I guess I’m one of the few people who thought Witcher 3 was a bit bland. I was already getting very bored at Novigrad and at Kaer Morhen I totally lost interest and have been unable to pick the game up since.
What do people like about it so much? I’ve read all the books, and generally speaking thought they were good, so I’m not exactly lacking in lore either.
Keep in mind that the main comparison point for it was Skyrim, which was pretty much the previous RPG people got sucked into.
The story was pretty good and it had a good number of meaningful side quests. Gwent was also a lot of fun, and the Blood and Wine DLC was another step above to keep the hype alive for longer. The combat can get fairly involved without feeling overly complex. Rather than the blank slate of many games of the era, you play as Geralt, who actually has relationships in the world to draw you in.
Basically, rather than the unfocused sandbox of random stuff in Skyrim, it was a more involved story-rich experience that a lot of people appreciated.
That said, the hype was ridiculous. It’s a very good RPG, not the second coming of Christ. It didn’t really do anything new, it was just a solid experience.
It’s a very good RPG, not the second coming of Christ.
That just shows what people want. Just a solid game, playable from start to finish. Due to time constraints i never finished Witcher 3 and barely made it past the prologue of BG3. But both those games are highly celebrated.
They don’t reinvent the wheel. They are just very solid games and come without predatory pricing.
Movement and combat in every Witcher game is so unpleasant for me that I find them unplayable. I’ve literally gone through YouTube “Choose Your Own Adventure” style videos of the games because the stories are great but I hate how Geralt moves.
Storytelling/quests that surpassed anything its modern contemporaries had to offer. Add in a beautiful open world with alright combat and it’s a hit in my books. Time also wasn’t an issue back in those days as I were still in high school when it launched.
The story telling is what really did it for me. I consider witcher 3 to be the greatest game I’ve ever played. The quality of that game is still extremely high even to today’s standards.
I played the full game and the dlcs. Only the 2nd dlc and the baron stories are good. Id suggest people just play the blood and wine dlc, its really great. The game isn’t very fun, but I do love the atmosphere and city design. I was totally sick of looking at wet horse ass. Gwents more fun than monster hunting though sadly
I really liked monster hunting as a potions guy. I felt like a real Witcher. I’d have to track them down, read up on them, then drink potions and apply oils that would be strong against them, then finally take them out. That preparation and build up made me as immersed as a Witcher as I felt as Batman in the Arkham games.
I liked the alchemy in Witcher 2 more but the game mechanics with 3 and the RPG elements were amazing for me. And on par with Skyrim imo. In some aspects I liked Witcher more like how it affected the world building based on your actions.
Skellige Island and the two expansions were actually great. Blood & Wine had an amazing flow. Otherwise I agree. It was a rehash of The Witcher 1, but not as charming.
Unpopular opinion: Many hyped up games fail immensely at some parts. But due to the social group effect criticism gets drowned out. Currently playing Elden Ring and while it makes a massively great impression all around it shows really bad game design cracks after more intense looking, especially in the boss and arena encounter design as if they were inexperienced. Cluttered, glitchy arenas impeding gameplay, just annoyingly specific roll tells, bad hitbox choices and the requirement to memorize full boss combo routes like a multiplayer fighter add to that 1-2 kill combos and it is terrible at times to me not we the effort. I am at Leyndell with almost all available side content/areas done. Waiting for the obligatory git gud chads storming in.
Well, yeah… that is so vague that it cannot help but be true. Almost all games fail in some way (especially more complex ones), they can all be improved by making some changes somewhere especially when everyone has different preferences for how things should work and what annoys them.
And by definition almost any hyped up game is going to fall short of expectations. Hype is born by imagination and has no limits, but games are delivered in reality where compromises need to be made, especially when time pressure is involved. And by nature the more hype a game is the more likely it is going to be over-hyped and fall far shorter of the expectations.
I am wary of any hyped up game. Hell, I would be wary of any AAA game on release day these days. Wait for real reviews to come in and not what the prerelease hype says about it. And even after remember that what games one person enjoys a lot another might absolutely hate.
I would not say it is as broadly self defined and I tried to give specific reasons. Elden Ring itself at its very core is about the core difficulty and yet I had way too many deaths caused by jank (the difference on how much better my experience with the same bosses in a cleaner arena speaks volumes, or the terrible twin fights) , not just some side nitpicking on minor mechanics. And so many reviews giving it excellence and yet there is apparently quite a bunch of people rating it below many of their other titles as at the last part of the game the problems pile up to an even worse degree.
I do enjoy it for most of the other aspects and I understand and agree what it is why people rave about it so much , but I would have loved to see scaled down boss damage, especially combos and twin fights to bridge the fun-defying issues, although a different design philosophy would be the better solution.
For me it was too long. I finished it with all the DLC for the first time a few days ago. I generally enjoyed it but was also quite happy to be done with it when I finally finished it at around the 110 hour mark. I actually took a break after Hearts of Stone and played a couple of shorter games before I came back to finish off Blood and Wine.
I haven’t yet played a single player game that I thought needed to be more than 60 hours no matter how engaging or well made it was.
I remember going into the first sandbox, and then going forward with no xp very fast. Then it was just me being weak as hell and rolling around to dodge and using a cast to make a shield around me to avoid dying. Then I stopped. Load time were horrible. But I want to try the remaster on ps5.
I guess I’m one of the few people who thought Witcher 3 was a bit bland. I was already getting very bored at Novigrad and at Kaer Morhen I totally lost interest and have been unable to pick the game up since.
What do people like about it so much? I’ve read all the books, and generally speaking thought they were good, so I’m not exactly lacking in lore either.
The world is interesting, Geralt is a cool character to play, combat is nice enough, and first and foremost every quest is worth looking into.
The game has a ton of side quests that had more thought put into than the main quests of other games
Keep in mind that the main comparison point for it was Skyrim, which was pretty much the previous RPG people got sucked into.
The story was pretty good and it had a good number of meaningful side quests. Gwent was also a lot of fun, and the Blood and Wine DLC was another step above to keep the hype alive for longer. The combat can get fairly involved without feeling overly complex. Rather than the blank slate of many games of the era, you play as Geralt, who actually has relationships in the world to draw you in.
Basically, rather than the unfocused sandbox of random stuff in Skyrim, it was a more involved story-rich experience that a lot of people appreciated.
That said, the hype was ridiculous. It’s a very good RPG, not the second coming of Christ. It didn’t really do anything new, it was just a solid experience.
That just shows what people want. Just a solid game, playable from start to finish. Due to time constraints i never finished Witcher 3 and barely made it past the prologue of BG3. But both those games are highly celebrated.
They don’t reinvent the wheel. They are just very solid games and come without predatory pricing.
Movement and combat in every Witcher game is so unpleasant for me that I find them unplayable. I’ve literally gone through YouTube “Choose Your Own Adventure” style videos of the games because the stories are great but I hate how Geralt moves.
Storytelling/quests that surpassed anything its modern contemporaries had to offer. Add in a beautiful open world with alright combat and it’s a hit in my books. Time also wasn’t an issue back in those days as I were still in high school when it launched.
The story telling is what really did it for me. I consider witcher 3 to be the greatest game I’ve ever played. The quality of that game is still extremely high even to today’s standards.
I played the full game and the dlcs. Only the 2nd dlc and the baron stories are good. Id suggest people just play the blood and wine dlc, its really great. The game isn’t very fun, but I do love the atmosphere and city design. I was totally sick of looking at wet horse ass. Gwents more fun than monster hunting though sadly
I really liked monster hunting as a potions guy. I felt like a real Witcher. I’d have to track them down, read up on them, then drink potions and apply oils that would be strong against them, then finally take them out. That preparation and build up made me as immersed as a Witcher as I felt as Batman in the Arkham games.
10/10 Makes you feel like Geralt
I liked the alchemy in Witcher 2 more but the game mechanics with 3 and the RPG elements were amazing for me. And on par with Skyrim imo. In some aspects I liked Witcher more like how it affected the world building based on your actions.
Skellige Island and the two expansions were actually great. Blood & Wine had an amazing flow. Otherwise I agree. It was a rehash of The Witcher 1, but not as charming.
Unpopular opinion: Many hyped up games fail immensely at some parts. But due to the social group effect criticism gets drowned out. Currently playing Elden Ring and while it makes a massively great impression all around it shows really bad game design cracks after more intense looking, especially in the boss and arena encounter design as if they were inexperienced. Cluttered, glitchy arenas impeding gameplay, just annoyingly specific roll tells, bad hitbox choices and the requirement to memorize full boss combo routes like a multiplayer fighter add to that 1-2 kill combos and it is terrible at times to me not we the effort. I am at Leyndell with almost all available side content/areas done. Waiting for the obligatory git gud chads storming in.
Well, yeah… that is so vague that it cannot help but be true. Almost all games fail in some way (especially more complex ones), they can all be improved by making some changes somewhere especially when everyone has different preferences for how things should work and what annoys them.
And by definition almost any hyped up game is going to fall short of expectations. Hype is born by imagination and has no limits, but games are delivered in reality where compromises need to be made, especially when time pressure is involved. And by nature the more hype a game is the more likely it is going to be over-hyped and fall far shorter of the expectations.
I am wary of any hyped up game. Hell, I would be wary of any AAA game on release day these days. Wait for real reviews to come in and not what the prerelease hype says about it. And even after remember that what games one person enjoys a lot another might absolutely hate.
I would not say it is as broadly self defined and I tried to give specific reasons. Elden Ring itself at its very core is about the core difficulty and yet I had way too many deaths caused by jank (the difference on how much better my experience with the same bosses in a cleaner arena speaks volumes, or the terrible twin fights) , not just some side nitpicking on minor mechanics. And so many reviews giving it excellence and yet there is apparently quite a bunch of people rating it below many of their other titles as at the last part of the game the problems pile up to an even worse degree.
I do enjoy it for most of the other aspects and I understand and agree what it is why people rave about it so much , but I would have loved to see scaled down boss damage, especially combos and twin fights to bridge the fun-defying issues, although a different design philosophy would be the better solution.
For me it was too long. I finished it with all the DLC for the first time a few days ago. I generally enjoyed it but was also quite happy to be done with it when I finally finished it at around the 110 hour mark. I actually took a break after Hearts of Stone and played a couple of shorter games before I came back to finish off Blood and Wine.
I haven’t yet played a single player game that I thought needed to be more than 60 hours no matter how engaging or well made it was.
I remember going into the first sandbox, and then going forward with no xp very fast. Then it was just me being weak as hell and rolling around to dodge and using a cast to make a shield around me to avoid dying. Then I stopped. Load time were horrible. But I want to try the remaster on ps5.
I’ve played it like 6 times. Just love the whole world.