WOW, they managed to make the controls even WORSE

[cvv]

I'll ask the hivemind a simple question: is the story as good as TW2? Is it worth suffering through this game's shitty gameplay?

Story, writing, characters, quests, lore, atmosphere, worldbuilding pretty much blow most other games out of the water. This IS the best written game ever created, period. In fact it's so good you almost won't notice the RPG elements are indeed shitty. Character development, loot and itemization are straight up terrible, much worse than W1 and W2 and the controls are bad but you'll get used to it all and almost not mind.

The combat is pretty decent for an action game btw. You mentioned DS did it better - obviously. But you CAN'T graft such a combat onto a mass-market game like Witcher 3. Deep, complex mechanics are no-go in this business. I'd say the current combat is as complex as is feasible here. Anything more and retards like Angry Joe would fucking flip. Just watch how he absolutely trashes Risen 2 and Risen 3 combat (both of which are actually very good, despite the retarded common wisdom) and you'll know what I mean.

 

[Sranchammer]

I've never understood the whole 'caring' for fiction characters

 

[Jools]

TW 2 controls weren't the best thing ever, but they were passable (sort of). TW 3 feels completely unnatural, holy shit. I own a X360 gamepad and I've tried both input methods. They both suck, no reason to argue which is better. Stiff movement all around, terrible controls both in and out of combat. Target selection mixed with camera movement? OH YEAH, why not? A character that can't stab a guy right in front of him before doing a triple flip? YESS, WE JUST LOVE TAKING DAMAGE FOR NO REASON. Because everyone ELSE is capable of doing fast-non-flamboyant-attacks.

Playing Tank-Geralt is not fun, so I'll ask the hivemind a simple question: is the story as good as TW2? Is it worth suffering through this game's shitty gameplay? Because I loved TW2's story and plot twists, but found the gameplay pretty mediocre. Only reason I'm bothering with TW 3 is because the characters are great and I DO care about Yennefer, Geralt and Triss. Potato devs should've written the story and handed gameplay design to someone else. Whoever is responsible for tank-geralt deserves to be shot.

Oh yeah, and I must make the mandatory DARK SOULS DID IT BETTER commentary. Sorry guys, you know it's true.

I should be done with the main plotline tonight or tomorrow night, and will develop a better overall opinion then. But, so far...

...I'm not really sure. I'd say story and writing are very close to W2, with one prevailing over the other on certain occasions, and vice versa: overall, though, I'd say W3 is more enjoyable, more varied, and definitively has better pacing. The general feeling is slightly less grimdark, actually, much less grimdark. To me, W2 seeped with melancholy and bitterness, while W3 is often more lighthearted, while still featuring some seriously grimdark/woah content (mostly confined to the first half of the game). It even goes full-out mushy-feels towards 3/4. There are no C&C of particular relevance, but there are more emotional moments and outcomes than in W2.

There definitively are some flaws in the writing and in the plot, especially the irritatingly abysmal conversations (very limited choices, and an unnecessary lot of "forced" conversation outcomes) and some filler content here and there (a lot of it, as you approach endgame: still better than the abrupt/rushed finale of W2). In W3's favour, the game is definitively longer than W2: took me some15 hours for a completionist run on Dark difficulty, whereas I'm playing TW3 on normal, I'm only pursuing the main quest and I'm already at 25 hours or so (and I haven't finished it yet).

In conclusion, if you set the difficulty to easy, thus spare yourself the horrible spastic popamole pain that combat is, you should be able to enjoy a fairly good story and the spledidly built world, delivered via an endless sequence of cutscenes and some minor "active" gameplay (run there, use witcher powers here, kill something, etc...). Also, bubs.

Tl;dr - Very good plot, better than W2, not as good as W1 imho; great writing (better than basically 99% of the AAA titles oput there, except for GTASA); great world (visuals and lore). Mediocre C&C (honestly, they're not really much: but I guess in this day and age, mediocre is the new "good", when it comes to C&C). Dreadful everything else (combat, movement, controls, world interaction, "RPG elements").

 

[Carrion]

I think TW2's story with all its layers and intrigue is the best in the series, and in my opinion TW3 doesn't quite live up to it, although the writing itself is at least as good if not better. I guess that mostly comes down to personal preference, though, as TW3 tells a very different yet much more straightforward story and does it really well, but it never really got me wondering what was going to happen next. Minorish spoilers regarding the overall structure of the game:

Spoiler

You know that the story's going to first throw you to Velen, then Novigrad and then Skellige, and it's very easy to guess that you won't find her before visiting all the areas first. After you finish that part of the main quest your goal becomes very clear, and the game suddenly shifts into full-speed mode to bring things to a conclusion, in a way that seems logical but almost too obvious.

Many of the other storylines that are somehow linked to the main quest are superb, though, as good as anything in the previous two games.

 

[Eyestabber]

Indeed, I really loved TW2's "conspiracy" angle and NO

Spoiler

I did not see Leto double crossing the sorceresses until it was on my face. That game did an amazing job with a brutish-looking character that ends up being deceptive and, to everyone's surprise, a bro to Geralt before he lost his memory. Leto is an amazingly written character, no doubt about that

I guess Kodex Konsensus says "TW 3 story is great", altough accounts vary a bit. I've yet to see someone trash the story.

Thanks a lot guys, really good stuff posted after the DS butthurt was over with. Still, I'm going to wait for patches/EE before giving them money. "Give money first, will fix game later" <- FUCK you.

 

[Makabb]

Angry Joe

 

[prodigydancer]

I think TW2's story with all its layers and intrigue is the best in the series

I think TW1 was superior to TW2 in every way, including the story.

Combat systems were almost equally worthless but in TW1 fighting was less annoying which counts as a win in my eyes. From a pure tech standpoint TW2 graphics was more advanced but I found the world stifling. TW1 had a lot more open space and acceptable visuals so the trade-off wasn't worth it.

Story is always a matter of taste, I suppose. I don't care about politics whether ir's RL or fantasy and that "you're framed, now you have to clear your name" hook was really lazy. In the long run I just couldn't take TW2 seriously - the density of royal population was so think it made me wish I could join Letho in his weird crusade. I mean I like pretentiousness but TW2 went completely overboard with it which hurt its narrative. TW1 was maybe less grimdark and gruesome but it asked much deeper questions. Aside from the obvious "do the ends justify the means?" there was a lot about the price of freedom, for example. Is faith a necessary part of social contract or merely a tool of oppression? Is neutrality self-determination or just apathy and cowardice? That's TW1 themes. Consequently, the choices in TW1 were more meaningful and made sense (siding with Iorveth hardly makes sense even if you import a save where you sided with Yaevinn).

Finally, in terms of interesting personalities TW2 loses hands down. Even recurring characters were pale shades of their former selves.

 

[Carrion]

I think TW1 was superior to TW2 in every way, including the story.

I prefer TW1 too, but the writing is miles better in TW2. The first game has an alright story that serves the rest of the game superbly in terms of pacing and its relation to the other storylines of the game, but it goes pretty much into cartoony fan fiction territory in many places, like when you bang the Lady of the Lake or kill Dagon, not to mention defeating an army of super mutants, the portrayal of the Wild Hunt and all the parts where they outright took stuff straight from the books and inserted it in the game in a slightly different form. TW2 is much more consistent with its portrayal of the Witcher world, is a lot closer to the source material in every way and has far superior and more naturally flowing dialogue, among other things.

siding with Iorveth hardly makes sense even if you import a save where you sided with Yaevinn

Siding with Iorveth makes more sense than siding with Yaevinn considering that the former can actually offer something tangible in your search for Triss, aside from having Zoltan's support as well. If you set aside your personal feelings for Iorveth and Roche, who you want to side with really comes down to whether your first priority is to catch the kingslayers or save Triss.

I do think that TW1's take on neutrality was great, though, and TW2 doesn't really offer a similar perspective.

Finally, in terms of interesting personalities TW2 loses hands down. Even recurring characters were pale shades of their former selves.

Both games have a very likeable cast of characters (just like TW3 does), but I really don't see how TW2 would be at least any worse in this regard, no matter whether we're talking about recurring characters, the ones lifted from the books or completely new ones. The game's got like two dozen characters that are critical to the plot, and pretty much all of them are memorable: even ignoring all the recurring characters you have Roche, Ves, Letho, Henselt, Dethmold, Philippa, Síle, Loredo, Shilard, Stennis... In terms of their personalities the characters are every bit as distinct as in TW1, but the writing is again more consistent with the overall tone of the game, and their motivations and roles in the world and the story are generally more complex. TW1 has got a notably smaller set of characters, and since it's a longer game you also get to interact with some of them more than you get with the characters in the sequel, but I don't think that directly translates into depth.

Overall, I think the story and the characters are the only things where TW2 is the best in the series. Everything else is better in TW1 and/or TW3.

 

[MicoSelva]

Geralt randomly changes targets when fighting multiple opponents, instead of locking into the enemy the camera faces. What is this I don't even

Whoever designed it this way should be hanged by the balls (tits if female) until renouncing this evil path.

Other than that, controls are fine, if a little clunky.

 

[Carrion]

Geralt randomly changes targets when fighting multiple opponents, instead of locking into the enemy the camera faces. What is this I don't even

For me this is only an issue in fist fights against multiple opponents, as in sword fights I've never really had problems with target selection. It feels a bit weird at first, but it isn't random at all, just based on Geralt's direction of movement rather than the way he's facing. The current system allows you to switch opponents quickly without rotating the camera at all, like taking a swing at the enemy in front of you and then immediately dealing another towards an enemy that is just about to backstab you, all the while keeping the same general direction. Combined with dodge it actually makes the movement in combat rather fluid once you get used to it, allowing you to move all over the place quickly without it becoming a carousel simulator. Of course there's always the lock-on button as well, although I found the combat much better without it because switching targets is such a pain in the ass, at least with keyboard and mouse.

 

[Aeschylus]

Geralt randomly changes targets when fighting multiple opponents, instead of locking into the enemy the camera faces. What is this I don't even

It's possible to lock onto a single target ('z' I think), but you still lose target focus if you get too far away, so it's basically pointless.

The controls are pretty much a clunkier version of Assassin's Creed 2 where instead of avoiding or running up obstacles you come to a dead stop when you touch them. Not fantastic.

 

[Eyestabber]

Finally, in terms of interesting personalities TW2 loses hands down. Even recurring characters were pale shades of their former selves.

BRO, I finished a TW1 playtrough YESTERDAY and I gotta tell you: Geralt's interactions with TW1 characters are pretty shallow. Even major characters like Triss and Yaevinn/Siegfried have very few lines of dialogue and you can't really understand them apart from the FUNCTION they serve in the plot. TW2 interaction between characters has a LOT more depth, comparing Siegfried to Roche and Iorveth to Yaevinn is not even remotely fair. TW2 also shows us Triss Merigold's thoughts and opinions, rather than just using her as a quest giver/sex card. EVERY character in TW2 is more fleshed out.

Replay TW1 is all I'm gonna say. The plot may be good, perhaps even better, but the characters are all paper-thin.

 

[prodigydancer]

Carrion, Eyestabber
While TW2 characters are more agreeable and likeable and definitely more Geralt-centered, we shouldn't confuse charisma with depth. TW1 characters are less perfect and that's what makes them more alive. It's all subjective though so I won't defend my point of view to the last drop of blood. It's just how I feel after replaying both games recently.

---

My earlier posts sounded too negative towards TW2 though. So to clarify: despite shortcomings, overall it was still a very good game, one of the best AAA titles ever. If the combat system weren't so atrociously bad, it'd be on my personal top 10 list.

 

[Lyric Suite]

I was about to agree with you about the atrocious controls but then

DARK SOULS DID IT BETTER

and then I

DS didn't even have working M&K controls on PC at all, you fucking consoletard.

So? It was a game designed specifically for controllers, who gives a fuck about M&K in that context?

 

[made]

I was about to agree with you about the atrocious controls but then

DARK SOULS DID IT BETTER

and then I

DS didn't even have working M&K controls on PC at all, you fucking consoletard.

So? It was a game designed specifically for controllers, who gives a fuck about M&K in that context?

People who like the responsiveness of mouselook in their 3rd person action games (maybe you remember those, it wasn't such an uncommon sight a decade ago).

What's worse, DS controlled like ass with a pad as well which was even more infuriating than TW3 because the latter at least doesn't have any junp&run sequences.

 

[Lyric Suite]

You don't need "responsiveness" in a game like DS, because there is no actual targeting involved. DS has nothing in common with Max Payne, if that is what you are thinking of here.

The point remains that the game wasn't designed with M&K in mind, so to argue that the controls are shit because M&K works like ass is a bit asinine, wouldn't you say?

 

[Eyestabber]

This guy is butthurt because I said the obvious: Dark Souls (both 1 and 2) combat blows The Witcher (all three) out of the water. And I'm a guy that enjoys the entire Witcher series, despite the mediocre-to-shit combat. Also:

DS controlled like ass with a pad as well which was even more infuriating than TW3 because the latter at least doesn't have any junp&run sequences.

That's just flat-out lying and calls for a "Fanboy" tag. Both games have terrible platforming sequences. Witcher 3 is the FIRST Witcher game to feature a jump button, it introduced platforming to The Witcher series. Witcher 1 had nothing of the sort and W2 used animations for jumping (you can't fail your jumps on TW2). The amount of bullshit and wrong information on a single line is astounding.

 

[made]

You don't need "responsiveness" in a game like DS, because there is no actual targeting involved. DS has nothing in common with Max Payne, if that is what you are thinking of here.

The point remains that the game wasn't designed with M&K in mind, so to argue that the controls are shit because M&K works like ass is a bit asinine, wouldn't you say?

I would say a modicum of effort should be put into adjusting the control scheme to take advantage of M&K when porting a game to PC. It can't be that hard seeing as a week or so after release some kid made a mod that fixed the controls (or so I'm told, haven't tested it personally), and DS2 came with working K&M controls out of the box. DS2 also improved pad controls and at the same time cut down on jump&run sequences which made for much smoother gameplay.

TW3 controls like ass regardless of input method mostly due to Geralt's inertia and the fact that you can't precisely target containers (not even with the mouse) and there's a fuckton of containers to loot.

Eyestabber Pls to link some platforming gameplay from TW3 that requires precise jumping to reach some secret or objective in the way of actual jump and runs (or DS), tyvm.

 

[Lyric Suite]

I would say a modicum of effort should be put into adjusting the control scheme to take advantage of M&K when porting a game to PC.

The game was ported on the PC only because of an online petition and From Software agreed to do it on the condition they wouldn't be reproached for putting no real effort into it, which they didn't. The game itself was made for consoles exclusively and was never meant to be played on PC in the first place, so even if they had put some effort into the port i don't see how much they could have changed to make M&K more viable than what modders already did in the first place. DS2 has mouse support out of the box but the game still plays better on a controller, because the game is virtually identical to the first one, the one that was designed for consoles exclusively.

In essence, in order to judge whether the game has good controls or not, you have to look on how it plays on a controller first and foremost, M&K support being mostly an afterthought.

 

[Lyric Suite]

The comparison between the two games is interesting only in the sense that it shows that a combination between RPG combat and twitch gameplay doesn't really work all that well. The Witcher seems to fail precisely because it doesn't seem to know what it wants to be (at least as i remember it. I only played the first one and that was a long time ago, correct me if i'm wrong here), where as DS succeed because it is a combat game first and foremost, and an RPG only secondarily. Abilities and equipment can make you more powerful but the outcome of the battle is entirely dependent on your skills as a player, and the fact the game puts more emphasis on action makes it better in my view, because at least it is good at something rather than being shit at both action and RPG combat.

 

[Eyestabber]

The comparison between the two games is interesting only in the sense that it shows that a combination between RPG combat and twitch gameplay doesn't really work all that well. The Witcher seems to fail precisely because it doesn't seem to know what it wants to be (at least as i remember it. I only played the first one and that was a long time ago, correct me if i'm wrong here), where as DS succeed because it is a combat game first and foremost, and an RPG only secondarily. Abilities and equipment can make you more powerful but the outcome of the battle is entirely dependent on your skills as a player, and the fact the game puts more emphasis on action makes it better in my view, because at least it is good at something rather than being shit at both action and RPG combat.

Witcher 1 combat is pretty different from 2 and 3. W1 had dice rolls determining wheter you hit a monster or not, same with parries. 2 and 3 take the action option (same as DS) -> hits, dodges and parries are entirely dependent on player input + enemy input. And, yes, focusing on the action part is the way to go. The combat system in both 2 and 3 isn't inherently bad, but it's implementation is lackluster, mostly due to random animations and rewarding attack spamming (or refusing to punish it). Also, dem shitty controls take their toll. But, as I said many times: modders have a chance to fix it, just like Rise of the Sword turned TW2 Combat into something almost passable.

 

[Eyestabber]

Eyestabber Pls to link some platforming gameplay from TW3 that requires precise jumping to reach some secret or objective in the way of actual jump and runs (or DS), tyvm.

Off the top of my head: you need a couple of jumps to get the Serpent Steel Sword Diagram. Reaching the Var Attre Twins is also done via some platforming. There are SEVERAL treasure chests only accessible by jumping, earliest one I can remember is at the Nilfgaardian camp entrance (broken bridge on the opposite side of the gate). Ofc, you're gonna argue that these aren't "precise" jumps, but they are as precise as, say, getting the sublime bone dust near the entrance to the Charriot Boss in DS2. Both cases involve running and jumping, just as you asked. As for footage, I won't bother recording and uploading platforming comparisons because, seriously, fuck platforming.

You have every right to think DS is shit and Witcher is potato jesus, but, please, stop raping facts to make a point.

 

[made]

Maybe if you weren't such a dumb fanboy who jumps at a perceived slight to his favorite game you would get the point I was actually trying to make. Both games have shit controls. Deal with it.

 

[GrapeJam]

DS 1's MnK control was indeed like ass even with mods. DS2's control is actually fairly acceptable once you've got used to it, at least combat wise, platforming was like ass. TW3's the opposite, platforming is acceptable, but combat is complete ass, even more ass than DS 1's MnK control after mods.

And both DS games indeed mop the floor with TW3 when it comes to combat

 

[Lyric Suite]

I still don't see the point of using M&K in DS, except for those rare occasions you are trying to snipe something with arrows (and the cool thing about playing the game on PC is that you can use both control schemes at once). Ultimately, DS is nothing other than a third person beat'em up. Think about it. You lock onto an enemy, and then it is all about executing the right attack move at the right time. Controllers work better with this game for the same reason they work better with beat'em up games in general.