I have only recently started playing Witcher 3.

 

Was just wondering on what people thought in regards to these 2 games

 

please vote

I don't think you could've picked two less alike games within the same genre.

What's with all these "Deadfire versus a mainstream juggernaut" debates? It's like comparing Blade Runner with the most recent Marvel movie.

Edited July 11, 20187 yr by Murp

I can't answer this one. I enjoyed both quite much, but for extremely differing reasons. These games just seem insanely hard to compare in somewhat relevant manner.

 

Push comes to shove: If you forced me to pick one and I had to make no justifications, I'd say I enjoyed Wiedzmin 3 a bit more. I'd place PoE1 above Wiedzmin 3 though.

Well overall Witcher 3 has a much more engaging main conflict and story. Sure it got bogged down in the middle, but one of the main story quests early on was as one of the best quests I've ever played (won't spoil it for you, others prob know). And the story really picked up interest and suspense as it went on.

 

HOWEVER, Witcher 3 has some serious, serious clunk issues. Like the gameplay is straight awkward most of the time. Maybe one of the worst menu systems in a quality AAA game. Constant menu swaps, constant menu-ing. Combat is serviceable compared to the terrible combat of W2 but it's not great. Not even good really. Overall, game play is clunky and feels less precise.

 

Now, Deadfire's main story is mostly a joke, but damn are the side quests really fun and engaging. Witcher 3 is similar, but Deadfire is just so much more fun to PLAY - i.e. the gameplay is a ton smoother. So in regards I give Deadfire the major edge. Both have great worldbuilding so lets call that a tie.

 

Lastly, Deadfire's bugs in some instances are inexcusable. Key dialogue not triggering? A FINAL BOSS NOT TRIGGERING?! Yes that's right friends, I did not fight the final boss on my first playthrough. So regarding polish W3 wins.

 

Overall, and very biasedly, I give the edge to Deadfire, but Witcher 3 does have a great main story and characters, something Obsidian can learn from. In time polish will really help Deadfire, but time will tell if it will be remembered as much as W3 with all of it's acclaim, some due and some undue.

 

But really the King is still BG2 sorry had to throw that in.

Edited July 11, 20187 yr by Verde

Not comparable at all.

My xaurip's brain can't handle this.

What's with all these "Deadfire versus a mainstream juggernaut" debates? It's like comparing Blade Runner with the most recent Marvel movie.

 

Are you new to the internet or something? You're not allowed to just like things on their own terms. You have to place them into some kind of internal top 10 list and then go aggressively searching for validation.

So im the OP

 

I have been trying to play witcher 3 the last couple of days

 

I cant get into it

 

Its to linear eg go to X do Y

 

The game is seriously not that good to be honest dont understand the hype around it

What didn't you like about tight-ass-lady-of-time-with-boobs-nearly-sticking-out-of-half-exposed-bra, while she is cutting down hordes of enemies wearing high heels and using amateur sword techniques from Hollywood. Huh?

 

HUH?!

 

Witcher 3 and Deadfire aim to achieve very different things. My mouth practically curls by itself into a sneer when I remember some of the absurdities of Witcher 3. There is good in the game, but it just isn't for me. No... No, sir. Thank you. Come again.  

so why all the hype about witcher 3 then

 

I have been told it is a good game

 

I have been playing it for the last 4 days

 

It is honestly very boring.

 

Every single part of the game is just go to X and do Y. Over and over and over and over. Different monsters but still go to X and do Y

 

Sh$t game hey like a terrible game. Only a 4 year old child would find the mindless braindead monster hunt enjoyable

Yeah whatever.

Because it has great story, is visually pleasing, has amazingly written characters, deep lore, many amazing sidequests, very open world, phenomenal soundtrack.. there's a lot. I only got into Witcher 3 after it went GOTY because earlier I thought that it's not my type of the game. How wrong I was. The only thing I didn't enjoy very much was combat, but only because I'm not normally into aRPG games and to be honest I kinda suck at them.

 

Go to X and do Y feels like.. I don't know.. every single game ever created that has a single-player story campaign? Play sports games if you don't like that.

 

Also, I'm pretty sure that every person individually decides what's fun for him/her.

Sometimes a game comes along and no matter how popular or great it is, all you can see are the cracks in the seams. Breath of the Wild was like that for me. Everyone else loved it and the flaws are glaringly obvious to me and prevent me from enjoying it. That doesn't mean the game isn't great or that my tastes are 'incorrect', but that it just wasn't for me. We'll all be a lot happier when everyone accepts this fact and no longer dwell on it.

Go to X and do Y feels like.. I don't know.. every single game ever created that has a single-player story campaign?

 

That's true, and I think a big part of game design in general is covering it up. Most video games ultimately constitute a sequence of fetch and/or murder quests, but it's the aesthetics that are important. The Witcher series has a very particular, well-crafted aesthetic - a mix of "dark" fantasy (and remember, when the first Witcher came out, dark fantasy was even more popular than it is now), open-world gameplay elements, evocative retelling of sword-and-sorcery tropes,  and ultra-masculine physical, intellectual, emotional and sexual power fantasy. But Deadfire can be broken down in the same way, as can any other game. If one or more of those things hooks you, the game is going to feel substantial. If none of them do ... yeah, it's gonna feel like busywork.

 

Go to X and do Y feels like.. I don't know.. every single game ever created that has a single-player story campaign?

 

That's true, and I think a big part of game design in general is covering it up. Most video games ultimately constitute a sequence of fetch and/or murder quests, but it's the aesthetics that are important. The Witcher series has a very particular, well-crafted aesthetic - a mix of "dark" fantasy (and remember, when the first Witcher came out, dark fantasy was even more popular than it is now), open-world gameplay elements, evocative retelling of sword-and-sorcery tropes,  and ultra-masculine physical, intellectual, emotional and sexual power fantasy. But Deadfire can be broken down in the same way, as can any other game. If one or more of those things hooks you, the game is going to feel substantial. If none of them do ... yeah, it's gonna feel like busywork.

 

Yeah right

 

GTA5 definetely 100% doesnt feel like go to X and do Y

 

Like no where near it

 

Its budget was something like what $50,000,000 million though

 

50 mil aint bad lol

 

EDIT

 

it actualy cost  $278 million lol so says Wikipedia  

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop

 

apparantley GTA5 made more money then the entire music industry in sales the year it was released . WOW

 

https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/09/28/gta-5-sales-hit-1-billion.aspx

Edited July 11, 20187 yr by no1fanboy

So you're saying that you can complete GTA5 without doing any specific quests or tasks that the game require you to, to move the story forward?

 

What's with all these "Deadfire versus a mainstream juggernaut" debates? It's like comparing Blade Runner with the most recent Marvel movie.

Are you new to the internet or something? You're not allowed to just like things on their own terms. You have to place them into some kind of internal top 10 list and then go aggressively searching for validation.

Hahaha.

 

Now I just want to seek validation for an extremely unpopular opinion.

I don't think you could've picked two less alike games within the same genre.

 

Edited July 11, 20187 yr by no1fanboy

OK let me break this down:

 

The only "con" in Witcher 3 is it's rather black/white main storyline with that cardboard cartoon villain who lacks meaningful characterization and becomes a strawman threat. - I am judging the game on its own terms btw in this- and a flat underdeveloped villain/character like Eredin is generally not a staple one comes to associate of what the Witcher franchise usually brings to the table and is as a result jarring. That, however, is the only weakness of the "external" surface plot of the main storyline in that game - the internal/hidden storyline which is a father/adopted daughter storyline between Geralt and Ciri of the Witcher 3 is quite solid though and engaging, and the two DLC released for that game Heart of Stone and Blood and Wine are unsurpassed in terms of rpg storytelling, the characters and how you as a main protagonist fit into the plot of those games. 

Even with that weakness in Witcher 3 does not compare objectively to all the "potholes" in the main story arc of PoE2 - but PoE2's strength is not story but rather character design and engaging in a semi open world. And by the way the "semi open world" is still better in W3. 

 

I mean Witcher 3 is the best rpg of the last 10 years since DAO just because of it's two DLCs push it rightfully into all time great discussion. Without DLCs for me Witcher 2 would have been still the better game though because it's a more complicated political story is what I look for in the Witcher franchise, but the DLCs brought that even aspect of Witcher 2 into Witcher 3 with more refinement. 

 

What's with all these "Deadfire versus a mainstream juggernaut" debates? It's like comparing Blade Runner with the most recent Marvel movie.

 

Are you new to the internet or something? You're not allowed to just like things on their own terms. You have to place them into some kind of internal top 10 list and then go aggressively searching for validation.

 

 

Addendum: it is not silly to ask "What would win, X or Y?" questions if you are

 

a) five years old;

b) Urdnot Wrex.

I don't think you could've picked two less alike games within the same genre.

 

Deadfire gets compared to D:OS2 all the time so comparison to TW3 isn't surprising.

I thoroughly enjoy both games, so I’m gonna pick One Punch Man.

Neither are good. Deadfire is bugged and unbalanced and the developers do not care. Witcher 3 developers do care but the game forces me to play as a man. That sucks.

This thread, while nominally this side of on-topic seems to mostly be off-topic now.