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.

So, which one is your favourite Witcher game?

Which Witcher does Witchering the Best?

  • Witcher 1 (the NWN mod)

    Votes: 149 45.8%
  • Witcher 2 (the cutscene simulator)

    Votes: 20 6.2%
  • Witcher 3 (the downgraded port)

    Votes: 126 38.8%
  • KC (Skyrim)

    Votes: 30 9.2%

  • Total voters
    325

Quillon

Arcane
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
5,263
Witcher 4: Origins will be the best!

:prosper:

They fooked the world up, one empire burning & conquering most of the map, another kingdom eating its neighbors. To go forward you must go back.

Tho fuck consistency; they could always say some time passed, Nilfgaard expansion failed and they retreated south, other northern kingdoms risen from ashes etc

Then again retards hate politics and want personal story, this simplistic remains of once interesting map could work for them.
 

Phisto

Literate
Joined
Oct 19, 2017
Messages
21
Guess I'm in the minority. 3 has better gameplay and exploration but I enjoyed 2's story a lot more, probably because it had a worthwhile villain. Chubby pasty guy or THE ICE AGE didn't convince me to abandon berry picking nor elicit any interest from me to learn who they are.
 

moon knight

Matt7895's alt
Joined
Apr 7, 2015
Messages
1,138
Location
Italy
probably because it had a worthwhile villain.

Yes, Letho alone holds the entirety of the main quest.
Witcher 2 story also feels better paced because of the semi linear structure of the game. Also, the branching path is always a plus.
 

Falksi

Arcane
Joined
Feb 14, 2017
Messages
10,720
Location
Nottingham
Guess I'm in the minority. 3 has better gameplay and exploration but I enjoyed 2's story a lot more, probably because it had a worthwhile villain. Chubby pasty guy or THE ICE AGE didn't convince me to abandon berry picking nor elicit any interest from me to learn who they are.

I'm in that minority too. TW2's story - especially the branching path & interwoven plot points (such as the dragon) - were IMO fucking brilliant. A superb blend of earthyness & epicness, with the whole motovation simply being to survive. As you say, Letho was a great villain too. Not too mention the "bros" on both sides were equally as good.

Bloody Baron quest aside, TW3's story for me was boring as hell and a massive mistep. It set you up with a sense of urgency with the Wild Hunt as a threar, yet gameplay wise you plodded through it at your own pace, doing youor day job & numerous errands along the way. As Moon Knight says, TW2 was just far better paced.
 

Sjukob

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2015
Messages
2,076
I see people are slowly realising that TW2 has the best story in the series and TW3 is pretty derp . May be a few years later we will agree that TW1 is the best of them .
 
Joined
Apr 3, 2006
Messages
1,386
There's a considerable overlap between the Assassin's Creed fanbase and The Witcher 3 fanbase. This isn't by chance. There's also a disturbing amount of Codexers who own console controllers. If we drew a Venn diagram of these three sets, then the Codexers who voted for The Witcher 3 in this poll would be in the intersection of all three sets.
 

Falksi

Arcane
Joined
Feb 14, 2017
Messages
10,720
Location
Nottingham
I see people are slowly realising that TW2 has the best story in the series and TW3 is pretty derp . May be a few years later we will agree that TW1 is the best of them .

I'm still gobsmacked at the praise TW3 had recieved tbh. TW1 & TW2 are both classics IMO, not TW3 though.

Don't get me wrong, I can see TW3 has decent elements, but - Bloody Baron aside - it's frightening how much any RPG can be praised with such criminally dull & disconnected main quest.

There's a considerable overlap between the Assassin's Creed fanbase and The Witcher 3 fanbase. This isn't by chance. There's also a disturbing amount of Codexers who own console controllers. If we drew a Venn diagram of these three sets, then the Codexers who voted for The Witcher 3 in this poll would be in the intersection of all three sets.

Agreed, but I'm more of a console player than a PC one, simply because I can't be doing with all the faff trying to get some games to run. And it definitely doesn't take a rocket scientist to see all the AAA Assasin Creed like tropes which seeped into TW3.

Personally it felt as if I spent 2/3rds of my time running over barren wasteland, and around none-entity "npcs" who you couldn't interact with. There appeared to be a large amount of "nothingness" (pointless loot, none-interactive NPCs, repetitive merchants, samey quests) which seemed to fill the game.
 

Mr. Salty

Novice
Joined
Sep 4, 2017
Messages
8
Honestly, I enjoyed them all. Combat was never great in any of them, but obviously worst in TW1. I enjoyed some of the grey morality and snarky writing. If I had to pick, I would probably say 1, because of all of the crap that was available at the time, and I found it to be a refreshing change.
 
Joined
Apr 3, 2006
Messages
1,386
There's a considerable overlap between the Assassin's Creed fanbase and The Witcher 3 fanbase. This isn't by chance. There's also a disturbing amount of Codexers who own console controllers. If we drew a Venn diagram of these three sets, then the Codexers who voted for The Witcher 3 in this poll would be in the intersection of all three sets.

Agreed, but I'm more of a console player than a PC one, simply because I can't be doing with all the faff trying to get some games to run. And it definitely doesn't take a rocket scientist to see all the AAA Assasin Creed like tropes which seeped into TW3.

Personally it felt as if I spent 2/3rds of my time running over barren wasteland, and around none-entity "npcs" who you couldn't interact with. There appeared to be a large amount of "nothingness" (pointless loot, none-interactive NPCs, repetitive merchants, samey quests) which seemed to fill the game.
With The Witcher 3 it felt like they were trying to make The Witcher 2.5, i.e. a reasonably focused story-driven game with branching narrative. All the basic elements of The Witcher 2 are present in The Witcher 3, but for sales purposes they slapped the whole thing down into a giant Ubisoft-style open world theme park complete with animatronic robots posing as NPCs and vast amounts of shallow, repetitive content. And shallowness aside, the gating of XP through the main quest made exploration redundant anyway. For me, Blood and Wine was a better experience over the base game as the level of meaningful content per virtual square mile was higher.
 

MicoSelva

backlog digger
Patron
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
7,496
Location
Fort Joy
Codex 2012 Codex 2013 Codex 2014 PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Codex+ Now Streaming! Enjoy the Revolution! Another revolution around the sun that is. Serpent in the Staglands Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Divinity: Original Sin 2 Bubbles In Memoria A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath I helped put crap in Monomyth
I like The Witcher 3 the most, but I've wanted to roam around in that world since I read the first book at 14 yo, and this game finally delivered that. It has some major flaws, true, but what it did well, it did really well.
 

Falksi

Arcane
Joined
Feb 14, 2017
Messages
10,720
Location
Nottingham
With The Witcher 3 it felt like they were trying to make The Witcher 2.5, i.e. a reasonably focused story-driven game with branching narrative. All the basic elements of The Witcher 2 are present in The Witcher 3, but for sales purposes they slapped the whole thing down into a giant Ubisoft-style open world theme park complete with animatronic robots posing as NPCs and vast amounts of shallow, repetitive content. And shallowness aside, the gating of XP through the main quest made exploration redundant anyway. For me, Blood and Wine was a better experience over the base game as the level of meaningful content per virtual square mile was higher.

:bro: Same here chap.

Trouble being for me personally, that TW2's story was also far more epic & exciting than TW3's too. So not only was it padded out world-wise, but it felt padded out story-wise too. Almost everything extra which they included in TW3 not only felt pointless, but for me actually hindered getting to the good stuff too.

It was also a fucking retarded way to do it as well. The whole of TW3 was meant to be about urgently getting to Ciri before the Wild Hunt did, and plodding around doing your day job & mundane, everyday tasks totally went against that and made the whole thing feel off. "Quick get to Ciri before the Wild Hunt get there!!! Actually, I'll just get some paint for this troll......"

How'd you compare Blood & Wine to TW2? I tried Heart of Stone & again it just didn't grab me.
 
Last edited:

vonAchdorf

Arcane
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
13,465
TW3 has a few problems. The really really urgent, but really not so urgent main quest (and side quests). The randomized, level scaled loot destroyed any sense of wonder and discovery.
 

anvi

Prophet
Village Idiot
Joined
Oct 12, 2016
Messages
7,633
Location
Kelethin
The bad combat makes them all bad. Give me decent combat and let me play as a Ranger or Wizard or something and Witcher 3 would have been one of my favorite games.
 
Joined
Apr 3, 2006
Messages
1,386
How'd you compare Blood & Wine to TW2?
I'd say it's not particularly similar to The Witcher 2. If TW2 could be compared to a multi-part novel series, than Blood & Wine is a short story. It's like a very long side quest with an open world attached to it rather than the linear world but far more complex story of TW2. Blood & Wine is basically a condensed, more cheerful version of The Witcher 3 with less time-wasting filler and a relatively low-key story. Of all The Witcher games, Blood & Wine is closest in tone and content to the original Sapkowski short stories I've read.
 

Quillon

Arcane
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
5,263
Of all The Witcher games, Blood & Wine is closest in tone and content to the original Sapkowski short stories I've read.

I particularly found it not quite bittersweet as the books as far as quest resolutions go; there are many quests with "good for everyone involved" outcomes compared to all the Witcher games till then. I found TW2's story structure where Geralt's travelling with a small group of people, staying at inns, doing contracts in that hub before moving on to the next one in the direction of the main goal etc. quite similar to how the story told in the books.
 

Akratus

Self-loathing fascist drunken misogynist asshole
Patron
Joined
May 7, 2013
Messages
0
Location
The Netherlands
Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
The best parts of the Witcher 1 are better than the Witcher 2, for me. But it also has far more stretches of boring overlong content, so overal I enjoy the second one more even though I prefer the first in certain ways. The witcher 3 is filled with way too much crap and you can't say fuck humans and go chill with the dwarves and elves so fuck that one.
 

Falksi

Arcane
Joined
Feb 14, 2017
Messages
10,720
Location
Nottingham
How'd you compare Blood & Wine to TW2?
I'd say it's not particularly similar to The Witcher 2. If TW2 could be compared to a multi-part novel series, than Blood & Wine is a short story. It's like a very long side quest with an open world attached to it rather than the linear world but far more complex story of TW2. Blood & Wine is basically a condensed, more cheerful version of The Witcher 3 with less time-wasting filler and a relatively low-key story. Of all The Witcher games, Blood & Wine is closest in tone and content to the original Sapkowski short stories I've read.

Cheers mate. I'd like to think I'll give it a go, but after forcing myself through the main game twice and getting frustrated with Heart of Stone I doubt I will.

The best parts of the Witcher 1 are better than the Witcher 2, for me. But it also has far more stretches of boring overlong content, so overal I enjoy the second one more even though I prefer the first in certain ways. The witcher 3 is filled with way too much crap and you can't say fuck humans and go chill with the dwarves and elves so fuck that one.

Agreed. Both 1 & 2 are classics to me in their own ways. I can return to both and still thrive on them, with the only struggle I have being TW1's more labourious sections such as the swamp.

What I find bizare about TW3 is how all they've really done is take TW2, improve the combat slightly, add an Open World & loads of filler (most pointless), add a fair few of AAA tropes too, water down the quality of the story, and folk are raving about it.

I hated it, but fair play I can see there's a fair game in there for folk who like more Assasin's Creedy type games. But why are some so called hardcore RPG fans spunking for joy over it and not it's predecessors? It's clearly the most "casual" out of the 3 games,and CDPR are walking a similar path to Bioware by dumbing down & casual-pandering each new game further for said casual audience, but without EA pointing a gun at their head.
 

vonAchdorf

Arcane
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
13,465
I wouldn't call TW3 a bad game, that would be too edgy, but it didn't grip me as much as TW1 (and to an extent TW2 did).
 

luj1

You're all shills
Vatnik
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
13,879
Location
Eastern block
Definitely the first Witcher. TW3 is obviously a very good game, but I didn't like the change in aesthetic. Also that MMO UI is pure cancer.
 

vota DC

Augur
Joined
Aug 23, 2016
Messages
2,289
Guess I'm in the minority. 3 has better gameplay and exploration but I enjoyed 2's story a lot more, probably because it had a worthwhile villain. Chubby pasty guy or THE ICE AGE didn't convince me to abandon berry picking nor elicit any interest from me to learn who they are.

But Letho wasn't a villain, just the antagonist. Yeah he killed king Sisterfucker and framed you but he is supposed someone you feel sorry about. I killed him only because I already spared Henselt so it made sense be 100% king's puppet.
 

agentorange

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
5,256
Location
rpghq (cant read codex pms cuz of fag 2fa)
Codex 2012
Witcher 1 has the most vile, medieval atmosphere of them all. It also had the more fitting character system, especially the alchemy system that felt like a very ingrained part of the game instead of the boring, almost unnecessary power up system it got changed into in later games. Segmented open world like Witcher 1 is also a far better choice for world design, it allows for greater detail in the individual areas and less of a need for filler. Witcher 3 has a giant world but very little of it is unique or enjoyable to explore.
 

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