right at that second part, so yeah, it's quite understandable when people put the first game down...

that being said, I still enjoyed it once I got the hang of it, HOWEVER, they have a little tidbit in the witcher 2 that catches you up on the story if you didn't play the first game. so if you can't stand it then feel free to jump to the second which is, for most people, leaps and bounds better.

To be honest I thought the story of the first Witcher was better than the second and much more complete.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

I have the first game installed and the second for my Xbox, but haven't played either of them for more than an hour. I can't really say why, because the setting alone is right up my alley. I enjoy my dark magic medieval stuff, mature stories and Game of Thrones as well, so yeah...

Seems I should give them another try, I am reading a LOT of praise from people who played the games and are interested in the third one. In contrast to other fan bases the community has valid, well rounded arguments for loving the games that I can comprehend. I just need that final kick to start playing.

Is it true that most players quit the first Witcher in the first act's swamp lands, almost exactly at the point the story starts rolling?

PS: Nevertheless, the graphics for the 3rd game look amazing! My PC is so old it can barely handle the first Witcher on 1080. But I can accept low graphics as long as story and atmosphere suck me in.

the first game is ROUGH as shit, and it can get bloody dry right at that second part, so yeah, it's quite understandable when people put the first game down...

that being said, I still enjoyed it once I got the hang of it, HOWEVER, they have a little tidbit in the witcher 2 that catches you up on the story if you didn't play the first game. so if you can't stand it then feel free to jump to the second which is, for most people, leaps and bounds better.

To be honest I thought the story of the first Witcher was better than the second and much more complete.

which is fine, I did enjoy the first one as about as much as the second one, the story might've been better but you gotta admit the pacing in the first oh...half of the game is really wonk, not for the less stubborn of your average rpg players.

 

[Morgoth780]

I have the first game installed and the second for my Xbox, but haven't played either of them for more than an hour. I can't really say why, because the setting alone is right up my alley. I enjoy my dark magic medieval stuff, mature stories and Game of Thrones as well, so yeah...

Seems I should give them another try, I am reading a LOT of praise from people who played the games and are interested in the third one. In contrast to other fan bases the community has valid, well rounded arguments for loving the games that I can comprehend. I just need that final kick to start playing.

Is it true that most players quit the first Witcher in the first act's swamp lands, almost exactly at the point the story starts rolling?

PS: Nevertheless, the graphics for the 3rd game look amazing! My PC is so old it can barely handle the first Witcher on 1080. But I can accept low graphics as long as story and atmosphere suck me in.

the first game is ROUGH as shit, and it can get bloody dry right at that second part, so yeah, it's quite understandable when people put the first game down...

that being said, I still enjoyed it once I got the hang of it, HOWEVER, they have a little tidbit in the witcher 2 that catches you up on the story if you didn't play the first game. so if you can't stand it then feel free to jump to the second which is, for most people, leaps and bounds better.

To be honest I thought the story of the first Witcher was better than the second and much more complete.

which is fine, I did enjoy the first one as about as much as the second one, the story might've been better but you gotta admit the pacing in the first oh...half of the game is really wonk, not for the less stubborn of your average rpg players.

Yeah I agree.

I think part of the problem is that the Witcher 2's ending really left a sour taste in my mouth. I was expecting two more chapters and the ending was very abrupt during the rising action, as opposed to the Witcher 1 ending just setting the premise of the rest of the series (trying to avoid spoilers).

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

I have the first game installed and the second for my Xbox, but haven't played either of them for more than an hour. I can't really say why, because the setting alone is right up my alley. I enjoy my dark magic medieval stuff, mature stories and Game of Thrones as well, so yeah...

Seems I should give them another try, I am reading a LOT of praise from people who played the games and are interested in the third one. In contrast to other fan bases the community has valid, well rounded arguments for loving the games that I can comprehend. I just need that final kick to start playing.

Is it true that most players quit the first Witcher in the first act's swamp lands, almost exactly at the point the story starts rolling?

PS: Nevertheless, the graphics for the 3rd game look amazing! My PC is so old it can barely handle the first Witcher on 1080. But I can accept low graphics as long as story and atmosphere suck me in.

the first game is ROUGH as shit, and it can get bloody dry right at that second part, so yeah, it's quite understandable when people put the first game down...

that being said, I still enjoyed it once I got the hang of it, HOWEVER, they have a little tidbit in the witcher 2 that catches you up on the story if you didn't play the first game. so if you can't stand it then feel free to jump to the second which is, for most people, leaps and bounds better.

To be honest I thought the story of the first Witcher was better than the second and much more complete.

which is fine, I did enjoy the first one as about as much as the second one, the story might've been better but you gotta admit the pacing in the first oh...half of the game is really wonk, not for the less stubborn of your average rpg players.

Yeah I agree.

I think part of the problem is that the Witcher 2's ending really left a sour taste in my mouth. I was expecting two more chapters and the ending was very abrupt during the rising action, as opposed to the Witcher 1 ending just setting the premise of the rest of the series (trying to avoid spoilers).

yeah to that I'll agree, the last part of the second witcher game was pretty abrupt while the first witchers ending was quite a bit of fun, I still remember the first time I got through the first game and immediately wanted to replay it just for the second half of the game.

 

[Morgoth780]

I have the first game installed and the second for my Xbox, but haven't played either of them for more than an hour. I can't really say why, because the setting alone is right up my alley. I enjoy my dark magic medieval stuff, mature stories and Game of Thrones as well, so yeah...

Seems I should give them another try, I am reading a LOT of praise from people who played the games and are interested in the third one. In contrast to other fan bases the community has valid, well rounded arguments for loving the games that I can comprehend. I just need that final kick to start playing.

Is it true that most players quit the first Witcher in the first act's swamp lands, almost exactly at the point the story starts rolling?

PS: Nevertheless, the graphics for the 3rd game look amazing! My PC is so old it can barely handle the first Witcher on 1080. But I can accept low graphics as long as story and atmosphere suck me in.

the first game is ROUGH as shit, and it can get bloody dry right at that second part, so yeah, it's quite understandable when people put the first game down...

that being said, I still enjoyed it once I got the hang of it, HOWEVER, they have a little tidbit in the witcher 2 that catches you up on the story if you didn't play the first game. so if you can't stand it then feel free to jump to the second which is, for most people, leaps and bounds better.

To be honest I thought the story of the first Witcher was better than the second and much more complete.

which is fine, I did enjoy the first one as about as much as the second one, the story might've been better but you gotta admit the pacing in the first oh...half of the game is really wonk, not for the less stubborn of your average rpg players.

Yeah I agree.

I think part of the problem is that the Witcher 2's ending really left a sour taste in my mouth. I was expecting two more chapters and the ending was very abrupt during the rising action, as opposed to the Witcher 1 ending just setting the premise of the rest of the series (trying to avoid spoilers).

yeah to that I'll agree, the last part of the second witcher game was pretty abrupt while the first witchers ending was quite a bit of fun, I still remember the first time I got through the first game and immediately wanted to replay it just for the second half of the game.

I've only played each one once but I'm going to replay them before the Witcher 3. Definitely two of my favorite RPGs.

 

[Casual Shinji]

The voice acting is still wooden, but if they fix the godawful combat I might give this series another try.

Well, Geralt is supposed to be at least slightly autistic(raised by warrior monks, no outside contact, infertile, outcast, etc.), but the other stuff still is on the same level as the witcher 2.

How long did you play into 2 btw? The combat at the beginning is pretty crap, but that's because the levelling early on is piss poor. Getting to about level 11 or so allows you to stop levelling Geralt for him to be a less-shit fighter, and level to turn him into an actually good fighter.

I played till right after I defeated some giant monster in a forrest not long after you leave that very first castle where the king gets murdered. I think I stopped when I was doing some quest in a cave. Apparently the game expected me to prepare with potions and what-have-you's before every battle, but how am I supposed to do that when I don't know when a battle will present itself? And the actual combat just felt wholly unsatisfying, which I could except if it wasn't also overly complicated or if I could enjoy the characters and story.

And it wasn't just Geralt's voice acting, everyone just sounded like... they're reading their lines from a sheet of paper. The guy in the video even makes a comment that makes me think he realizes the voice acting is a bit crap.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

The voice acting is still wooden, but if they fix the godawful combat I might give this series another try.

Well, Geralt is supposed to be at least slightly autistic(raised by warrior monks, no outside contact, infertile, outcast, etc.), but the other stuff still is on the same level as the witcher 2.

How long did you play into 2 btw? The combat at the beginning is pretty crap, but that's because the levelling early on is piss poor. Getting to about level 11 or so allows you to stop levelling Geralt for him to be a less-shit fighter, and level to turn him into an actually good fighter.

I played till right after I defeated some giant monster in a forrest not long after you leave that very first castle where the king gets murdered. I think I stopped when I was doing some quest in a cave. Apparently the game expected me to prepare with potions and what-have-you's before every battle, but how am I supposed to do that when I don't know when a battle will present itself? And the actual combat just felt wholly unsatisfying, which I could except if it wasn't also overly complicated or if I could enjoy the characters and story.

And it wasn't just Geralt's voice acting, everyone just sounded like... they're reading their lines from a sheet of paper. The guy in the video even makes a comment that makes me think he realizes the voice acting is a bit crap.

I'll admit that the voice acting can be a bit pants, and I guess it varies from person to person in this case. For me, it's okay enough that it doesn't get in the way of the story, but that's just me, and I can live with that.

As for the potion preparation combat mechanic: the game is built around preparation and investment. Granted, this can be exhausting and rather boring at times, but you need to get into that rhythm; it's why you have to purchase a book on the monster you are about to hunt before you can seek the bounty(the books actually detail useful info on attack patterns and weaknesses). With this in mind, you can prepare accordingly. For more general encounters, all you need is Swallow, which boosts your health regen. as there is no encounter in the game where Swallow doesn't prove itself useful. The game just requires patience and determination, which is a point against it's favour, I know, but once you break through that initial BS and you start to familiarise yourself with the mechanics, there is an excellent game waiting beyond.

The combat does get better later though, once you get the execution moves and Geralt can dodge better/has better spells with AoE effects, etc etc.

I would say that if you want to try the game again, put aside an afternoon or so, and really dig into it: focus on the info it gives you, run the tutorial a few times, play the arena(it helps to familiarise yourself with the combat).

It is very different to most modern RPGs, and I think it needs to be approached more carefully than something like Skyrim or Dragon Age Origins. The quest design in particular is great because something as simple as "get rid of those ghosts" can escalate into a complex moral choice, as well as leading you to the location of a long-forgotten treasure in a distant land.

 

[Spushkin]

I have recently replayed and finally finished the first two games and I am definitely hyped. The only reason that's stopping me from preordering this (Gog has this awesome preorder deal, 20% off if you have Witcher 1&2) - and I have NEVER preordered anything in my life - is the fact that my PC won't be able to play it well, so I'm gonna be getting this for the PS4.

Speaking of the PS4, does anyone know if there is a gameplay video of Witcher 3 on PS4 (or XbOne for that matter) out there?

 

[DarkhoIlow]

I have recently replayed and finally finished the first two games and I am definitely hyped. The only reason that's stopping me from preordering this (Gog has this awesome preorder deal, 20% off if you have Witcher 1&2) - and I have NEVER preordered anything in my life - is the fact that my PC won't be able to play it well, so I'm gonna be getting this for the PS4.

Speaking of the PS4, does anyone know if there is a gameplay video of Witcher 3 on PS4 (or XbOne for that matter) out there?

^ There is no gameplay video of the PS4 version.

MS presser was the only X1 footage (of 900p 30fps) gameplay..everything else at E3/Gamescom/SDCC was PC footage of a 4 months old build that wasn't optimized at all (hence why the frame rate dips in my gameplay video link).

Also I think you should just invest in a new GPU and play this one on PC at 60fps...(around 150-200$ investment will get you a gpu that will manage to run this at 1080p 60 high settings with a few minor setting tweaks).

 

[Spushkin]

^ There is no gameplay video of the PS4 version.

MS presser was the only X1 footage (of 900p 30fps) gameplay..everything else at E3/Gamescom/SDCC was PC footage of a 4 months old build that wasn't optimized at all (hence why the frame rate dips in my gameplay video link).

Also I think you should just invest in a new GPU and play this one on PC at 60fps...(around 150-200$ investment will get you a gpu that will manage to run this at 1080p 60 high settings with a few minor setting tweaks).

GPU is the newest part of my rig, 260x I got on discount recently. The rest of the pc is 5-7 years old, Athlon II x2, 2 GB RAM, that type of thing

I plan to upgrade it, but step by step, and right now a PS4 version of Witcher 3 sounds as my best choice. At some point down the road, a Steam or GoG discount and a PC powerful enough to run it at ultra-high details will provide some refreshed fun

 

[DarkhoIlow]

^ There is no gameplay video of the PS4 version.

MS presser was the only X1 footage (of 900p 30fps) gameplay..everything else at E3/Gamescom/SDCC was PC footage of a 4 months old build that wasn't optimized at all (hence why the frame rate dips in my gameplay video link).

Also I think you should just invest in a new GPU and play this one on PC at 60fps...(around 150-200$ investment will get you a gpu that will manage to run this at 1080p 60 high settings with a few minor setting tweaks).

GPU is the newest part of my rig, 260x I got on discount recently. The rest of the pc is 5-7 years old, Athlon II x2, 2 GB RAM, that type of thing

I plan to upgrade it, but step by step, and right now a PS4 version of Witcher 3 sounds as my best choice. At some point down the road, a Steam or GoG discount and a PC powerful enough to run it at ultra-high details will provide some refreshed fun

How much ram? Because if you have 8GB then you might get the game playing at medium settings 60fps with a few tweaks. Hell even turning down the resolution to gain 60fps will probably make it a better experience than on PS4, but hey that's just me..I despise anything that plays sub 60, because I notice it so well.

 

[Spushkin]

How much ram? Because if you have 8GB then you might get the game playing at medium settings 60fps with a few tweaks. Hell even turning down the resolution to gain 60fps will probably make it a better experience than on PS4, but hey that's just me..I despise anything that plays sub 60, because I notice it so well.

You must read a bit more carefully, I said 2GB of RAM

To make matters worse, it's DDR2 on 800MHz, and the motherboard does not support anything higher. So I need to get a new motherboard, CPU and RAM, and judging by the sounds from the PSU, that's also on the list of changes. And it takes money I won't have in the coming months.

I don't mind the fps difference that much. If they can provide an equally engaging experience (minus the top quality eye-candy that PC will have), that'll be all I need.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

How much ram? Because if you have 8GB then you might get the game playing at medium settings 60fps with a few tweaks. Hell even turning down the resolution to gain 60fps will probably make it a better experience than on PS4, but hey that's just me..I despise anything that plays sub 60, because I notice it so well.

You must read a bit more carefully, I said 2GB of RAM

To make matters worse, it's DDR2 on 800MHz, and the motherboard does not support anything higher. So I need to get a new motherboard, CPU and RAM, and judging by the sounds from the PSU, that's also on the list of changes. And it takes money I won't have in the coming months.

I don't mind the fps difference that much. If they can provide an equally engaging experience (minus the top quality eye-candy that PC will have), that'll be all I need.

Ah my bad for not noticing..well shit that's quite old indeed. Yeah guess a complete upgrade would be better. Then I guess you got no choice than to get it on PS4..hope it gets optimized well for consoles as well as the PC version since that's what they are doing at the moment.