Falkon Swiftblade Posted February 24, 2015 Posted February 24, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWYjLurySU0 oh dang, that's the opposite of what I want. I just want some chatter everyone in a while or when you crit it say's, "Ohhh, that's going to leave a mark!" Or something like that.
Luckmann Posted February 24, 2015 Posted February 24, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWYjLurySU0 http://youtu.be/DMaN_bHmMBc?t=31s 1
Karkarov Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 I dropped about $250 on this game, I'm glad I did, and I would do so all over again if given a chance. I'd much rather back a PoE for $250 than purchase a Witcher 3 for $50. Agreed. Althought I wouldn't play another Witcher game if you payed me $50 to do it, so that's me. :D Me three! I feel for you guys and how you hate what is going to be a great game. I wouldn't mind another lilacor but it is sort of a gimmick. I also can't imagine it being added in game and the weapon actually being serious and not a goofball.
Luckmann Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 Since this thread is pretty much dead, the main topic over and done with, I must ask: what's wrong with The Witcher 3? I haven't been keeping up at all; I really liked the first Witcher game, but I never got around to playing The Witcher 2 on account of The Witcher 1 running badly on my rig (constant crashes) and it being pretty much a toaster for many games (also, I never truly finished the first game, which makes it a big no-no for me to continue to The Witcher 2) but I know it was very popular and I have a friend (admittedly a Polish one, so expect chauvinism) that loved it, and won't stop talking about it.So what's up with The Witcher 3? Did they radically change the format or something?
Diogenes Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 It looks fine, but its an RPG so any change meets with hostility from someone, no matter how minor.
Luckmann Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 It looks fine, but its an RPG so any change meets with hostility from someone, no matter how minor. It's often warranted, though. RPG gamers are paranoid because the RPG genre have been subverted and straight-up beaten with a crowbar more often than no other.
wanderon Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 Didn't like much of anything about Witcher 1 gave it up entirely after a few days play - bought it to fill the gap while waiting for another game can't recall which one - suspected I would not like it from the start (even before purchasing it) not my style. Nomadic Wayfarer of the Obsidian Order Not all those that wander are lost...
CaptainMace Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 Xan as a sentient, blue-flame sword, please. That'd be damn cool and probably hilarious. 1 Qu'avez-vous fait de l'honneur de la patrie ?
Luckmann Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 Xan as a sentient, blue-flame sword, please. That'd be damn cool and probably hilarious. We're all doomed, anyway. 1
illathid Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 Since this thread is pretty much dead, the main topic over and done with, I must ask: what's wrong with The Witcher 3? I haven't been keeping up at all; I really liked the first Witcher game, but I never got around to playing The Witcher 2 on account of The Witcher 1 running badly on my rig (constant crashes) and it being pretty much a toaster for many games (also, I never truly finished the first game, which makes it a big no-no for me to continue to The Witcher 2) but I know it was very popular and I have a friend (admittedly a Polish one, so expect chauvinism) that loved it, and won't stop talking about it. So what's up with The Witcher 3? Did they radically change the format or something? Wrote this on another site: Could someone try to explain the appeal of the Witcher series to me? I've been playing CRPGs for 16 years, and I've started both Witcher games multiple time but I have to stop after a 5 or so hours because they just seemed so bad. From what I recall in the first game you have amnesia, and have to track down "the Professor" who stole the "mutagens." Pretty sure I've read middle school fanfiction with better stories than that. So what's the appeal? The grimdark tone? The consequences that matter? a love for gravely voiced amnesiacs? or is it because of the plot? 1 "Wizards do not need to be The Dudes Who Can AoE Nuke You and Gish and Take as Many Hits as a Fighter and Make all Skills Irrelevant Because Magic." -Josh Sawyer
CaptainMace Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 From what I recall in the first game you have amnesia, and have to track down "the Professor" who stole the "mutagens." Pretty sure I've read middle school fanfiction with better stories than that. Man it reminds me of the ending. I rarely facepalm that hard However I liked the Witcher 1, it's not really an rpg though, or at least what I have in mind when I think of rpgs. But I liked it for the monster hunting aspect. The way Geralt had to actually gather information about monsters in order to slain 'em, the trophies for unique ones and such. The Witcher 2 however, didn't leave me any particular impression. I just remember that it's a bit more action. Don't remember the plot. Qu'avez-vous fait de l'honneur de la patrie ?
Lephys Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 I dunno... I have a feeling that a decent bit of Witcher 3 (and games like it) hatred is more just "I'm so resentful that this is getting made but my preferred style of RPG isn't!". I really don't think it's The Witcher 3's or DA:I's faults that more PoE's aren't being made. And they're not bad games just because they're not the greatest in all respects/facets. I don't think everything has to be judged on the exact same scale. Not even RPGs (there's plenty of room for variance in them). So, yeah, I get such games not being people's cup o' tea, but... it seems like they tend to take an awful lot of flak sheerly because of what they aren't, rather than for what they are. Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u
blueitem Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 Wrote this on another site: Could someone try to explain the appeal of the Witcher series to me? I've been playing CRPGs for 16 years, and I've started both Witcher games multiple time but I have to stop after a 5 or so hours because they just seemed so bad. From what I recall in the first game you have amnesia, and have to track down "the Professor" who stole the "mutagens." Pretty sure I've read middle school fanfiction with better stories than that. So what's the appeal? The grimdark tone? The consequences that matter? a love for gravely voiced amnesiacs? or is it because of the plot? But can't most stories be summarized in such a way? I mean, hell, with a three sentence structure and an insult at the end, I'm pretty sure we can make anything look horrible -- From what I recall of the second BG game, you are captured by an evil wizard, and have to track this "Irenicus" fellow down because he stole your "sister". Pretty sure that's the most generic fantasy plotline out there, and even worse they decided what you did in the first game with absolutely no care to your actual actions. But most players would agree that, if perhaps not the most original plot, that BG2's plot is at least enjoyable. Generally, the appeal of the Witcher games is that the fantasy world is really dark, there aren't any "correct" answers to problems -- a nice change from the common "you can be a saint or the devil" approach in many games -- and at least in Witcher 2 the combat is decent and the exploration isn't too bad (Witcher 1 had more of a problem in this regard, but it still wasn't unplayable, just fairly dull). And while I don't think the plots from the Witcher games are absolutely amazing, they are enjoyable and at least attempt some original things (for example, in an investigation in the first one, you can get completely conned by a character for most of the subplot if you don't come to the right conclusions, or you can figure it out and get the upper hand on them).
illathid Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 But can't most stories be summarized in such a way? I mean, hell, with a three sentence structure and an insult at the end, I'm pretty sure we can make anything look horrible -- From what I recall of the second BG game, you are captured by an evil wizard, and have to track this "Irenicus" fellow down because he stole your "sister". Pretty sure that's the most generic fantasy plotline out there, and even worse they decided what you did in the first game with absolutely no care to your actual actions. Yeah, I get what you're doing but I'd say that even with your synopsis of BG2, the Witcher sounds much, much worse. Yeah, Irenicus is sort of a generic fantasy name, but it's much better than calling a villain "the Professor." And I don't think I need to say anything about mutagen compared to Imoen. And I get what you say about it being a gritty dark world, but it doesn't hold a candle to Warhammer Fantasy and that's been around since the '80s. Point is this: dumb story = I won't play even if you paid me. "Wizards do not need to be The Dudes Who Can AoE Nuke You and Gish and Take as Many Hits as a Fighter and Make all Skills Irrelevant Because Magic." -Josh Sawyer
Recommended Posts