So... is The Witcher any good?

[sanquin]

The witcher 1 has it's flaws. They tried something new with the combat, which didn't work in their favour. It's tedious, as said before. Even a bit boring at times. The story is xena/hercules-like as said before, which is nothing special. But at least it's different from pretty much all other fantasy rpg's out there. Voice acting isn't THAT terrible in my opinion, though I've heard a lot better. And Gerald the character you'll be playing doesn't have much of a personality. (Though I suspect they did this so you can better project yourself onto him as a player.)

The witcher 2 is far better in every way. Combat is now fast-paced and more interesting. Graphics are outright stunning and the aesthetics are incredible. The story has been pretty interesting too as far as I've played the game.

In other words, I'd go with witcher 2 right away. W1 was more of a 'try out' you could say. The devs then actually listened to the players for their second game. W2 is where it's really at.

 

[Sam Warrior]

Havent played two but im enjoying the first one alot, the combat isnt fantastic but has enough depth with the potions and spells to be interesting. The characters are fairly interesting and so far the story has been different compared to the usual fantasy stuff and interesting enough to keep me going through the game.

 

[IronMit]

I played Witcher 1 for 3 hours before deciding it's not for me.
An unexplained confusing potion mechanic which is essential to the game and some sort of rhythmic combat mechanic.

You have a quick sword stance, a strong stance and a group sword stance if I remember correctly. So a minion comes at you..you hit spacebar or whatever and choose strong stance and click in some rhythm, I can only describe it as a consistent QTE. So once his dead..you run forward a bit...what's this now there's 3 guys...so you hit spacebar..change the stance to group. And then you click in rhythm to defeat them using your crowd control stance. Rinse, repeat.

The story seemed ok, some stuff went down at the start and I went on some quest to do something. Nothing to get to excited over.

To put it in perspective for you - in case your tastes align with mine
I can enjoy Skyrim combat and rpg mechanics, I like pokemon, I like Dark & Demon's souls, I like zelda, I like prince of persia combat, I like mass effect 1 combat, I can put up with Alpha protocol gameplay, I tried Kotor 2 recently and didn't mind the combat too much. I did not like Dragon Age origins gameplay (I didn't expect it to be the D&D based gameplay).
I do not like Witcher 1.

 

[Danceofmasks]

I played Witcher 1 for 3 hours before deciding it's not for me.
An unexplained confusing potion mechanic which is essential to the game and some sort of rhythmic combat mechanic.

You have a quick sword stance, a strong stance and a group sword stance if I remember correctly. So a minion comes at you..you hit spacebar or whatever and choose strong stance and click in some rhythm, I can only describe it as a consistent QTE. So once his dead..you run forward a bit...what's this now there's 3 guys...so you hit spacebar..change the stance to group. And then you click in rhythm to defeat them using your crowd control stance. Rinse, repeat.

The story seemed ok, some stuff went down at the start and I went on some quest to do something. Nothing to get to excited over.

To put it in perspective for you - in case your tastes align with mine
I can enjoy Skyrim combat and rpg mechanics, I like pokemon, I like Dark & Demon's souls, I like zelda, I like prince of persia combat, I like mass effect 1 combat, I can put up with Alpha protocol gameplay, I tried Kotor 2 recently and didn't mind the combat too much. I did not like Dragon Age origins gameplay (I didn't expect it to be the D&D based gameplay).
I do not like Witcher 1.

So, I guess you didn't right-click everything.
As in, Igni spam, win.

Late-game, the sword combat actually got half decent, especially if you build hit%.
With sufficiently high hit%, you could clear half a dungeon with a single strong style combo, switching targets. Somewhat entertaining to see Geralt windmill the 15th monster in a row.

If you use Igni, however, combat becomes so trivial you do less clicking than a tower defense game.

 

[wolf thing]

I never played the first game but the witcher 2 is really good, i think it was one of the best games of it year. the books by Andrzej Sapkowski are also amazing and worth reading

 

[Kael Arawn]

Wow, you'd swear Geralt personally came to some of these people's homes and pissed in their cornflakes.

The Witcher games are two of my favourite rpgs. I've played a lot of rpgs and I'm highly critical of their stories and I still think those games have a great story especially compared to some of the other slop they goes for "story" in games these days. What's more is that the game makes you make decisions that aren't black and white and have repercussions on the story.

The combat is different and can be somewhat of an acquired taste because it's a little different from what other games offer. exxxed in his post gives a good explanation of how the combat works. For me the combat took a little getting used to but I found it rather refreshingly different from the standard fare offered.

The first one is pretty much one of the worst games I've ever played. Second one is alright.

You obviously haven't played many games if Witcher 1 is the worse game you ever played.

Thank you for saying exactly what i wanted about the game without me having to type it, so yeah what he said just pretend I said it and give me all the credit for his awesome post

 

[Vegosiux]

Well, leaving aside the first one, the second one isn't bad. It's no second coming, mind, if it was a gamer rather than a game, the term I'd use to describe it is "tryhard", considering how often it goes "By the way, have you noticed how mature I am? Have an implied rape scene, lest you forget that". So, while it's not bad, it's just...trying too hard.

 

[Milanezi]

I'm going to defy everybody so far and say I liked it. It wasn't awesome but it was OK. I hear the second game is way better, though.

Also, if you're going to get the Witcher (1 or 2), I'd suggest GOG.

And I'm going to back you up and place both The Witcher and The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings as my favorite RPG's from this and the last generation, and amongst the best games I've ever played.

It's culturally rich bringing much of the overall mood of eastern European mythology (seriously though, if you're not fond of that STAY AWAY, this is not your usual fantasy RPG). Gameplay per se, Witcher 2 is much better, but I found the gameplay of Witcher 1 pretty good as well, call it an "update on point and click". Combat requires you to understand you enemies: humans go down with normal weapons, monsters with silver blades, as long as you use a sword you'll have access to three different styles of fighting that you must change in order to fight heavy foes, fast foes or group attacks; you can ALWAYS kill anything using any weapon and any style, but it's way harder than doing it the right way, and then there are combos which means you click then when the game tells you to click again at the right time. Essential to game (unless you're playing easy mode) is understanding how to use "potions", the player actually has to sorta predict the situations he'll find himself in: if you're in a swamp where drowners show up all the time you might drink Swallow beforehand (it helps you regenerate health during combat, there's no potion to REPLENISH health, Witchers are like Wolverine they regenerate 24/7, drinking the swallow will make it happen faster during a fight), you might also want to prepare your sword with ointments etc. It's pretty easy on easy mode, but fun nonetheless, on normal it becomes serious and you MUST adhere to the games rules, such as planning beforehand, making your own potions etc. On hard mode the game well, in my opinion, it goes a bit Ninja Gaiden in terms of unforgiveness....

 

[AT God]

I have both of them but I haven't gotten around to playing through the second one.

The first one I loved, I felt it to be extremely like KotOR, which makes sense because it is a similar engine. The story was interesting and well written, but the combat was a little tedious because unlike KotOR you don't have any force powers to fight with. That said I still loved it and look forward to when I get the time to play through the second one.

Just super afraid the third is going to Mass Effect 3 me and make me doubt my ability to love again.

 

[DoPo]

I'm going to defy everybody so far and say I liked it. It wasn't awesome but it was OK. I hear the second game is way better, though.

Also, if you're going to get the Witcher (1 or 2), I'd suggest GOG.

And I'm going to back you up and place both The Witcher and The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings as my favorite RPG's from this and the last generation, and amongst the best games I've ever played.

It's culturally rich bringing much of the overall mood of eastern European mythology (seriously though, if you're not fond of that STAY AWAY, this is not your usual fantasy RPG). Gameplay per se, Witcher 2 is much better, but I found the gameplay of Witcher 1 pretty good as well, call it an "update on point and click". Combat requires you to understand you enemies: humans go down with normal weapons, monsters with silver blades, as long as you use a sword you'll have access to three different styles of fighting that you must change in order to fight heavy foes, fast foes or group attacks; you can ALWAYS kill anything using any weapon and any style, but it's way harder than doing it the right way, and then there are combos which means you click then when the game tells you to click again at the right time. Essential to game (unless you're playing easy mode) is understanding how to use "potions", the player actually has to sorta predict the situations he'll find himself in: if you're in a swamp where drowners show up all the time you might drink Swallow beforehand (it helps you regenerate health during combat, there's no potion to REPLENISH health, Witchers are like Wolverine they regenerate 24/7, drinking the swallow will make it happen faster during a fight), you might also want to prepare your sword with ointments etc. It's pretty easy on easy mode, but fun nonetheless, on normal it becomes serious and you MUST adhere to the games rules, such as planning beforehand, making your own potions etc. On hard mode the game well, in my opinion, it goes a bit Ninja Gaiden in terms of unforgiveness....

Oh, while the fights themselves weren't that interesting in terms of mechanics (click, click, click...that's mostly it) I absolutely loved the potions and the ointments and the preparation. And the mythology was quite engaging, too - I really liked it. A fresh take after all the dwarves and elves and the dragons and so on...although dwarves were still present, as well as elves. But the other stuff I found nice.

 

[astrav1]

I have been eyeballing it for awhile on steam but I'm not really sold yet. I hear it has a good story but the combat is really bad. My biggest question is how bad we talking here, like unplayable bad, hair pulling bad, or just tedious bad?

The only reason you should buy it is because the developers have great business prctices that are deserving of respect. The game is god awful however.

 

[Amaror]

I played 2, with an import from Witcher 1. All that top end gear really helped me out at the beginning. Never made it past the first town unfortunately, nasty bug kept crashing the game randomly. Don't know if it's been fixed. Probably not.

Of course it's fixed, the game came out a long time ago and cd project red fixes the problems with it's games.

 

[blackdwarf]

The moment I finished it, I said that it was great experience, but that I will never play it again. The combat is not fun and the pacing is really bad. go play 2. Sure, some characters and events are not explained well, but you always can look that up.

 

[eberhart]

I'd also argue that The Witcher 1 has a better story. I'm usually the type of person that has a strong opinion either way, so for a game to change my mind part way through and make me pick the neutral path for the first time ever is a pretty big thing for me. This, of course, won't be the case for everyone, but it had a pretty big impact on me. In contrast, 2 (so far; I haven't finished it yet) doesn't allow a neutral path and forces you to pick a side. Take from that what you will.

Limiting your choices around Act II (Witcher II) is not necessarily exluding neutrality in general, though it is true you have no strictly "middle" path during meatier parts of the game (well, at least "defined as neutral by someone else than a player"). You can, however, make mid-Act choices regarding eg. Loredo or Henselt, so it's less about following a faction, more like influencing events the way you want to (or the way you naively hope to ).

There's no spoiler-ess way to argue about meaning of the ending (including, which is often ignored*, entire second half of Act III), so let me say this: regardless of what your Act II was, you will have pretty important binary choice, A or B if with Roche and B or C if with Iorveth, and you could consider "B" pretty close to "selfish/neutral" option. While the rest of events will still rely on your decisions, this particular case is a good way to show what happens when Geralt says "oh, screw it, I am going to do something for myself". Even if it's not exactly nece... er... I'll let you figure it out


* ironically, usually ignored in favor of complaints about "short Act III" (as if there was some "acts should have equal lenght" dogma around) - the silliest part is how many were unable to figure out that Act III was a chain of consequences produced by the entire game, so basically: the ending itself. Or three proto-endings. Enhanced Edition expanded it a bit, but the structure remains the same - even added parts depend on earlier choices and the rest consists of final parts of long questlines.




As for earlier posts... comparing Witcher (be it in terms of lore, plot, characters... whatever) to Hercules / Xena is something that should make entire thread self-combust XD

 

[DarksideFlame]

It's the worst game I've ever played so bad that I couldn't bring myself to finish it. So I really recommend staying away from it.

 

[Raikas]

I generally agree with the comments about how 2 was a huge improvement over the original, although one thing I'd add is that I actually thought the first one was more entertaining than the second. True the second one had a clearer story and vastly superior gameplay, but it was also a lot more serious, which lost a little bit of the charm for me.

That's a matter of taste though, of course.

 

[Pieturli]

I couldn't stand the first one, really liked the second one. It is long winded as fuck, but also pretty damn gripping once you get into it, I think.