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.

The Witcher 1 Thread

Suchy

Arcane
Joined
Nov 16, 2007
Messages
6,031
Location
Potatoland
yeh. has faults, but definitely worth a try.
 

Stinger

Arcane
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
1,366
Witcher 1 has a lot of flaws but it is still interesting and has its moments.

Witcher 2 is a pretty crappy, 'cinematic', awesome-button masher but with really good graphics.
 

anus_pounder

Arcane
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
5,972
Location
Yiffing in Hell
1st one combat is slightly boring to me. left click left click wait...left click!
I like 2nd one's combat more TBH.

Not sure if serious. Considering the amount of flak that gets thrown at Witcher 2's combat, around here, I'm no longer sure when people are being serious about Witcher 2.
 

Andyman Messiah

Mr. Ed-ucated
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,933
Location
Narnia
Witcher 1 is boring, has worse dialog than a Bethesda/BioWare game and a story that is retarded and all over the place.

Also the combat sucked.
 

Majestic47

Learned
Joined
Nov 9, 2011
Messages
432
I think you never experienced Witcher 1 combat before.

It was like a mini QTE for the fights. The icon will glow in flame when it's a good time to strike. If you misclick, your combo breaks and you're just opening yourself to damage.

Now for Witcher 2. people may say , Quen > All. But that's not finesse. That is brute force. If you actually use Quen as a fall-back plan instead of 'i'll just re-Quen again if I get hit' then the combat mechanic is actually pretty fun and fluid. It felt more natural than the first one. My geralt felt more agile, responsive, and the 'action' made more sense than QTE of the 1st.

Anyone who claims the 1st combat is better than the 2nd - please explain why. I find it boring TBH.
Facing three bandits at normal difficulty in Witcher 2 might get u killed if you're careless. That is never the case in Witcher 1.
 

bozia2012

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jun 17, 2006
Messages
3,309
Location
Amigara Fault
Codex 2014 PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again!
Combat in TW1 is just simple - since it's actually an adventure game with RPG elements :) It does what it's suposed to do - add some dynamic to the encounters.

TW2's combat is more complex and arcadey - you actually need to dodge and use signs tactically. In TW1 more enemies meant you can spam group style and cut their heads off easily - now it actually adds a lot of challenge - staggering, backstabs...

It's flawed, sure - but it's worth playing just for the setting/art/uniqueness alone.

It was like a mini QTE for the fights. The icon will glow in flame when it's a good time to strike. If you misclick, your combo breaks and you're just opening yourself to damage.

Easymodefag.

You're right about the rest though.
 

Black

Arcane
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
1,872,592
Better than oblivion.
Because as we all found out in the last months or so, being better than oblivion means a lot.
Hah, just kidding with you kids.










Better than skyrim.
 

bozia2012

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jun 17, 2006
Messages
3,309
Location
Amigara Fault
Codex 2014 PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again!
If you crave AAA+ quality, super AI, physics etc. - it's shit. But it has those special moments not many games have. Plus it's made in realistic style - which is not common in fantasy games.

F.e. so what if Alpha Protocol has retarded sneaking mechanics, the AI is broken if it's the only harem-spy-game with branching dialogues and C&C.
 

abnaxus

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Dec 31, 2010
Messages
10,849
Location
Fiernes
I think you never experienced Witcher 1 combat before.

It was like a mini QTE for the fights. The icon will glow in flame when it's a good time to strike. If you misclick, your combo breaks and you're just opening yourself to damage.

Now for Witcher 2. people may say , Quen > All. But that's not finesse. That is brute force. If you actually use Quen as a fall-back plan instead of 'i'll just re-Quen again if I get hit' then the combat mechanic is actually pretty fun and fluid. It felt more natural than the first one. My geralt felt more agile, responsive, and the 'action' made more sense than QTE of the 1st.

Anyone who claims the 1st combat is better than the 2nd - please explain why. I find it boring TBH.
Facing three bandits at normal difficulty in Witcher 2 might get u killed if you're careless. That is never the case in Witcher 1.
What feels natural about rolling around like an idiot all the time?

Witcher 1 combat = clickety click.
Witcher 2 combat = deferred clickely click + awesome button.
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
35,660
They both have really flawed combat for different reasons.
First: A single-character Knights of the Old Republic with a forced rhythm game (not a QTE).
Second: Clunky cinematic context-sensitive Arkham Asylum-wannabe with none of the polish.
I still think they're pretty entertaining adventure games though. :M
 

RK47

collides like two planets pulled by gravity
Patron
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
28,396
Location
Not Here
Dead State Divinity: Original Sin
What feels natural about rolling around like an idiot all the time?

I don't roll around all the time. I use trap signs, throwing knives etc. Just because one option is considered 'the most effective to you' doesn't mean alternatives aren't available.
 

bozia2012

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jun 17, 2006
Messages
3,309
Location
Amigara Fault
Codex 2014 PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again!
Actually the combat in TW2 is what you make of it - f.e. if you go the Quen route...

You don't play TW for it's combat anyway...
 

visions

Arcane
Joined
Jun 10, 2007
Messages
1,801
Location
here
How the fuck can something the core gameplay of which is not built around solving puzzles be an adventure game? The games that are frequently called action/adventure around here are in core gameplay terms farther from adventures than they are from rpgs (as opposed to actual action/adventures, the gameplay of which is the hybrid of action and adventure, like Alone in the Dark). What is the core of adventure gameplay? Solving puzzles. What is the core of rpg gameplay? Character development, performance in the gameworld controlled by the characters stats (the extent of which is greater in pure rpgs and lesser in arpgs). Although rudimentary, the latter is still more present in these games than the former.

But wait - they are action/adventures, because, hey you control a dude who has all sorts of adventures in them? Brb, gonna play the role of a space marine in the arpg Doom.
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
3,181
How the fuck can something the core gameplay of which is not built around solving puzzles be an adventure game? The games that are frequently called action/adventure around here are in core gameplay terms farther from adventures than they are from rpgs (as opposed to actual action/adventures, the gameplay of which is the hybrid of action and adventure, like Alone in the Dark). What is the core of adventure gameplay? Solving puzzles. What is the core of rpg gameplay? Character development, performance in the gameworld controlled by the characters stats (the extent of which is greater in pure rpgs and lesser in arpgs). Although rudimentary, the latter is still more present in these games than the former.

But wait - they are action/adventures, because, hey you control a dude who has all sorts of adventures in them? Brb, gonna play the role of a space marine in the arpg Doom.
Whether you're called an asshat or an assburger doesn't change the fact that you're frothing over box label terminology, bro.
 

visions

Arcane
Joined
Jun 10, 2007
Messages
1,801
Location
here
Just seems weird when people make an effort to call Oblivion/The Witcher/whatever action adventures in order to emphasize that these games are not rpgs, when they have less in common with the core gameplay of adventure games than that of rpgs.
 

janjetina

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 28, 2008
Messages
14,231
Location
Zagreb, Croatia
Torment: Tides of Numenera
Just seems weird when people make an effort to call Oblivion/The Witcher/whatever action adventures in order to emphasize that these games are not rpgs, when they have less in common with the core gameplay of adventure games than that of rpgs.

Action adventure is a widely accepted name of the established genre. Without delving into the merits of the name, one can positively claim that games like The Witcher and Dragon Age 2 belong to this genre (Oblivion is not an action adventure, but regardless of that fact it is a bad game).
 

Phelot

Arcane
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
17,908
Just seems weird when people make an effort to call Oblivion/The Witcher/whatever action adventures in order to emphasize that these games are not rpgs, when they have less in common with the core gameplay of adventure games than that of rpgs.

The Holy Wiki Article about adventure games speaks:

An adventure game is a video game in which the player assumes the role of protagonist in an interactive story driven by exploration and puzzle-solving instead of physical challenge.[1] The genre's focus on story allows it to draw heavily from other narrative-based media such as literature and film, encompassing a wide variety of literary genres. Nearly all adventure games are designed for a single player, since this emphasis on story and character makes multi-player design difficult.
So, I'd say you and your opposition are both correct. TW is certainly an interactive story that's driven by exploration, though not so much in the puzzle solving department except if you consider what dialogue choices will lead to boobies a puzzle (which I do)
 
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
1,875,975
Location
Glass Fields, Ruins of Old Iran
Action adventure is a widely accepted name of the established genre. Without delving into the merits of the name, one can positively claim that games like The Witcher and Dragon Age 2 belong to this genre (Oblivion is not an action adventure, but regardless of that fact it is a bad game).

Oblivion is Action RPG. [insert half trolling, half serious smiley here]
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
35,660
How the fuck can something the core gameplay of which is not built around solving puzzles be an adventure game? The games that are frequently called action/adventure around here are in core gameplay terms farther from adventures than they are from rpgs (as opposed to actual action/adventures, the gameplay of which is the hybrid of action and adventure, like Alone in the Dark). What is the core of adventure gameplay? Solving puzzles. What is the core of rpg gameplay? Character development, performance in the gameworld controlled by the characters stats (the extent of which is greater in pure rpgs and lesser in arpgs). Although rudimentary, the latter is still more present in these games than the former.

But wait - they are action/adventures, because, hey you control a dude who has all sorts of adventures in them? Brb, gonna play the role of a space marine in the arpg Doom.
The RPG and action parts of the Witcher games are god awful. The enjoyable parts involve running around and talking to people and in no way are Geralt's character stats involved (those pathetic dialogue skills in 2 don't count) therefore it's adventure gameplay.
 

visions

Arcane
Joined
Jun 10, 2007
Messages
1,801
Location
here
The reasoning behind my first post itt was like this:

Solving puzzles is adventure gameplay. The only thing that can be construed as a puzzle in The Witcher is the autopsy. Talking to people is not a gameplay element characteristic of adventure games if it's isolated from solving puzzles or gathering clues for solving puzzles, and talking to people in Witcher is not connected to solving puzzles, disregarding one particular instance (the autopsy). Therefore talking to people is not commonly applied in The Witcher the way it would have to be applied in order to make it adventure gameplay. Interaction with npcs for story/exposition purposes is common in both, rpgs and adventure games, therefore when untied to either rpg or adventure core gameplay, it is neutral. Simply having the element of talking to people does neither make the game an rpg nor an adventure game.

Although action combat and rpg characterization in the Witcher are rudimentary and strongly watered-down, they are generally present throughout the game, and if we are to label a game, it would make sense to do it based on which gameplay elements are generally present throughout the game, not present only in one particular instance.

But what janjetina said is also correct, I forgot that action/adventure can be used in the wider sense as a more generic label.
 

Crooked Bee

(no longer) a wide-wandering bee
Patron
Joined
Jan 27, 2010
Messages
15,048
Location
In quarantine
Codex 2013 Codex 2014 PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire MCA Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire
Not that I'm an expert on this, but as far as I'm aware action-adventure as an established genre has, in contrast to traditional adventure games, never been predominantly about puzzle-solving. They're basically reflex-based games with a story and character/environment interaction on top. As such, the Witcher perfectly qualifies.

Also, puzzles have traditionally been a very important part of RPGs. Think Wizardry V et al., Dark Heart of Uukrul, Might and Magic, etc. The Witcher doesn't have puzzles, therefore it isn't an RPG.
:troll:
 

Majestic47

Learned
Joined
Nov 9, 2011
Messages
432
i remember getting stumped on adraste's ashes quest puzzle in DAO...hah. Good times. Bioware's been inserting those lately in their games.
 

bozia2012

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jun 17, 2006
Messages
3,309
Location
Amigara Fault
Codex 2014 PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again!
W1 is basically an action-adventure with some weight shifted from action/adventure to rpg elements. It's not a conventional one (like f.e. LBA :salute:), so what? The character building is almost non-existant and the role-playing is minimal as you're playing Geralt. If you compare it only to modern RPGs it may look like one though. You can name it as you want, as long as you use your brain when analyzing the gameplay :)

W2 has more weight on character building (since you can max only one "tree" and this choice changes how gameplay looks on harder difficulties), combat and has more options for role-playing.
 

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