Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Help me hit the high points of the Witcher

Kthan75

Liturgist
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
410
Location
Bucharest
Codex 2012 Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2
Speaking of more casual, quick games, you may want to try Puzzle Quest: Challenge of the Warlords.

It's a turn based mix of bejeweled with RPG elements and has great character development. Quite easy to pick up and play but has surprising depth as you progress.

Anyone I showed it to got hooked immediately, whether they were casual or hardcore gamers.

It's also available now on every possible platform.
 

Lesifoere

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Messages
4,071
I'll echo the following advice: skip the bounty quests, the sex (which will also let you skip the most embarrassing part of the game), and don't bother with picking flowers. I experienced the same hurdles as you, before the EE came out and made the weirder parts of the script more sense-making, and couldn't play TW more than fifteen minutes at a time. Even after EE, it was a bit of a drag to have to trudge through the swamps, for example.

On the whole, though, I think it's worth it. The whole delayed consequences thing is delicious (I was delighted and startled when I found out that the way I did a certain seemingly trivial quest in the first chapter affected a later quest in the second), and that whole showdown with the villagers sequence was pretty excellent.

(Also, the combat's terrible? No, it's simplistic, but hardly terrible--combat in TW at least flows. Compare, for instance, to combat in NWN2. Especially as a melee character; now that is fucking terrible.)
 

Vibalist

Arcane
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
3,583
Location
Denmark
The thing about The Witcher is that you'll discover a lot of things by exploring you wouldn't have otherwise found. Aside from all the books you can find which contain ingame lore, you have several encounters that aren't necesarry to continue the main plot that will still somehow relate to it. The encounter with Yaevinn in the swamp and finding the ghost of Leo in the reverend's basement, for instance.


You could rush through the Witcher doing only the necesarry parts, but the game is more enjoyable if you don't. Heck, even the trivial monster killing quests are fitting because the game allows you to do them while attending to other matters and you're playing the role of a monster hunter for chrissakes. ;)
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
7,953
Location
Cuntington Manor
Long games are not meant for everyone. I second others suggestions here and say 'forget it'. I, too, do not have a lot of time for gaming. The difference is that I play an hour here, an hour there and save the game. No problem. If you cannot remember what it is that you were doing, either write it down on a notepad before you sign off, or try different games.
 

PennyAnte

Liturgist
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
769
Location
Here instead of playing an RPG.
If you want to focus on the best quests and see, as quickly as possible, how the ones heavy on choice and consequence play out, my advice would be:

Go to gamefaqs.com and speed-read a walkthrough, skipping over the notice board stuff. There - you saved more time on combat than you would have even if you played on easy to minimize combat and alchemy, and saved more time on every kind of quest than if you played at all, really. And you still will be able to discuss the game just like Real Players (r) (tm), just peppering in "teh combat sux tho" as needed for the rest of it.
But honestly, I wouldn't cut much of anything out, except maybe the bar fights and dice poker, because just about all the notice board quests, for example, can be done almost automatically as you go about the main quests. You can also not worry about doing all 10 bounties, but you'll probably end up doing a few of those as anyway just going along with the game, and at least one is required, maybe more, I can't remember.
 

Wyrmlord

Arcane
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
28,886
Witchblade said:
Wyrmlord said:
Follow the 15 minute rule - if the game does not entertain you within the first 15 minutes, stop playing. The game is supposed to work for you, not you for the game.

If I had to follow that rule, I would not have played Baldur's Gate *yawn*, and definitely not NWN2 *megayawn* Country fair, anyone? Fetching pelts for your guardian, anyone? :roll: Same goes for Fallout 2, and probably a good few other games, too.
Yeah, well those examples you are giving aren't considered particularly good games by the local crowd either.

Maybe, there is something to it.
 

Konjad

Patron
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
3,930
Location
Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Codex+ Now Streaming! Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Wyrmlord said:
Witchblade said:
Wyrmlord said:
Follow the 15 minute rule - if the game does not entertain you within the first 15 minutes, stop playing. The game is supposed to work for you, not you for the game.

If I had to follow that rule, I would not have played Baldur's Gate *yawn*, and definitely not NWN2 *megayawn* Country fair, anyone? Fetching pelts for your guardian, anyone? :roll: Same goes for Fallout 2, and probably a good few other games, too.
Yeah, well those examples you are giving aren't considered particularly good games by the local crowd either.

Maybe, there is something to it.

Baldur's Gate is a great casual rpg, good for someone who don't have time to play RPGs but wants to.
 

Witchblade

Scholar
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
131
Location
Up yours
Konjad wrote:
Baldur's Gate is a great casual rpg, good for someone who don't have time to play RPGs but wants to.
It sounds like playing real RPG's must be pretty exciting. Won't you please be so kind as to post a list of them?

I'm eager to start on the real stuff.
 

SpaceKungFuMan

Scholar
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
253
mondblut said:
SpaceKungFuMan said:
I don't have much time to play games anymore

:roll:

Me neither (in fact, I haven't played *any* game since new year yet), but somehow I don't feel the genres whose primary virtue is size and content (300 hours, anyone?) should bend to accomodate for my needs to work, go out et cetera.

There is a whole world of so-called "casual games" for the married attorneys. If RPGs are too long for you, consider changing your playing interests.

Since when are the primary virtues of RPGs size and content? The best RPG ever made (Fallout) is only 10 hours long.

I absolutely do think that RPGs should be shorter though, along with any other game that has content that can be cut without taking away positive gameplay experiences. When a game is filled with great quests and an interesting world that is worth exploring because that exploration itself is interesting (i.e. divine divinity, fallout) and not just because of rewards, it can be as long as it wants. If everyday for 3 months I sit down to play a game for an hour and that hour is fantastic, then that's great. But as soon as the playtime is padded with trash encounters, pointless dungeons, and walking across bland generic scenery (i.e. Oblivion), the game needs to be shorter to stay worth playing. If I don't get to do anything that is actually fun in a game in the time I have to play it for a night, I'm probably not going to keep playing the game. . .

The only reason I can see to make a 300 hour game is to sell it to people who can't afford to buy many games. Are they really the demographic you want to target? I would buy a game like portal or cod4 every week, because they provide a short but great experience. That seems like a better revenue stream then milking one purchase for half the year.
 

SpaceKungFuMan

Scholar
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
253
Blackadder said:
Long games are not meant for everyone. I second others suggestions here and say 'forget it'. I, too, do not have a lot of time for gaming. The difference is that I play an hour here, an hour there and save the game. No problem. If you cannot remember what it is that you were doing, either write it down on a notepad before you sign off, or try different games.

An hour here and an hour there is great if every hour is fun. Walking around the village looking for quests from generic villagers and engaging in the shitty combat is not really compelling content.

Am I the only one that thinks the combat is so bad? I'm on medium, and it seems like the "perfect" mix of too dull to be engaging and too input intensive to just ignore. I'd really prefer simple click and let stats resolve combat. IMO, combat has to be great to be superior to simple stat resolution, since the stats represent who you are. Turnbased will always be best, of course, but noone wants to do that anymore, so we have to make the best of a shitty situation. If we're not talking top flight action combat like ninja gaiden, then RPGs should always go stat based resolution. Anything else is just a waste of time and player effort with no reward other than the minimization of character building. For all the hate that PS:T combat gets, I'd rather have that than the combat systems 90% of games have now. I would take PS:T combat over NWN2, FO3 (of course, this game has no fucking redeeming qualities, so nothing could save it), Oblivion (see FO3), TW, etc in a heart beat. Incidentally, I'd take Dungeon Siege's "click once and attack till dead" diablo variant over the combat in all of these games too.
 

Vibalist

Arcane
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
3,583
Location
Denmark
A week ago I sat around and complained about the spirit eater mechanic in MoTB, because I had only invested a couple of hours in the game and in my infinite wisdom thought I could already pass judgment on it at that point. When I played on I ended up loving it.
You're in chapter one right now and have a long way to go, so I suggest giving it a shot before criticizing the combat system too harshly. It takes some getting used to, but personally I think it fits perfectly into the game. When you acquire more combos and gain access to better potions and spells later on it becomes better. Stick with it. The Witcher is one of those games where choosing between different combat skills have an effect on how you deal with your enemies.

Personally turn-based or NWN2 style combat would have bored me in the witcher. Turn based is good, but not in all games.
 

Wyrmlord

Arcane
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
28,886
SpaceKungFuMan said:
Blackadder said:
Long games are not meant for everyone. I second others suggestions here and say 'forget it'. I, too, do not have a lot of time for gaming. The difference is that I play an hour here, an hour there and save the game. No problem. If you cannot remember what it is that you were doing, either write it down on a notepad before you sign off, or try different games.

An hour here and an hour there is great if every hour is fun. Walking around the village looking for quests from generic villagers and engaging in the shitty combat is not really compelling content.
Hmmm...sounds more like a case of a game being BAD rather than TOO LONG.

I mean, a good game is fun whenever you play it, at any point of time. I can swear that with some long games, I could just go on playing and playing and every moment of it is as entertaining as another. Ultima Underworld and Betrayal At Krondor come to mind.

I mean, as long as essential mechanics are good, then even small things like searching for loot or outfitting your party will be fun. A game being boring always stems from inherently bad mechanics and that is the sign of a bad game.

Like I said, it seems you are not enjoying the Witcher and the best solution for you would be to stop playing, and just play whatever you actually like, right?
 

St. Toxic

Arcane
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,098
Location
Yemen / India
Vibalist said:
You're in chapter one right now and have a long way to go, so I suggest giving it a shot before criticizing the combat system too harshly.

I struggled on to Chapter 4, and you can take it from me SKFM; it doesn't get any better.
 

Imbecile

Arbiter
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
1,267
Location
Bristol, England
The combat sucks donkey balls. Basically the Witcher has excellent delayed consequences, and a cool second act. Thats pretty much it.
 

Astromarine

Erudite
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
2,213
Location
Switzerland
Blackadder said:
Astromarine said:
dude you're freaking me out :D

Hmm, I had no idea this one was already taken. You want me to find a new face?

Meh, up to you. I find it a bit weird myself just because I started using that all over the net, but the truth is you probably post here more than me by now, by a far margin. So, yeah, keep it if you're attached to it.
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
Imbecile said:
The combat sucks donkey balls. Basically the Witcher has excellent delayed consequences, and a cool second act. Thats pretty much it.

If by delayed "consequences" you mean f.e. having one of quest-giving NPCs killed in the second act - yet getting the exactly same quest with the exactly same objectives just nearby - then duh. But TW does a nice job at hiding fake non-linearity and if you won't dig into it you will never notice - I must give CDP that.
 

hiver

Guest
Space,
The easiest thing for you to do is follow main story quests only and you can do that because they are marked and sorted as such in the Journal.

So just use the Journal itself to show you which ones are important for main quest progression.
 

Serus

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
6,681
Location
Small but great planet of Potatohole
skyway said:
Imbecile said:
The combat sucks donkey balls. Basically the Witcher has excellent delayed consequences, and a cool second act. Thats pretty much it.

If by delayed "consequences" you mean f.e. having one of quest-giving NPCs killed in the second act - yet getting the exactly same quest with the exactly same objectives just nearby - then duh. But TW does a nice job at hiding fake non-linearity and if you won't dig into it you will never notice - I must give CDP that.
Incredible, Skyway said something not 100% negative about The Witcher. Amazing !


Since when are the primary virtues of RPGs size and content? The best RPG ever made (Fallout) is only 10 hours long
No. 20 hours is more likely. If you can do it in 10 hours the first time you are speedplaying (skipping many side quests). Fallout 1 is a little too SHORT imho.
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
SpaceKungFuMan said:
Since when are the primary virtues of RPGs size and content? The best RPG ever made (Fallout) is only 10 hours long.
It isn't like Fallout had small number of content - besides not all of it is available to you at every playthrough.
In fact it has the same number of content as your standard RPG of that time - it however sacrificed playtime for non-linearity - and that's a different thing.

Also why should RPGs be shorter? You will spend the same amount of time on them per day anyway. And it isn't like you immediately forget the story of your favorite tv series that has 30 minutes long episodes which are shown once per week.

I think the problem is that the game has too much boring filler not that it is too long.
 

SpaceKungFuMan

Scholar
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
253
skyway said:
I think the problem is that the game has too much boring filler not that it is too long.

That's 100% right. The problem is developers seem to think length is an end unto itself, so they inevitably use filler. I can't think of a long game that doesn't have filler, and all the time I spend playing filler is time that could be better spent on the quality parts of another game.
 

hiver

Guest
Vibalist said:
A week ago I sat around and complained about the spirit eater mechanic in MoTB, because I had only invested a couple of hours in the game and in my infinite wisdom thought I could already pass judgment on it at that point. When I played on I ended up loving it.
A-HA !!!
 

mondblut

Arcane
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
22,205
Location
Ingrija
SpaceKungFuMan said:
Since when are the primary virtues of RPGs size and content?

Since about the time they went out of the dungeons and met towns and outdoors outside.

Of course, good combat engine and advanced game-mechanics stand first, but the bigger the world and more content, the more potential it has in exploration, the third priority.

The best RPG ever made (Fallout)...

Who told you? Last time I checked, Wizardry 7 was the one. Or was it Darklands? Maybe Temple of Elemental Evil?

...is only 10 hours long.

Spoilers ain't good for salvation. But I guess married attorneys don't have much choice other than to arm themselves with a walkthrough and run like hell to wherever the ending happens, if only the game permits so?

That guy on youtube who played through Morrowind in under 14 minutes, it wasn't you, by any chance? :lol:

I absolutely do think that RPGs should be shorter though

I sure hope you won't ever lose your hands to a terrible accident. Else you'd probably demand RPGs to have pedal controls.

along with any other game that has content that can be cut without taking away positive gameplay experiences.

Ever occured to you that someone else's take on positive gameplay experiences might be a tad different from yours?

When a game is filled with great quests and an interesting world that is worth exploring because that exploration itself is interesting (i.e. divine divinity, fallout) and not just because of rewards, it can be as long as it wants.

Can't argue here, all correct. Except that there is nothing inherently wrong with exploring for rewards alone, if rewards are good. Ontopic, huge part of a problem with TWitcher was that "rewards" were worth shit.

But as soon as the playtime is padded with trash encounters, pointless dungeons, and walking across bland generic scenery (i.e. Oblivion), the game needs to be shorter to stay worth playing.

No. The game needs not to be played at all. Shorter length does not make trash encounters, pointless dungeons and generic scenery any better. And problem herein is not in length but in a crappy game in general.

I would buy a game like portal or cod4 every week, because they provide a short but great experience. That seems like a better revenue stream then milking one purchase for half the year.

As a game producer who has to goad gullible people into purchasing more of my games to make my living, I would probably agree. As an RPG player, I think huge games like Wizardry 7 or World of Xeen piss at 10-15 hours long midgets from a very, very high altitude.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom