Plus there's the whole 'vastly different body of folklore being drawn on' thing, and Eastern European folklore in general is much darker than Western European folklore.Sigmund Av Volsung said:
What do you have against The Witcher series?
- Thread starter endtherapture
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Simple. My assassin with my backstory and my Deathclaw > Geralt. I can forgive a lot of game faults if the protagonist is my own character, but it will take a 11/10 game to convince me spending time with a character I don't give a toss about is worth my already meager gaming time.
And a game that actively punishes you for dodging (instead of blocking) don't get high marks neither. You still swing = I land a fucking hit, not a ninja block from you.
Also, I got stuck in the tutorial because the parry prompt never appeared.
And a game that actively punishes you for dodging (instead of blocking) don't get high marks neither. You still swing = I land a fucking hit, not a ninja block from you.
I don't have anything against the Witcher series. Now I do. Perhaps you should change your tone a bit so the Witcher fans don't sound like Dark Souls/Windows Phone fans.endtherapture said:
Also, I got stuck in the tutorial because the parry prompt never appeared.
I dont get people it seems, there are complains about not liking darkage medieval settings, in a dark age medieval setting, complaining about not been able to create your character, in a game were you play a predetermined character, or the game been sexist in the frigging middle ages......
its like complaining about cod: AW been a modern military shooter, and not been able to design your own grunt....
well yeah... its not that sort of game.
its like complaining about cod: AW been a modern military shooter, and not been able to design your own grunt....
well yeah... its not that sort of game.
I have a couple issues with the second game, but overall I really like it. My biggest problem however is how utterly useless any weapon other than a longsword is. You'd think a short sword would be a really good offhand weapon, but apparently Geralt can only sword dance when he's using his regular bastard swords. All the spinning and dodging and rolling moves are restricted to that set of weapons, leaving shortswords, claymores and axes completely borked.
Personally, I loved both Witcher games. The first one was a bit clunky, sure, but it was wonderfully atmospheric and I enjoyed having to plan ahead, read up on the local monsters, and prepare your potions in advance. The second one was amazing, such an authentic feeling world, with a very Eastern European feel to it.Like the first game I had to research, plan and generally figure out how to accomplish what I needed without the game holding my hand like too many other modern games. I was very fond of Geralt himself, despite him being utterly unlike the sort of character I normally create in other RPGs. I guess I just don't see why people complain about so many things that I found to be the primary appeal of the game.
This thread is filled with people complaining about features of the game, such as the setting being dark and gritty, the fact you can't create your own character, the hardcore nature of the game, the stuff like potions must be applied pre-combat, the fact that it's not Skyrim/Dragon Age/Western RPG Number 68. It's like complaining that Dark Souls is hard, or that it has a slightly Eastern take on things, or that your health doesn't regenerate out of combat.Happyninja42 said:
For example, there's this quote here:
Sorry to take you as an example, but you get people complaining about stuff like this and also not being able to wield staves, or longbows or greataxes, and it just shows a failure to "understand" the setting. Geralt can only sword dance with his longswords because that's the combat style he was trained for, he wasn't trained to use shortswords like an assassin, claymores like a knight or axes like a viking bloke so he doesn't have the knowledge to use them.Soviet Heavy said:
So really, if you go into The Witcher or The Witcher 2 expecting a game like Skyrim where you can make your own character, you're misunderstanding the game. It's called The Witcher because it's about playing as the Witcher Geralt of Rivia.
I played through some of the first one and found the combat tedious and awkward, the game glitchy (I had a habit of getting hit by someone the instant I entered a room, staggering backwards, and getting trapped inside the scenery), the regular offers of sex as a reward to be obnoxious and demeaning (demeaning me, the player, more than anyone else), the 10 bear ass quests, the over-use of sexual innuendo or swearing to sound adult, but worst of all, a bland protagonist. The writers and devs have tried too hard to make him look cool. He's boring.
I played a little of the second game, which fixes the combat to an extent and has a more engaging premise. I haven't played it for a while and will need to get back into it, but I'm not hurrying to meet Mr grouchy boring man again.
I played a little of the second game, which fixes the combat to an extent and has a more engaging premise. I haven't played it for a while and will need to get back into it, but I'm not hurrying to meet Mr grouchy boring man again.
There's also this. Some poeple just don't like to be exposed to the same type of sexism, homophobia or abuse they suffered in real life. While i could barely chug through the game thanks to it's more unsavory elements and how gleefully it presents them with a big sign in the background "see how medieval we are?", the moment that killed it for me was Deathmolds scene, seriously they couldn't have been more offensive if they tried.Longing said:
If I remember correctly, CDProjekt RED released a video promoting the different weapons you could use in The Witcher 2, and they mentioned the alternative weapons as an option. I'm just curious why they would do that if they were going to make them so useless, and if longswords are in such abundance throughout the game.endtherapture said:
I'll give them credit though. At least they didn't treat two handed swords like they weigh thirty pounds like Skyrim does.
Probably cut for time or something? I remember there being daggers and axes and maces in the first game but I literally never used them, they were so pointless. The loot situation in the first game was fairly pathetic so i'm glad they fixed that and made other swords and armors more worthwhile in the second game.Soviet Heavy said:
I also seem to remember people forgetting to pick up their weapons so had to use a pitchfork for some period of the game, and I think there's a run of the game where a guy does the entire story using only a pitchfork or a mundane weapon like that.
I tried playing the first one. It was clunky as hell. The first main female was walking around in bikini armour or something whilst talking to people as if nothing was out of the ordinary. It was jarring as hell. After a fight in the beginning, you get a conversation with her. I asked if she was okay and she proceded to have sex with the main character.
I'll say that I hopped into this game because of all of the claims of maturity on the internet. I guess I found out that those claims must have been coming primarily from 15 year olds.
I'll say that I hopped into this game because of all of the claims of maturity on the internet. I guess I found out that those claims must have been coming primarily from 15 year olds.
I don't understand this argument for three reasons:sonofliber said:
1) It's a fantasy setting! A fantasy depiction of a medieval times does not have to be consistent with every facet of a real medieval setting. People's immersion will not destroyed just because they didn't see a guy punch a prostitute; the castles and plagues and swords create enough of a flavour to pin the atmosphere down. That said, they could legitimately depict the world as a progressive society with completely equal treatment of the sexes, and I doubt any one would really mind, because, you know, fantasy. You could go the other way and make a Gorean fantasy (though please don't). Despite this, writers like to keep going for a gritty, grim dark depiction, and justify it by saying it is more realistic. This is disconcerting, but also inaccurate because...
2) Yes whilst there was more sexism in the middle ages, it didn't necessarily match the kind of sexist depictions in our medieval fantasy fiction. The medieval ages were sexist, less because they were filled with bodacious babes who would trade sex for any favour, and more because they saw women as quintessentially inferior. It would seem odd then that a fantasy attempting to resemble a more authentic middle-age setting would feel the need to depict medieval women as porn-stars, rather than women lacking basic rights.
3) Contrarily, the middle ages weren't quite as sexist as people assume, at least in some respects. It was normal for women to run businesses and own property, for instance. Also, due to a tendency for male authorities and officials to get themselves killed or wind up absent, their wives would often take on their husband's wealth and standing. This side of reality barely features in fantasy settings though, with the emphasis on depicting women as serfs, barmaids, prostitutes, nuns - as people without power. Whenever a women is shown as being powerful, they are usually in a fictional job role, such as a sorceress or enchantress. Writer's are missing a trick here, in that they could tell a lot of interesting stories about women in these more powerful roles. Skyrim certainly didn't have any problem doing it (for the most part).
I don't think I've seen anyone complain that you can't create your own character, just that they don't like the main one.endtherapture said:
And seriously, I would like to know what the purpose is to applying potions before going into combat, when you don't know what you're walking into, or when you're walking into it.
Well I picked up Witcher 2 here the the other day, and I just can't for the life of me get through it because of the same issue I had with Dragon age (all of them).
It's actually quite simple, the mechanics are terrible. I don't care how good the story is or whatever else is in there when the thing I will be doing the most just feels wrong on every level.
Can't say exactly what the problem was in Witcher, but I had trouble beating the tutorial because there were something about that combat system that just did not work well with my brain. There was no good flow to get into and I was constantly fighting the camera.
You may say I suck at the game, fine, but when I finally beat something and died a bit later I had to do everything all over again, which would be fine if I could skip cutsceenes, but nope you can't do that.
Maybe it gets good if I get the hang of it, but I'll never know as it was one of the few games I've just put down and thought "nope, not happening". The core game mechanics are just bad in my opinion. Witcher 2 did not even explain those rune things you have to use in the selection screen, you are just supposed to know/remember.
Give me Souls caliber combat and the ability to skip shit I've seen 6 times already and I might give it a shot.
It's actually quite simple, the mechanics are terrible. I don't care how good the story is or whatever else is in there when the thing I will be doing the most just feels wrong on every level.
Can't say exactly what the problem was in Witcher, but I had trouble beating the tutorial because there were something about that combat system that just did not work well with my brain. There was no good flow to get into and I was constantly fighting the camera.
You may say I suck at the game, fine, but when I finally beat something and died a bit later I had to do everything all over again, which would be fine if I could skip cutsceenes, but nope you can't do that.
Maybe it gets good if I get the hang of it, but I'll never know as it was one of the few games I've just put down and thought "nope, not happening". The core game mechanics are just bad in my opinion. Witcher 2 did not even explain those rune things you have to use in the selection screen, you are just supposed to know/remember.
Give me Souls caliber combat and the ability to skip shit I've seen 6 times already and I might give it a shot.
Gundam GP01 said:
They can also see further than 5' away by manipulating the mystic force of Draw Distance and enhance their peripheral vision using invoking the entity FOV.
Well fair enough that some people dislike Geralt. Some of us, on the other hand, really like him. Horses for courses I guess.Casual Shinji said:
As for applying oils and making preparations beforehand, the point is you are supposed to research what you are likely to be fighting. Don't just skip through quest descriptions and various flavour text like it was Generic MMO no 47, instead look through them for hints about what creatures you're going to find in the areas you are going to and then read books about those creatures to learn how best to deal with them.
Heh.. reminds me of New Vegas and people complaining about the Deathclaws just north of... wossit? Junction?... despite everyone you meet at the place telling you "If you go past this point, Deathclaws will fuck you up."infohippie said:
Standard old school RPG procedure - open all doors, empty all containers, read all books, talk to every npc you can.