Review The Witcher sucks

[DarkUnderlord]

Tags: Witcher, The

... or at least it does according to Twenty Sided. Shamus Young's <a href="http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=1788">original review was damming</a> "inhabiting the role of Geralt was about as much fun as shuffling around the house in Hugh Heffner’s nasty old bathrobe". <a href="http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=1793">His follow-up was no better</a> "After this much drudgery, the game would have to let me relive the alleyway scene from Spider-Man". Well, now <a href="http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=1797">Shamus has posted his final thoughts</a> and it's still not good:
<br>
<blockquote>It turns out I never really took the steps needed to enjoy the game. I’ve been unfair. Luckily, people have provided me with lots of helpful tips on what I’ve been doing wrong. It turns out that to really enjoy the game you just need to:
<br>
<br>
1. Read a 72-page manual.
<br>
2. Read the series of books on which the game is based. (You need to learn Polish first, as only the first book is available in English.)
<br>
3. Wait until the patch comes out in a few months that will fix up all the annoyances and problems with the game.
<br>
4. Spend hundreds of dollars upgrading your computer. Only a fool plays a game with mid-range hardware, anyway.
<br>
5. Play for several hours until you get to the good parts.
<br>
<br>
Okay, snark and sarcasm aside, I really do think I need to shelve this game. I seem to be immune to the alleged charm of The Witcher, and endlessly hammering away at it is sort of pointless.
<br>
<br>
This goes back to my first post in this series. Some people faulted me for writing a whole post about Geralt, but I think that post encapsulated the entire problem. Geralt is step one to liking the game. If you’re repulsed by him the way I am, then it’s going to be a deal-breaker. Playing The Witcher if you don’t like Geralt is like playing GTA if you hate driving.
<br>
<br>
And this probably explains why this series has been so hostile. If you’re not immersed in a game, all the faults tend to stick out and grab your attention. If you’re having fun, you gloss over the little annoying details.</blockquote>
<br>
But I thought the game was totally awesome on release and doesn't need any "annoying issues which completely ruin the game for you" (thus rendering it unplayable) to be fixed up? For those waiting on the Enhanced Edition, CD Projekt have <a href="http://www.rpgwatch.com/show/newsbit?newsbit=9977">issued this press release</a> letting you know about all the goodies that'll be in the new box.
<br>
<br>
If you get a 404 or similar error message trying to view TwentySided, <a href="http://hidemyass.com/">use HideMyAss</a>.
<br>
<br>
Spotted @ <a href="http://www.gamebanshee.com">GameBanshee</a>

 

[sportforredneck]

DU continues his decline into asshole-ishness.

 

[Solohk]

Your news posts are bad and you should feel bad.

 

[Claw]

No change, really.

 

[Jedi_Learner]

So long as a game has choices and consequences, the members of this community will happily ignore all shortcomings. Just look at Arcanum.

 

[elander_]

God forbid someone preferring choices and consequences over graphics and retard safe gameplay.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

So long as a game has choices and consequences, the members of this community will happily ignore all shortcomings. Just look at Arcanum.

You are an insightful genius whose perception knows no bounds.

 

[Jedi_Learner]

You are an insightful genius whose perception knows no bounds.

I piss on your juvenile scorn!

 

[Hamster]

What was the site that allows people who get this

Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /twentysidedtale/ on this server.

Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request

to view shamusyoung.com ?

 

[Joe Krow]

God forbid someone preferring choices and consequences over graphics and retard safe gameplay.

...because these are the only options.

 

[DefJam101]

Uhm, alright.

 

[Fez]

Nicely done, DU.

 

[Spectacle]

How the fuck is some guy writing on his blog about how he doesnt like a certain game front page news???

It seems like DU is deliberately posting otherwise inconsequential articles that are sure to incite people, to generate a lot of posts. There is a word for this activity: Trolling.

Decline of the codex....

 

[LCJr.]

If this had been a post about Oblivion there wouldn't be a single complaint. In fact it'd probably be on at least page 10 by now. Bask in the irony friends.

 

[Jeff Graw]

It's obvious that this is nothing more than a vain attempt on DU's part to recover from the massive butthurt he received in the other thread.

That being said, there are plenty of things to criticize in The Witcher: Too much grinding, the railroaded ending sequence, a dull beginning section, the idiotic tarot cards.... but it's still an above average RPG on the whole.

 

[elander_]

God forbid someone preferring choices and consequences over graphics and retard safe gameplay.

...because these are the only options.

No, it's obvious that the only options are graphically nauseating games and retarded safe game play. Just look at Oblivion 10/10 score.

 

[sportforredneck]

You are an insightful genius whose perception knows no bounds.

I piss on your juvenile scorn!

You are seriously fuck up man.

 

[Jung]

Oh how I miss the halcyon Vault Dweller days...*DECLINEOMETER pegs the stop*

 

[Volourn]

"It seems like DU is deliberately posting otherwise inconsequential articles that are sure to incite people, to generate a lot of posts. There is a word for this activity: Trolling."

Oh, please. Codex newsposts have always been nlike this. Dumbass.

 

[Silellak]

How the fuck is some guy writing on his blog about how he doesnt like a certain game front page news???

Because apparently, by finding someome else who didn't like the Witcher, this somehow justifies everything he said here: http://www.rpgcodex.net/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=25856

This is my favorite part of the post:

But I thought the game was totally awesome on release and doesn't need any "annoying issues which completely ruin the game for you" (thus rendering it unplayable) to be fixed up?

So, because some random guy at some random website didn't like it and found it unplayable, that means those of us who think it's awesome are wrong, and that the general concensus of the gaming community is that it's "unplayable."

I wasn't aware that a few people finding a game "unplayable" made it a general fact, but I'll keep that in mind from now on.

Did you know the world is flat? I totally found a website here that say so: http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm

 

[Dgaider]

I will say that I agree with the guy on one thing: if you're going to force a player to play the role of a specific character in an RPG, that character will need to be appealing or you've just erected an insurmountable barrier for some of your player base. Granted, you're never going to please everyone in this respect, but that's what character customization is supposed to solve. It makes the character more personal -- the player has some ownership over the role they're being asked to play.

I think Planescape: Torment had the same fault. For all the things it did right (and it did them right in some pretty spectacular ways), I know a lot of people who just could not get past the fact that they were forced to play a giant, grey, hulking brute called The Nameless One. If you didn't like him, you would never get to the point of enjoying the actual story.

Which is too bad. Planescape had an awesome story, and so did the Witcher. Having a set main character is part of what allowed that, but also part of what prevented a lot of people from getting into it. A trade-off to keep in mind on the developer side, I suppose.

 

[DefJam101]

Yeah, probably doesn't help that Geralt himself is a 'niche' character. Most everyone I have talked to has either hated him or loved him, and I can understand both views.

I demand Shepard/Turian romance in Mass Effect 2, by the way.

 

[Silellak]

I will say that I agree with the guy on one thing: if you're going to force a player to play the role of a specific character in an RPG, that character will need to be appealing or you've just erected an insurmountable barrier for some of your player base. Granted, you're never going to please everyone in this respect, but that's what character customization is supposed to solve. It makes the character more personal -- the player has some ownership over the role they're being asked to play.

I think Planescape: Torment had the same fault. For all the things it did right (and it did them right in some pretty spectacular ways), I know a lot of people who just could not get past the fact that they were forced to play a giant, grey, hulking brute called The Nameless One. If you didn't like him, you would never get to the point of enjoying the actual story.

Which is too bad. Planescape had an awesome story, and so did the Witcher. Having a set main character is part of what allowed that, but also part of what prevented a lot of people from getting into it. A trade-off to keep in mind on the developer side, I suppose.

Yup, I agree, those type of games are definitely double-edged swords. I love the Song of Ice and Fire series of books, as does nearly everyone I know who read them. But one guy I know couldn't get past the first book because he couldn't find a single character he liked. And there's not much you can say about that - it's hard to enjo ANY story without liking the characters, be it a novel or a video game.

What DU seems to be misunderstanding is that someone not liking Geralt, and thus not liking the Witcher, is not proof that the game sucks and is unplayable. I really don't understand how he made that leap.

I mean the author of the review says this:

And this probably explains why this series has been so hostile. If you’re not immersed in a game, all the faults tend to stick out and grab your attention. If you’re having fun, you gloss over the little annoying details.

But really, what game isn't that true for? All games have flaws, and the more you're drawn in, the more willing you are to overlook them. The fact that the Witcher has flaws does not mean it is unplayable. I don't think anyone ever claimed the game was "flawless", just that it was already very-much playable and that the Enhanced Edition certainly isn't necessary to make the game "playable".

They're just improving what many people think is already a kick-ass game. If you don't like the game already, I really don't think the EE is going to magically change your mind.

 

[BillyOgawa]

..

 

[Shannow]

But I thought the game was totally awesome on release and doesn't need any "annoying issues which completely ruin the game for you" (thus rendering it unplayable) to be fixed up?

Which were? Long loading times, boobies, bad but undestandable translation, 3D, Set character, dislike of setting and unenjoyable combat?
Those depend on your attitude, nationality and preferences, but they do not make a game unplayable. Or are tomatoes un-eatable because I don't like them?
I said before that it is ok for you or anybody else not to like TW. It is simply strange that you'd rag on a company for trying to improve their product according to fan-input for free for people who did like it or think that they might like it.

You suffer from Codex-braindamage which only allows you to think in absolutes.

@dgaider: There is room for more than one kind of game on the market. Not all games have to follow your preferences (thank god).