The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt [2014]

[licketysplit]

 

 

Silly trailer, something in-game would have been better.  But I'm not really anticipating another watered-down semi-RPG that has no actual role-playing and little emphasis on player choice, which is exactly what the first two games are.  

Sounds like you are a big fan of the series?

If  games like Witcher don't offer you RPG choices what would be a good example of a modern game that does? I am interested to compare your idea of a true RPG to the Witcher series.

 

Witcher 2 has 10 possible endings or so based on your decisions so I'm not sure what more you want?

 

 

The ending isn't everything.  Examples of modern games that really do take into account player choice?  Both Dragon Age games (especially DA:O), all Mass Effect games (inb4ME3ending), and The Walking Dead for starters.  Only two or three choices made in TW1 actually make some sort of affect on TW2 when importing a save, and these changes are minuscule: one of them is a small dialogue change, the other lets you get into a city without fighting.  Your romance choice is completely ignored.

 

Character development is completely one dimensional, dialogue choices result in no difference in this regard.  Most decisions made throughout both games have no long term effect, especially compared to the games I listed above.

 

 

"Witcher 2 has 10 possible endings"

 

L0L

 

 

 

  "If there's one thing the Witcher games have, it's a strong emphasis on player choice and consequences based on those choices."

 

D0UBLE L0L

 

 

Glad I'm not the only one who sees this.

 

 

I've no idea what you're seeing. Both Witcher games offered plenty of choice and consequence for me.

[Volourn]

You get to play the white haired monster killer or you get to play the white haired monster killer. DEEP CHOICE.

[licketysplit]

You get to play the white haired monster killer or you get to play the white haired monster killer. DEEP CHOICE.

 

Cosmetic. I'm more interested in how the narrative, gameplay opportunities and NPC's react to my decisions.

[Gorth]

Just wait for the hair dye DLC

[entrerix]

volo is making a real point though

 

he is confusing role playing with choice and consequence, but its true that in the witcher you play as Geralt.  In many rpg's you play as HERO, which you get to name and create.  its a very different experience

[Rhamnetin]

 

 

 

I've no idea what you're seeing. Both Witcher games offered plenty of choice and consequence for me.

 

 

Sure, just very little compared to many other RPGs.  Although like I said, the result of most choices is immediate and doesn't affect anything later in the game.  It's just disgusting to see people praise The Witcher games as some of the best RPGs ever made, especially on Obsidian forums lol.  But thankfully it's more rare here.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

I've no idea what you're seeing. Both Witcher games offered plenty of choice and consequence for me.

 

 

Sure, just very little compared to many other RPGs.  Although like I said, the result of most choices is immediate and doesn't affect anything later in the game.  It's just disgusting to see people praise The Witcher games as some of the best RPGs ever made, especially on Obsidian forums lol.  But thankfully it's more rare here.

 

 No need to feel disgusted, this is our opinion that millions of fans of the series share. This is merely a difference of view

[mkreku]

You get to play the white haired monster killer or you get to play the white haired monster killer. DEEP CHOICE.

 

You mean like playing the scarred amnesiac the Nameless One in Planescape: Torment?

[Azdeus]

Sure, just very little compared to many other RPGs.  Although like I said, the result of most choices is immediate and doesn't affect anything later in the game.  It's just disgusting to see people praise The Witcher games as some of the best RPGs ever made, especially on Obsidian forums lol.  But thankfully it's more rare here.

 

 

Really? Compared to what games? Because neither DAO or Mass Effect have any choices worth mentioning, especially not compared to the Witcher series.

[Malcador]

Mass Effect has the Tuchanka and Geth arcs that go across the games, that was pretty good.

[alanschu]

 

You get to play the white haired monster killer or you get to play the white haired monster killer. DEEP CHOICE.

 

You mean like playing the scarred amnesiac the Nameless One in Planescape: Torment?

 

 

There are people that dislike PST for that reason though.

[Rhamnetin]

 

Sure, just very little compared to many other RPGs.  Although like I said, the result of most choices is immediate and doesn't affect anything later in the game.  It's just disgusting to see people praise The Witcher games as some of the best RPGs ever made, especially on Obsidian forums lol.  But thankfully it's more rare here.

 

 

Really? Compared to what games? Because neither DAO or Mass Effect have any choices worth mentioning, especially not compared to the Witcher series.

 

 

The Witcher games have no choices worth mentioning, especially compared to Dragon Age or Mass Effect series.  See, I can do that too.

 

Witcher's choices don't matter as much to me since they have a much smaller impact on the world, and the one dimensional lesser character development keeps me from really caring.  If this doesn't stop you from preferring The Witcher for some reason, good for you.  I'm not as easily satisfied.

 

Not to mention the choices are a lot "smaller"... kill this person or not, side with this side or not, compared to choosing the fate of an entire race in Mass Effect, or choosing who will run Ferelden.  Witcher provides little and does little as an RPG.

Edited August 16, 2013 by Rhamnetin

[HoonDing]

Only choice I remember is whether banging Ves or banging a succubus.

[Rhamnetin]

Only choice I remember is whether banging Ves or banging a succubus.

 

That accounts for most of the dialogue options.  BANG HOOKER Y/N

[entrerix]

i actually didnt really like playing as geralt in the witcher 2.  i prefer having more control over my characters personality, not just his actions.

 

 

the nameless one in torment provides more of a role-play feel than geralt, because he is more of a blank slate whereas geralt has a lot of his personality defined for you right at the beginning.

 

i still thought the witcher 2 was a good game, and im excited for part 3, but if i was allowed to play my own witcher character that i got to make and name i would be A LOT happier

[Malcador]

Hm, could just be differing tastes - not every game has to have world altering change driven by the PC, although it is common

[entrerix]

i dont care about altering the world, i usually prefer smaller scope games (altering the fate of a few small towns would be nice)

[licketysplit]

Only choice I remember is whether banging Ves or banging a succubus.

 

 

That's a very important decision.

 

Seriously though, The Witcher games are brimming with impactful choices. We can join different factions in both games, let people burn, save them or kill them ourselves. We can avert regicide or let it happen, which alters the course of political alliance in the north prior to a massive invasion. We can let a kidnapping sadist escape justice or we can side with him. Let a seemingly innocent elf hang or get lured into a trap by her. Everything has multiple outcomes, which is ideal for an RPG. 

Edited August 16, 2013 by licketysplit

[alanschu]

Hm, could just be differing tastes - not every game has to have world altering change driven by the PC, although it is common

I agree. I enjoyed The Witcher 2 (though I found the combat cumbersome). I didn't care so much for the first one, however.

[Nonek]

Personally I found the choices in both Witcher 1 and 2 rather satisfying, especially as they queried ones morality by asking the questions rather than bluntly enforcing their own answers, and didn't particularly have a mandate to obviously enforce. The choice of whether to slay Foltests get or let her serve as a bargaining chip in the game of thrones, the choice of whether to support the one good man in the Order, or a bad man fighting for what seems at first glance to be a worthy cause (if one knows nothing of the Aen Elle) or just walk away from their little war was inspired in my opinion.

 

In terms of micro in game choices I don't think either Witcher game can be beaten, whether that be the the choice of whether to support your brother Witchers or defend the laboratory at Kaer Morhen to the choice of whether to let Letho of Gulet walk away. Macro choices are a little less enforced, but then again what lasting effect can one itinerant monster slayer have on policy and succession, though I will say that my support of Siegfried and slaying of Adda were nicely implemented in game. Geralt may try and shape things to his will, but personally i'd be dissatisfied if he was treated with the same blatant and blunt protagonist empowerment that other games mistake for satisfying progression. After all the world of the Witcher is a noirish world, where the lesser evil is sometimes all one can possibly hope to achieve, despite ones intentions and actions.

 

In the Witcher 2 one loses to Letho during the prologue, very much making the game some what of a tragedy, but I would say that this enforces rather than robs the player of agency. Every choice is tremendously empowering and personal, rather than playing into the epic confrontation between the Northern Kingdoms and the Black Ones, whether that be giving Loredo and Moril's child to Seherim or rescuing the scared little girl who watched her father slain while

under your protection, they intersected with the grand political machinations of potentates and power mongers, but that was not what made those decisions important in my eyes.

 

As for Geralt himself, i've been amazed throughout both games as to how much I can mold the gentleman to my own playstyle and alter his outlook on situations. Most games I play as a barely defined entity, picking from some binary morality system, and of course changing their looks to suit my personal tastes, however I felt that there was a little more depth and real growth in the Witcher. True the white wolf is somewhat defined as very much a man of bone dry wit, old fashioned sensibilities and vast experience and skill in his area of specialisation, but once again the micro choices where the real meat of the game and character lies are left wide open.

 

However I realise that this may be just my personal evaluation, and respect others opinions and choices, I don't think there's any reason to foster a rivalry between Bioware and CDPR, after all they're enormously different products when looked at closely.

 

Edit: I must also add that the game had a nice logical motivation for every aspect that my character undertook, at no point was I forced to take a dislikable option because there were good sensible reasons for my every choice, for me personally a narrative that is logical and a plot that is rational are enormously satisfying. I feel that this is the least any game can do, otherwise it's slightly insulting to ones intelligence.

Edited August 16, 2013 by Nonek

[alanschu]

IMO the rivalry exists more in the minds of the players (and maybe marketers?) than in the companies themselves.

 

 

On the BSN I had a thread discussing my progress through the first two games, and after the second one specifically called out some quality work on some of the scenes and especially the nuances for how Geralt responded.  Turns out someone that worked on the game saw it, and said he/she was super flattered because they were picked the fidelity they saw in Mass Effect 2 as their goal, and simply having someone from BioWare acknowledge that it was pretty quality totally made that person's day.

[Keyrock]

Why must there be a rivalry?  I would be very happy if both The Witcher 3 and Dragon Age 3 turned out great.

[anubite]

TW2 closed off a whole zone based on your choice in the first act. BioWare hasn't ever done something like that. I find TW1/TW2 to be "middling" games - they aren't perfect by any means, but they're fun enough for a once-through. That's more than what I can say about a lot of games these days... It helps TW2 has free DLC while DA2 has bucket loads.

Edited August 16, 2013 by anubite

[licketysplit]

Why must there be a rivalry?  I would be very happy if both The Witcher 3 and Dragon Age 3 turned out great.

 

Comparisons started back when DA:O released, which was advertised heavily as a dark fantasy RPG. Witcher had come out two years earlier and pretty much nailed that theme using the Aurora engine licensed from Bioware. Before TW1, there wasn't a standout RPG with a realistic, low fantasy setting. The two franchises have been assessed in tandem ever since, especially by the media. It's worth mentioning that aside from a few off-the-cuff quips, the guys at CDPR have nothing but praise for Bioware and they listed Baldurs Gate and Mass Effect as influential. But that's the old Bioware. 

[Rhamnetin]

TW2 has free DLC while DA2 has bucket loads.

 

Well it's not like Witcher DLCs are the same scale.  The new missions were much shorter than Legacy or Mark of the Assassin in DA2.  But Bioware/EA DLC have ridiculous prices.  I can't even recall how much I spent on DLC for DA2, ME2, and ME3.

Edited August 16, 2013 by Rhamnetin