What do you have against The Witcher series?

[endtherapture]

I've noticed there's a lot of...not hate, but dislike for The Witcher series on these forums beyond some of the time. It's been called immature, grimdark, sexist and just bad by a number of people on these forums, and I'm wondering why. Because I don't get it (apart from maybe the juvenile sex cards in the first game which were tacky)

I've recently started playing my fourth or fifth playthrough of The Witcher 2 game recently after completing Dragon Age Inquisition and it really is a breath of fresh air to me.

I love that the writing is mature and treats you as an adult - it throws you into confusing politics and you're left to work out different players motivations without them being explained to you by an NPC. I love how it deals with relationships and friendships - Bioware's romances are like machines you put in niceness to to get sex out of, but Geralt's and Triss' relationship is far more nuanced and full of secrets. I also maintain that Iorveth and Roche are just as well written as any Bioware companion.

I love that the world is interesting to explore and feels lived in. The towns are busy and full of clutter and dirt. NPCs dont have massive glowing quest markers on their heads. It's honestly just as well designed as Skyrim and feels like a real world in my opinion.

I love the choice and consequence system and how it's not tacked onto an "approval" system or a moral meter. Choices are choices, you have to take track of them by themselves and a choice has a direct consequence, long or short term. It's really good.

I understand that a lot of people have reservations with the series but coming from a Bioware game where everything is pointed out to you, playing The Witcher really is a breath of fresh air in the way it treats you as an adult and not a teenager who needs to be pointed and nudged in the right direction, with everything explained to them.

So, what do you like and dislike about the series?

 

[SajuukKhar]

I dislike how boring all the characters are. Honestly, playing through Witcher 1 and 2, I couldn't give a flying crap about ANYONE in the game. Even the worst of Bioware characters somehow managed to be more entertaining and emotionally gripping then the best of Witcher. Everyone was just these annoying, overdone, fantasy cliche character tropes.

Witcher 1 also had abysmal..... well..... pretty much everything mechanics wise, especially the combat, the combat was terrible. Witcher 2 was miles better, but it still felt really clunky.

I also don't like how much they try to force "maturity" via nudity. I'm not against nudity in video games, when it has a point, but things like the intro of Witcher 2 where that guard walks into the Witcher's tent and sees Triss naked on the bed.... it served zero purpose beyond "LOOK AT DEESE BOOS M8YS!", and they do shit like that all the time.

Beyond that, I found the world to be pretty generic and uninteresting overall. there was no part of the lore that really made me go "wow, this is something I've only ever seen here and is a defining characteristic of this series".

Witcher was just boring all around.

 

[leberkaese]

I like the series for being a RPG with an adult audience in mind and a good story.

I think, nearly every problem I have with series comes from the first game.
I dislike Witcher 1 for its forced 'sex collection minigame'. Collecting cards for all the women you have slept with? Not what I'd call very grown up... Witcher 2 has done it a lot better.
And the used colors... Witcher 2 has really beautiful colors and has nicely done environments. From what I remember from Witcher 1 it's.. grey in grey with a little bit of brown.
Also, I really dislike the combat system of Witcher 1. Can't pull myself together to play it through to the end because of that.

 

[Pseudonym]

Well, the interface is the worst interface I've seen since xcom ufo defense and the game is difficult without having good gameplay. I'm told by other people it's barable but not worth it if I put it on easy and dump all my stats in meleedamage. Difficulty for me really only is a good thing when I like the gameplay. It might have a good story but I didn't get passed the starting area where I had to kill some swamp monster. I didn't even get to the swampmonster.

 

[endtherapture]

I dislike how boring all the characters are. Honestly, playing through Witcher 1 and 2, I couldn't give a flying crap about ANYONE in the game. Even the worst of Bioware characters somehow managed to be more entertaining and emotionally gripping then the best of Witcher. Everyone was just these annoying, overdone, fantasy cliche character tropes.

Witcher 1 also had abysmal..... well..... pretty much everything mechanics wise, especially the combat, the combat was terrible. Witcher 2 was miles better, but it still felt really clunky.

I also don't like how much they try to force "maturity" via nudity. I'm not against nudity in video games, when it has a point, but things like the intro of Witcher 2 where that guard walks into the Witcher's tent and sees Triss naked on the bed.... it served zero purpose beyond "LOOK AT DEESE BOOS M8YS!", and they do shit like that all the time.

Beyond that, I found the world to be pretty generic and uninteresting overall. there was no part of the lore that really made me go "wow, this is something I've only ever seen here and is a defining characteristic of this series".

Witcher was just boring all around.

I guess that's just your preference. I know you're a big Skyrim fan but I think that only character in Skyrim that can hold a candle to anything in The Witcher is Serana. I personally thought The Witcher 2 had a great cast. There's Zoltan and Dandelion who are both just fun, funny companions to flesh out the world. Then there's Iorveth and Roche, your two main companions who are more alike and they'd both admit. They're both extremely well characterised and have their own agenda and goals, just like all of the kings and side characters - there's just so much going on and in my opinion they all have great characterisation - I can remember the names and motivations of nearly every character in the game.

I won't deny that TW1 was clunky and not to everyone's taste but I grew up playing Infinity Engine RPGs so it wasn't that bad for me.

The lore sort of takes a back seat. I think it's going to come to the fore in the next game with the interdimensional elves coming to the world in person, but I think the concept of monsters and humans being brought to this world by interdimensional shifts is a really cool idea, even though the cultures and religions weren't as fleshed out as something like TES or Dragon Age. But I guess most of the lore is probably in the series of novels.

Regarding maturity - the tits are just there. They're just incidental. There's no immature censoring or hiding of nudity by carefully placed objects, there's no weird stuff like having sex in underwear, it's just all there and feels normal. The nudity isn't there to titillate you, it's just sort of incidental. I never got the feeling that nudity was a main focus of the game like everyone says.

 

[Grumman]

Female nudity doesn't bother me one bit, but the main thing I don't like about the Witcher series is that even if it was designed to be as immersive as Skyrim often is... I wouldn't want to. It is not a pleasant setting and I don't want to spend time there. I like fantasy and dislike historical fiction specifically to get away from the kind of feeling that this game gives me.

I don't want to play as Geralt, I don't like the levelling mechanics and I don't like the combat, but it is the toxic setting that kills any desire to push past these things. Not even the promise of boobs can make up for that.

 

[Tuesday Night Fever]

I couldn't get past the actual gameplay. I picked up The Witcher and its sequel during a Steam sale a few months back and the combat just feels clunky as all hell.

Normally I'm a "Story/Characters > All Else" type of gamer... but that requires story/characters that I find compelling enough to get past any issues that I may have with the gameplay. In the case of this series, I found both to be more of the same fairly generic fantasy that I can get out of a dozen other games that don't have gameplay that annoys the hell out of me.

Full disclosure though, I'm not super fond of fantasy settings. I'm much more of a Sci-Fi fan. So I tend to be much less forgiving when it comes to the story/characters of a fantasy game than I would be otherwise. They have to be something pretty special for me to find them compelling.

 

[endtherapture]

some endrega fucker to a backstab in your juicy buttocks.

I do have some problems with the writing though, it does get a bit silly with the grimness sometimes, and I am a bit dissapointed with Roche's path for Henselt and Dethmold (fucking Dethmold) actually stand out to be, while ruthless and nto very trustworthy, atleast not outright bananas crazy and evil. The they just flip a fucking switch after you kill the Draug and just become absurd.

That's cos they don't need you any more so they can be evil as they like

The overall plotline isn't all that strong either, especially the ending, which isn't really an ending. It just turns out everything is about a coming invasion, which'll happen in the next fucking game, that'd be like Mass Effect ending after your conversation with Sovereign.

Haven't you just described Mass Effect 2 haha?

 

[Knight Captain Kerr]

Apart from those weird sex cards from the first game, nothing. I haven't played either of them, I actually own both on GOG although my machine can only run the first. I could play 1 now and get 3 for PS4 but honestly I think I'm better off waiting until I eventually get a good computer and play all three back to back. I look forward to the day I can do so, I've heard great things about the series.

Incidentally I have a spare copy of Witcher 2 on GOG that I got in the last sale that runs out at the end of the year and I haven't been able to give to anyone yet.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I like the second game a lot. The first game was janky as hell and just wore out its welcome with me.

A lot of people condemn the games for "trying to be adult", citing T&A and profanity as the reasons why they're not, totally overlooking that those were never the reasons people praised them as "adult" to begin with. They also get unfairly slammed with the "grimdark" label, perhaps because they aren't specifically sugarlight and full of the clearly delineated black/white morality that typifies the genre.

 

[st0pnsw0p]

That's an awfully accusatory thread title you got there, OP.

Anyways, I started the first game just last week. It told me that my laptop didn't meet the minimum system requirements and wouldn't let me lpay, but then when I did some crap to be able to play it I could run it just fine so I don't know what that was al about and also I don't get why I couldn't just "OK" the warning away and get to the game.

Couldn't get into the game until I changed the camera mode to High Isometric after the prologue. Got trhough the first chapter with some minor annoyances, now I'm in the second chapter and I'm reluctant to go keep playing. The main quest is literaly just a bunch of walking from place to place with barely any enemies to break up the monotony. I eventually made it into the swamp area where there are actually enemies, but then I remembered that the combat is godawful. MP regenerates at the speed of light but HP does so at a snail's pace and I've yet to find any way to heal other than meditating. There's also no strategy to fights, it's just click on people while you have the right sword equipped and the right battle mode active.

 

[sneakypenguin]

The pacing and balance is a major issue. The worst interface i've ever used I still blindly click around trying to equip stuff. Story seems oddly paced. IDK who anyone is except trish and dude in hat/fancy armor. Did I mention balance. Why did I just 1 hit all these guys but this guy just 1shotted me.

 

[Foolery]

Nothing, I like The Witcher. Even read a few of the translated novels, because I enjoyed the world and lore that much. The first game's combat was ass, though. And the fetch quest bullshit got annoying. Didn't finish it. 2 was really good, and I'm looking forward to 3.

 

[Redryhno]

I dislike the Witcher because the leveling system heavily favors you get one thing over another(how many times did you actually have time to apply oils and poisons to your weapons if it wasn't a completely scripted and built-up monster fight you've been preparing for since minute two of getting to a new place?)

The story is ok, but really offers alot to be desired, the characters I have to second as being pretty bland, and the gameplay itself is very hacky-slashy, and not all that responsive. The one thing I love about it though is the atmosphere and art, at least in 2.

 

[Mikeybb]

The first game with it's collection of cards felt...
Sleazy.

I ignored them and just got on with the game.

The grimy look to the setting appealed and I enjoyed playing my way through the story in both games.

As to the sexism/etc, there were aspects present (cards the most stand out part, which I ignored and did not miss in the sequel), but I wasn't sure if this was an effort to catch the feel of the setting in the novels, an effort to represent the dark age in which it was set (non historical, of course, but with parallels to our own history) or perhaps even a cultural difference given the developers are based in Poland.

All in all though, I found it a good game and am looking forward to the sequel.
If any of the aspects I dislike resurface, I'll ignore what I can.
Given the removal of the card game, I'm inclined to think that cd projekt red are responsive as developers to have dropped extraneous elements like that while still making all efforts to produce an internally consistent setting covered with a layer of mud.

 

[Jaegerbombastic]

Every time a new game comes out I have to beef my computer up the the bleeding edge. How dare CDPR always push the envelope.

Joking aside, the problem I have with the Witcher series is that the combat and mechanics are too dense. I have no problem with an RPG being complex and require you to carefully plan out what you do, but the Witcher 1 in particular goes overboard. Its a constant number crunch of determining what stance to use, what combos to land, what potions you need to drink, what magic to use and when to use it, etc. etc. It makes the game something you have to commit to for an extended period of time. You can't play the game, drop it to play something else for a while, and then go back to or you will find yourself having to relearn everything. The Witcher 2 is much better at this but still needs a bit more streamlining. Hopefully 3 gets it right.

Other than that, I love the series for its setting. CDPR understands how to make a setting morally grey, which is something most developers have tried but haven't quite gotten yet (see: Dragon Age). It's not perfect and I can understand why people would be turned off by how "ugly" it is, but for me the fighting between the Scoia'Tael and the Northern Kingdoms, Niflgaard's invasion plans, King Foltest's shenanigans, etc. are compelling as hell and the big selling point for me.

 

[ninja666]

I generally liked the Witcher. It was a breath of fresh air, especially at the time of release when your only alternatives were Oblivion or Gothic. My only gripe, however, is the protagonist - he's unlikable as fuck. He's basically an action hero thrown into a dark fantasy world - he's "badass" and sarcastic, he has superpowers, and he gets all the ladies. There's not a single believable aspect about him. The devs aren't really to blame in this case though, but rather Andrzej Sapkowski (author of the books, upon which the game's based) himself.

 

[sageoftruth]

I generally loved it, but I agree about the mechanics in the first one. Pretty shabby. I completely favor the setting though. Some have called it generic. I can see how one might think that, since it runs the gamut of generic fantasy races with their generic racial qualities, but the story does something completely new with these generic fantasy tropes. One of the big issues with fantasy is how black and white it can be, but this game was definitely not that. It pretty much pulled a Game of Thrones before Game of Thrones by making a fantasy game/book/movie/comic that wasn't about a heroic battle between the forces of good and evil.

I considered it very mature for presenting conflicts that couldn't just be solved by a) Finding source of conflict and b) killing it. Especially true when it was uncertain who the good guys and the bad guys even were. The only certain enemy was the Nilfgardians. Anyway, while I probably wouldn't go back for another playthrough for awhile, the games did convince me to get the books. I couldn't stop telling my boss about all the neat events as I read through them. He's a real social justice guy (works for nonprofit immigration law) so he loved hearing about conflicts with a realistic moral representation, rather than the old kill the bad guys save the world plot.

Anyway, if the new Witcher game can be as great as the others plot-wise with better mechanics, then I'm really looking forward to it.