Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kcwong]

What controls are you guys using?

I just went through the tutorial and a little ride with Vesemir, and it seems I need to adjust the key bindings a bit, or even consider using a controller (have a Xbox 360 controller).

The use of Alt together with WASD is rather inconvenient.

[umiman]

I really wish this forum had an ignore or hide post button.

It does. Go to your profile and then Modify Profile>Buddies/Ignore List>Edit Ignore List.

Oh sweet. Thanks!

Edit: kcwong, from what I hear the controls are just as wonky with a controller as it is with the keyboard. You don't need to use alt to dodge by the way. You can double tap the move button too.

[Retropunch]

Edit: kcwong, from what I hear the controls are just as wonky with a controller as it is with the keyboard. You don't need to use alt to dodge by the way. You can double tap the move button too.

I've always just used space to roll out of the way. There are few times I've needed to dodge instead of roll and the distance nearly always helps (although I might just be playing it wrong!)

[umiman]

That's what I do too, but one advantage to the short dodge is that it doesn't stop your stamina from regenerating unlike the roll. So you can spam the dodge until your meter fills.

[sebcool]

Snip

It is true that one can learn a lot about a game from reading reviews and looking at people's opinions on it. The problem is, you didn't do that. You looked at two negative articles on it and promptly deduced that the game was bad, dismissing it as over-hyped and ignoring everyone else's opinion. If that's not bias, I don't know what is. I'm biased too; I like the game, I was hyped as hell for this, and so far it has gone far beyond my expectations.

Those two articles don't challenge my comfort-zone, and I'm not angry at them for not agreeing with me. People can have whatever opinions they want, it doesn't change what I believe. I don't hate you for having an opinion either, but at least show some fucking respect and play the game before calling it shit. For anyone who is curious about the game, what you've written is worse than useless. You did nothing but pull out two articles that agree with your own prejudices, laud them as gospel, and when people then disagree with you, you belittle and insult them, because surely only someone completely blind to reason would disagree with you, because you know you're right. You haven't even given the game a chance, your opinion of it was set from the beginning, and all you're doing now is trying to justify it.

As for the rest you wrote, I vehemently disagree with you. Games, like all artforms, are great because they are free; as in free speech, not free beer. They should be able to portray anything, no matter how unreal or uncomfortable, because that's how the artist(s) envisioned it. Those things are there to make you uncomfortable, to revolt you, to challenge your beliefs, to make you feel about what's happening. It draws you into the world, makes it real, because it feels real. Like real-life, there are both good things and bad things, good people and bad people, and sometimes bad people can do good things, and vice versa. Real life is complex, and so should art be. If you try to remove everything that's uncomfortable to you, you destroy that complexity, and everyone is worse off for it.

And similarly, you can portray something without having to agree with it. You can write about a serial-killer, who murders and tortures people, without believing that it is somehow okay. If we only portrayed things we agreed with, there'd be no art. There'd be no villains, no monsters, no disasters, no tragedy, no conflict. That, in my opinion, would be horrible.

I've said what I wanted to say. If you want to continue with this, I'd suggest you do it via PM, so we don't derail the thread completely.

[Retropunch]

That's what I do too, but one advantage to the short dodge is that it doesn't stop your stamina from regenerating unlike the roll. So you can spam the dodge until your meter fills.

I actually had no idea that was the case! thanks!!

I have to say, putting it on hard difficulty from the start is a death sentence. It's awesome.

[Sonlirain]

And if there really is a sympathetic remark from Geralt to a woman-beater, then it`s clear as a day that dev`s own misogyny seeps through to the medium. Surely nobody will dispute that it does exist in the real world?

You do realize how RPG's work right? You know. you create your own character on interpret the character you are given in your own way. Misoginy IS a character trait whether you like it or not. If my Geralt goes around giving hi-fives to wife beating cunts its my choice. By removing that you effectively box Geralt into being a white knight (someting he certainly is not) whenever women are concerned because any reply that does not initiate bludgeoning of whoever dared to harm a woman within a 1 km radius from Geralt is probably misoginist. And of course the devs must be misoginist as well if they let you chose to not save a damsel in distress!

Compare that to Alpha protocol where you can have a fully misoginist character who acts like an complpete asshole to any woman within 10 kilometers of him and that's without the radio.
Does it mean the devs that made Alpha Protocol are misoginist bastards? No. Do they give the player an option to play as one? Definitely.
Is the player a misoginist? Maybe... or maybe they wanted to see the storyline told by a complete asshat?

Nevermind. I`m sure most of folk here read few paragraphs (lines ? of my post and went into the comfortable "ah, another hater/SJW" mode.

Pretending to be self conscious and hiding behind a shield made out of "I know you will disagree with me and my inflamatory opinions but i don't care" is not a legit line of defense for tinderbox opinions.

but you missed my biggest complaint, about how derivative this game really is and how sad that something hailed as an absolute pinnacle of RPG gaming is just a prettified version of "same old" olden games.

It's a story driven open world cRPG. What else did you expect? A giant sandboxy universe where armes, animals, monsters, traders and bandits all go about their buisness in real time?
Sure its a great idea but that kindof open world is a giant burden from a storytelling perspective. And people didn't expect nor want a sandbox. People want the final chapter of a trilogy and that's exacly what they got hence the high scores.

Also don't PM me. keep at it with Sebcool.
Unless of course you need an audience but then just make a new thread please and let's keep The Witcher 3 away from such accusations.

[umiman]

That's what I do too, but one advantage to the short dodge is that it doesn't stop your stamina from regenerating unlike the roll. So you can spam the dodge until your meter fills.

I actually had no idea that was the case! thanks!!

I have to say, putting it on hard difficulty from the start is a death sentence. It's awesome.

Ya, it's crazy. Even at level 13 I still constantly die to drowners if I get surrounded.

[Wimopy]

Getting surrounded / outnumbered always was as bad as in real life in Witcher. Especially since group attacks were removed. Oh, and archers from out of sight. You really don't want that.

Also, from my short foray into the game, if you haven't noticed already: Archers (crossbowmen definitely) can and will shoot from outside your engagement range sometimes. By that I mean that Geralt will not notice he's fighting, so no parrying, dodging or rolling.
Another thing you might not have noticed is that on horse* Geralt will cast axii on his mount. I'm not sure what it does exactly, but it probably has a calming effect, so until you get blinders you might want to try that when charging into the enemy. Extremely short duration from what I saw though.

Then again, maybe I'm saying obvious things, but I hope it helps some people.

*: I know his horse is called Roach, but I've seen the mount option on some other horses, so I'm sticking to general terms.

[Sonlirain]

Geralt has multiple horses in the books but he calls them all Roach.

[lastverb]

Geralt can mount other horses in game, but that doesn't count as becoming new Roach. (don't know if there is some story thing Roach for dying/new Roach)
And the worst thing for me about the game is stupidly forcing player to level - monsters that are few levels higher than you get ungodly magical bonuses. You kill level 14 ghul in 5/6 swings? Good, but you can't kill level 15 ghul in 50/60 swings because some number tells us you shouldn't.
Also, they added some gwent cards in introduction area. How the hell do I get those if I'm further ingame (any answer will do, including cheats)? Gwent is so good I wouldn't be surprised if CDP release some upgraded (balance high-end cards only decks) version with multiplayer of it soon.

[umiman]

?

I fought a level 25 Leshen just fine when I was level 11. Would have killed it too if it didn't summon a pack of level 5 wolves at the last second to gangbang me.

[nenjin]

So how would you guys say this stacks up to Witcher 2 in terms of gameplay?

I'm probably 2/3rds through Witcher 2 now, second attempt. And one thing I've noticed vs. the first game is how the story, combined with some very linear area designs, resulted in an assload of running around. Play a cRPG and you're used to it, but Witcher 2 seems almost excessive in it. Lots of one-shot areas that are less than an Oblivion side area, to do one thing, say hi to one guy, while the bulk of quests involve running back and forth to have your required story conversation. Witcher 2 has a pretty amped up storyline for one so in the beginning, I was ok with how it takes center stage. Flotsam was enjoyable and there was a decent mix of "Story vs. doing Witcher's work" that tilted toward the former.

Now pretty much done with Chapter 2 and it feels like the balance tipped way toward story. I've done nothing but run across the damn battlefield for hours, bouncing between quest objectives at the edges of the playable area. Monster spawns are few and far between and most are tied to quests, so fighting stuff that's not quest related feels very deliberately grindy.

So is Witcher 3 a continuation on this design, or does it get back more toward Witcher 1's openness and focus on sidequests as much as plot quests? Is it full of 1-shot corridors for quests like Witcher 2 or do things feel a little more open? Because in Witcher 2, it starts to feel like the designers were getting bored and just needed to deliver a level to further the story. While I don't necessarily miss, like, the Swamps of Vizima with its endless fields of enemies and herbs, Witcher 2 feels barren a lot of the time by comparison, and like a much smaller game in general.

[Sonlirain]

Can't say for myself because i didn't play the game myself but by looking at all the let's plays running i can say the game is more like Two Worlds 2, Gothic 3 or Risen than witcher 1 or 2 mostly thanks ot hte open world. As far as i can tell the first 4 hours are chock full of sidequests.

[Shadowlord]

Getting surrounded / outnumbered always was as bad as in real life in Witcher. Especially since group attacks were removed. Oh, and archers from out of sight. You really don't want that.

In Witcher 1, you'd basically get surrounded on purpose, go into group mode with the appropriate sword, and spin-to-win until everything was dead, unless you were fighting something unusual like a boss. Actually, Witcher 1 combat was generally just "drink the right potions and then spin to win," unless you felt like killing things with your flamethrower sign, or stunning and installing them, etc.