Character movement is more than challenging, it is a downright pain the ass. If I walk too far, and miss what I am trying to interact with, turning around to get it is like,,, well bad comedy.
The game is very very good. Very good. Too bad there isn't a multiplayer element to it.
60 hours into this game and still only lvl 18.cap is 60 i believe. the game is amssive!
loving it!
If someone is talking in general chat in a language you dont understand, chances are they're not talking to you. So chill out and stop bitching about it!
So basically every action adventure game is an RPG then? There should be a line and the Witcher walks along the edge of it. While I admit many SP action adventure games have RPG features such as upgrading certain skills over others;the hero, and their abilities are the same, the gameplay is essentially the same. To me Elder Scrolls, Dragon Age, Diablo, Path of Exile; these types of games are RPGs. You design your character, you pick the "class" you can choose different skills, your actual "role" is unique etc.
The most RPGish element in Witcher is the amount of options and choices in dialogue, which I do find impressive but... If I can bring Skyrim into this, I can basically be anything. I design my character, I can use any type of weapon and specialize in it, any type of magic, any type of armor etc. I can be an assassin, soldier, mercenary, thief, vampire, etc.
I don't know, it's like Final Fantasy, I consider these games quasi-rpgs (except the MMO versions), because the way I build my team will almost always be different then other people, but it is still the same characters, same story. Witcher sort of falls into the same category for me. But that is just my opinion.
Well, name some action adventure games and we'll look at the role play elements.
While Skyrim is a great game and I am still playing and modding it I can't really say it's a great role play game. You apparently think it is because you can "be anything you want".
for me, being anything I want means nothing if your choices have no meaning. There aren't really a lot of meaningful choices in Skyrim and not a lot of them are fleshed out in any intelligent way.
In The Wticher 3 you are playing as a charcter, you are stepping into a "role' just like any actor would.
In a game such as skyrim there isn't much of a role there but that's understandable becuase the story telling elements are weaker.
You can become the head of the mages guild if you do some jobs for the mage's guild. Doesn't make sense really. Heck, I have a character that joined the mage's guild that only has the starter spells. Doesn't make sense just because you did some work for them.
The bard's college is similar.
Your work in the civil war is shallow at best with the exception of the final city you siege where people will treat you differently. That's at least a plus.
Destroying Alduin doesn't get you much as far as recognition.
So yeah, Witcher 3 is an excellent role playing game because you are playing a role you have decisions people react to you. You may not be a thief or a powerful mage but that's not what this story is about.
If most actors followed your idea of "role playing" they wouldn't be doing many plays. Why take a role if 100's if not thousands upon thousands have already played it?
Well, to play it "your way".
Willy Loman dies at the end, no matter what. But it's how you play it that matters.
Yeah so I guess maybe our RPG definition differs. To me an RPG means unique, it means playing a unique character and setting yourself on a path of your own. Choices matter as well, in Skyrim your choices are more "what do I want to do with my life in Skyrim" granted anything you choose to pursue will have a singular ending, its the amount of roles you can play that make the difference.
In Witcher, you are a witcher and will always be a witcher. You indeed have more choices following this one path of being a witcher, which I love and with multiple endings! But you can never play the role of an assassin, bandit, or a cultist in this universe. You can't be a king, or rise the ranks of the military etc. (to my knowledge). You are Geralt, you have your two handed sword, your 5 spells, and your potions, just like everyone else who plays the game.
You say choices don't have meaning in Skyrim, but I kind of disagree. While there is only one ending for each set path, most have a permanent effect on the world. There is the civil war and depending on which side you choose becomes the victor. Taking up the path of Mage's or Fighter's guild and after the storyline is complete you now run the guild, can send people on missions, etc.
Theives guild provides you with fences to sell stolen goods, Being a thane you can have guards turn a blind eye to your petty crimes, etc.
Nearly all single player adventure games have some sort of character progression not unlike Witcher series. The Arkham batman games, Tomb Raider, Far Cry, Assassin's creed. Granted they don't really offer meaningful choices.. which is really the only reason I think Witcher could ever be called an RPG of sorts.
Now Playing: Bless / Summoners War Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
So basically every action adventure game is an RPG then? There should be a line and the Witcher walks along the edge of it. While I admit many SP action adventure games have RPG features such as upgrading certain skills over others;the hero, and their abilities are the same, the gameplay is essentially the same. To me Elder Scrolls, Dragon Age, Diablo, Path of Exile; these types of games are RPGs. You design your character, you pick the "class" you can choose different skills, your actual "role" is unique etc.
The most RPGish element in Witcher is the amount of options and choices in dialogue, which I do find impressive but... If I can bring Skyrim into this, I can basically be anything. I design my character, I can use any type of weapon and specialize in it, any type of magic, any type of armor etc. I can be an assassin, soldier, mercenary, thief, vampire, etc.
I don't know, it's like Final Fantasy, I consider these games quasi-rpgs (except the MMO versions), because the way I build my team will almost always be different then other people, but it is still the same characters, same story. Witcher sort of falls into the same category for me. But that is just my opinion.
Well, name some action adventure games and we'll look at the role play elements.
While Skyrim is a great game and I am still playing and modding it I can't really say it's a great role play game. You apparently think it is because you can "be anything you want".
for me, being anything I want means nothing if your choices have no meaning. There aren't really a lot of meaningful choices in Skyrim and not a lot of them are fleshed out in any intelligent way.
In The Wticher 3 you are playing as a charcter, you are stepping into a "role' just like any actor would.
In a game such as skyrim there isn't much of a role there but that's understandable becuase the story telling elements are weaker.
You can become the head of the mages guild if you do some jobs for the mage's guild. Doesn't make sense really. Heck, I have a character that joined the mage's guild that only has the starter spells. Doesn't make sense just because you did some work for them.
The bard's college is similar.
Your work in the civil war is shallow at best with the exception of the final city you siege where people will treat you differently. That's at least a plus.
Destroying Alduin doesn't get you much as far as recognition.
So yeah, Witcher 3 is an excellent role playing game because you are playing a role you have decisions people react to you. You may not be a thief or a powerful mage but that's not what this story is about.
If most actors followed your idea of "role playing" they wouldn't be doing many plays. Why take a role if 100's if not thousands upon thousands have already played it?
Well, to play it "your way".
Willy Loman dies at the end, no matter what. But it's how you play it that matters.
Yeah so I guess maybe our RPG definition differs. To me an RPG means unique, it means playing a unique character and setting yourself on a path of your own. Choices matter as well, in Skyrim your choices are more "what do I want to do with my life in Skyrim" granted anything you choose to pursue will have a singular ending, its the amount of roles you can play that make the difference.
In Witcher, you are a witcher and will always be a witcher. You indeed have more choices following this one path of being a witcher, which I love and with multiple endings! But you can never play the role of an assassin, bandit, or a cultist in this universe. You can't be a king, or rise the ranks of the military etc. (to my knowledge). You are Geralt, you have your two handed sword, your 5 spells, and your potions, just like everyone else who plays the game.
You say choices don't have meaning in Skyrim, but I kind of disagree. While there is only one ending for each set path, most have a permanent effect on the world. There is the civil war and depending on which side you choose becomes the victor. Taking up the path of Mage's or Fighter's guild and after the storyline is complete you now run the guild, can send people on missions, etc.
Theives guild provides you with fences to sell stolen goods, Being a thane you can have guards turn a blind eye to your petty crimes, etc.
Nearly all single player adventure games have some sort of character progression not unlike Witcher series. The Arkham batman games, Tomb Raider, Far Cry, Assassin's creed. Granted they don't really offer meaningful choices.. which is really the only reason I think Witcher could ever be called an RPG of sorts.
Wow at least you admit this is your opinion and one that is probably only shared by about 0.001% of actual gamers. It's really neat you are this much of a fan of Skyrim but it's also really weird you are this afraid of the witcher 3 that you need to create a new definition of what an RPG is.
What you are doing and failing in my opinion is like a basketball fan saying hockey isn't a sport because it's not played on hardwood.
Sorry no matter how many Witcher post you spam on this site or the internet it won't change the FACT that The Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best RPGs.
THE WITCHER 3 'Wild Hunt" is the best rpg I have ever played. Great Review Bill. One point I would add to your review....CD RED has said they will be supporting the game actively...patching....bug fixes....DLC's for the next two years. Geralt isn't quite done yet.
Nice game...too bad it needs a really high end pc...
I agree
I refuse to keep upgrading my PC for anymore games. Heck i'm still not done with Skyrim and all the mods for it. And i just don't like not being able to make my own character.
Wow at least you admit this is your opinion and one that is probably only shared by about 0.001% of actual gamers. It's really neat you are this much of a fan of Skyrim but it's also really weird you are this afraid of the witcher 3 that you need to create a new definition of what an RPG is.
What you are doing and failing in my opinion is like a basketball fan saying hockey isn't a sport because it's not played on hardwood.
Sorry no matter how many Witcher post you spam on this site or the internet it won't change the FACT that The Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best RPGs.
I really don't care what the public's opinion of RPG is. My definition is not "new" The definition of RPG HAS changed in the past few years, my definition is probably the one that existed about 10 years ago. These days any game where you play a role (which is basically every single one) is considered an RPG. I am sure Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best games and that's great.
Now Playing: Bless / Summoners War Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
Wow at least you admit this is your opinion and one that is probably only shared by about 0.001% of actual gamers. It's really neat you are this much of a fan of Skyrim but it's also really weird you are this afraid of the witcher 3 that you need to create a new definition of what an RPG is. What you are doing and failing in my opinion is like a basketball fan saying hockey isn't a sport because it's not played on hardwood. Sorry no matter how many Witcher post you spam on this site or the internet it won't change the FACT that The Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best RPGs.
I really don't care what the public's opinion of RPG is. My definition is not "new" The definition of RPG HAS changed in the past few years, my definition is probably the one that existed about 10 years ago. These days any game where you play a role (which is basically every single one) is considered an RPG. I am sure Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best games and that's great.
Your definition wasn't the definition of RPG 10 years ago. Not 20 years ago, either. Betrayal at Krondor (1993) is regarded as one of the all-time classical RPGs and during the course of the game you assume the role of various characters, none of which you create yourself.
Wow at least you admit this is your opinion and one that is probably only shared by about 0.001% of actual gamers. It's really neat you are this much of a fan of Skyrim but it's also really weird you are this afraid of the witcher 3 that you need to create a new definition of what an RPG is. What you are doing and failing in my opinion is like a basketball fan saying hockey isn't a sport because it's not played on hardwood. Sorry no matter how many Witcher post you spam on this site or the internet it won't change the FACT that The Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best RPGs.
I really don't care what the public's opinion of RPG is. My definition is not "new" The definition of RPG HAS changed in the past few years, my definition is probably the one that existed about 10 years ago. These days any game where you play a role (which is basically every single one) is considered an RPG. I am sure Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best games and that's great.
Your definition wasn't the definition of RPG 10 years ago. Not 20 years ago, either. Betrayal at Krondor (1993) is regarded as one of the all-time classical RPGs and during the course of the game you assume the role of various characters, none of which you create yourself.
You're right maybe I am being too strict on my definition. However I see RPG being slapped on everything these days. Just because it is a fantasy setting it's now an RPG. It has slight character progression, it is now an RPG. It has crafting, it is now an RPG. All I know is, if they made an MMORPG of the Witcher, and we all had the same weapon, skills, and character, we'd have a lot of upset people.
Now Playing: Bless / Summoners War Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
Wow at least you admit this is your opinion and one that is probably only shared by about 0.001% of actual gamers. It's really neat you are this much of a fan of Skyrim but it's also really weird you are this afraid of the witcher 3 that you need to create a new definition of what an RPG is. What you are doing and failing in my opinion is like a basketball fan saying hockey isn't a sport because it's not played on hardwood. Sorry no matter how many Witcher post you spam on this site or the internet it won't change the FACT that The Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best RPGs.
I really don't care what the public's opinion of RPG is. My definition is not "new" The definition of RPG HAS changed in the past few years, my definition is probably the one that existed about 10 years ago. These days any game where you play a role (which is basically every single one) is considered an RPG. I am sure Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best games and that's great.
Your definition wasn't the definition of RPG 10 years ago. Not 20 years ago, either. Betrayal at Krondor (1993) is regarded as one of the all-time classical RPGs and during the course of the game you assume the role of various characters, none of which you create yourself.
You're right maybe I am being too strict on my definition. However I see RPG being slapped on everything these days. Just because it is a fantasy setting it's now an RPG. It has slight character progression, it is now an RPG. It has crafting, it is now an RPG. All I know is, if they made an MMORPG of the Witcher, and we all had the same weapon, skills, and character, we'd have a lot of upset people.
Umm they made a mmorog called Conan not everyone is a barbarian. If they made an mmorpg of the witcher I'm sure they would have sorcerers and Hunter (elfs) again clearly showing you have no knowledge on the witcher.
They made an mmorpg on Swtor not everyone is Revan? But keep it coming
The Witcher 3 is a great game, and definitely an improvement to Witcher 2. It's more of an open-world action adventure game if you ask me. Some key reasons it isn't an RPG.
You can only play as Geralt
You can only use one weapon.
You have the same 5 spells.
Your Geralt is basically the same as my Geralt.
This would be similar to games like Assassin's creed, and Batman: Arkham City in which you can sort of choose slight differences and focuses on what you want to specialize in. But I wouldn't consider it an RPG. I do like how there is multiple endings, and that is + on player choice, still wouldn't really consider it a true RPG though.
Thanks, glad you mentioned that. I was about to buy the game but didn't after reading this. I would have wasted 60 dollars had I not read this.
all the signs have a diffreant attack to it or extra lol onle 1 weapon lol you have 2 swords you can use axes or bows too and bombs and fist
Wow at least you admit this is your opinion and one that is probably only shared by about 0.001% of actual gamers. It's really neat you are this much of a fan of Skyrim but it's also really weird you are this afraid of the witcher 3 that you need to create a new definition of what an RPG is. What you are doing and failing in my opinion is like a basketball fan saying hockey isn't a sport because it's not played on hardwood. Sorry no matter how many Witcher post you spam on this site or the internet it won't change the FACT that The Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best RPGs.
I really don't care what the public's opinion of RPG is. My definition is not "new" The definition of RPG HAS changed in the past few years, my definition is probably the one that existed about 10 years ago. These days any game where you play a role (which is basically every single one) is considered an RPG. I am sure Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best games and that's great.
Your definition wasn't the definition of RPG 10 years ago. Not 20 years ago, either. Betrayal at Krondor (1993) is regarded as one of the all-time classical RPGs and during the course of the game you assume the role of various characters, none of which you create yourself.
You're right maybe I am being too strict on my definition. However I see RPG being slapped on everything these days. Just because it is a fantasy setting it's now an RPG. It has slight character progression, it is now an RPG. It has crafting, it is now an RPG. All I know is, if they made an MMORPG of the Witcher, and we all had the same weapon, skills, and character, we'd have a lot of upset people.
Umm they made a mmorog called Conan not everyone is a barbarian. If they made an mmorpg of the witcher I'm sure they would have sorcerers and Hunter (elfs) again clearly showing you have no knowledge on the witcher.
They made an mmorpg on Swtor not everyone is Revan? But keep it coming
Lol why so hostile? but you proved my point.
If they made an MMO they would have given us a choice, because people like that sort of thing. So why not in single player? Because the developers want you to play the role they created for you. Sure you have some options, but the character you are playing is 75% developer created and 25% based on decisions through the game, roughly. You are roleplaying the developer's creation, not your own. If you want to think that is how a roleplaying game should be, fine. I will agree that it is an RPG, just one that you don't get to play the role you might have wanted to.
I just see this giant open world, full of exceptional production quality...Geralt would definitely still be involved as a character, but I wished this time they would have allowed you and your avatar to explore the world this time instead.
Now Playing: Bless / Summoners War Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
So basically every action adventure game is an RPG then? There should be a line and the Witcher walks along the edge of it. While I admit many SP action adventure games have RPG features such as upgrading certain skills over others;the hero, and their abilities are the same, the gameplay is essentially the same. To me Elder Scrolls, Dragon Age, Diablo, Path of Exile; these types of games are RPGs. You design your character, you pick the "class" you can choose different skills, your actual "role" is unique etc.
The most RPGish element in Witcher is the amount of options and choices in dialogue, which I do find impressive but... If I can bring Skyrim into this, I can basically be anything. I design my character, I can use any type of weapon and specialize in it, any type of magic, any type of armor etc. I can be an assassin, soldier, mercenary, thief, vampire, etc.
I don't know, it's like Final Fantasy, I consider these games quasi-rpgs (except the MMO versions), because the way I build my team will almost always be different then other people, but it is still the same characters, same story. Witcher sort of falls into the same category for me. But that is just my opinion.
Well, name some action adventure games and we'll look at the role play elements.
While Skyrim is a great game and I am still playing and modding it I can't really say it's a great role play game. You apparently think it is because you can "be anything you want".
for me, being anything I want means nothing if your choices have no meaning. There aren't really a lot of meaningful choices in Skyrim and not a lot of them are fleshed out in any intelligent way.
In The Wticher 3 you are playing as a charcter, you are stepping into a "role' just like any actor would.
In a game such as skyrim there isn't much of a role there but that's understandable becuase the story telling elements are weaker.
You can become the head of the mages guild if you do some jobs for the mage's guild. Doesn't make sense really. Heck, I have a character that joined the mage's guild that only has the starter spells. Doesn't make sense just because you did some work for them.
The bard's college is similar.
Your work in the civil war is shallow at best with the exception of the final city you siege where people will treat you differently. That's at least a plus.
Destroying Alduin doesn't get you much as far as recognition.
So yeah, Witcher 3 is an excellent role playing game because you are playing a role you have decisions people react to you. You may not be a thief or a powerful mage but that's not what this story is about.
If most actors followed your idea of "role playing" they wouldn't be doing many plays. Why take a role if 100's if not thousands upon thousands have already played it?
Well, to play it "your way".
Willy Loman dies at the end, no matter what. But it's how you play it that matters.
By your definition I guess "Call of Duty" is an RPG.
You are playing the "role" of a soldier...
I think too many people think these dialog simulators are RPG's.
Wow at least you admit this is your opinion and one that is probably only shared by about 0.001% of actual gamers. It's really neat you are this much of a fan of Skyrim but it's also really weird you are this afraid of the witcher 3 that you need to create a new definition of what an RPG is. What you are doing and failing in my opinion is like a basketball fan saying hockey isn't a sport because it's not played on hardwood. Sorry no matter how many Witcher post you spam on this site or the internet it won't change the FACT that The Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best RPGs.
I really don't care what the public's opinion of RPG is. My definition is not "new" The definition of RPG HAS changed in the past few years, my definition is probably the one that existed about 10 years ago. These days any game where you play a role (which is basically every single one) is considered an RPG. I am sure Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best games and that's great.
Your definition wasn't the definition of RPG 10 years ago. Not 20 years ago, either. Betrayal at Krondor (1993) is regarded as one of the all-time classical RPGs and during the course of the game you assume the role of various characters, none of which you create yourself.
I think what he is getting at is rpg's basically came from the tabletop games like AD&D. I have played a few times, hardly a pro, but every time I played I was given a character sheet and rolled "my" character. The GM never said "here is your character you are going to play. You other guys sitting around the table, guess what? You are going to play the same character."
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
By your definition I guess "Call of Duty" is an RPG.
You are playing the "role" of a soldier...
I think too many people think these dialog simulators are RPG's.
That's what I am saying. I was never "knocking" the Witcher, but I do think it would have been better with more personalization in that respect. I think even Call of Duty has specializations and levels now haha. Everyone gets to be an RPG!
Now Playing: Bless / Summoners War Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
Wow at least you admit this is your opinion and one that is probably only shared by about 0.001% of actual gamers. It's really neat you are this much of a fan of Skyrim but it's also really weird you are this afraid of the witcher 3 that you need to create a new definition of what an RPG is. What you are doing and failing in my opinion is like a basketball fan saying hockey isn't a sport because it's not played on hardwood. Sorry no matter how many Witcher post you spam on this site or the internet it won't change the FACT that The Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best RPGs.
I really don't care what the public's opinion of RPG is. My definition is not "new" The definition of RPG HAS changed in the past few years, my definition is probably the one that existed about 10 years ago. These days any game where you play a role (which is basically every single one) is considered an RPG. I am sure Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best games and that's great.
Your definition wasn't the definition of RPG 10 years ago. Not 20 years ago, either. Betrayal at Krondor (1993) is regarded as one of the all-time classical RPGs and during the course of the game you assume the role of various characters, none of which you create yourself.
You're right maybe I am being too strict on my definition. However I see RPG being slapped on everything these days. Just because it is a fantasy setting it's now an RPG. It has slight character progression, it is now an RPG. It has crafting, it is now an RPG. All I know is, if they made an MMORPG of the Witcher, and we all had the same weapon, skills, and character, we'd have a lot of upset people.
Umm they made a mmorog called Conan not everyone is a barbarian. If they made an mmorpg of the witcher I'm sure they would have sorcerers and Hunter (elfs) again clearly showing you have no knowledge on the witcher.
They made an mmorpg on Swtor not everyone is Revan? But keep it coming
Lol why so hostile? but you proved my point.
If they made an MMO they would have given us a choice, because people like that sort of thing. So why not in single player? Because the developers want you to play the role they created for you. Sure you have some options, but the character you are playing is 75% developer created and 25% based on decisions through the game, roughly. You are roleplaying the developer's creation, not your own. If you want to think that is how a roleplaying game should be, fine. I will agree that it is an RPG, just one that you don't get to play the role you might have wanted to.
I just see this giant open world, full of exceptional production quality...Geralt would definitely still be involved as a character, but I wished this time they would have allowed you and your avatar to explore the world this time instead.
Haha I'm not hostile just hilarious watching you come up with your own definitions and talking about a game you clearly have no clue on.
IF you played the witcher THEN you would KNOW you are more invested in Geralt and the world in the witcher then any character you could create. You have nothing to stand on to base your new founded definition of the witcher "sort of being an RPG" other then "oh I can't make my own toon". But the facts are the witcher destroy you new found definition.
I'll give you one example (leaving out spoilers). Before level ten you become more involved in one character in the witcher then you would in most of your so called "real RPGs" you meet the blood baron he is part of the early main story. He is not a main character but as you progress as GERALT your immersion towards the baron changes. At first he comes off and a drunk who deserves everything that has happened, by the end your (AS GERALT) views of him will change, this wouldn't be any different if I had created a toon and named him tasslehoff I would have felt and made the exact same choices. You see I'm Geralt I'm invested in him just like I would be in a character in a book or a toon in the witcher named tasslehoff. Just because I didn't create him doesn't mean I don't get to create this unique special Geralt the way I want.
Sorry you are just trying to create this fictious definition of an RPG just to suit your opinion. That is not how the real world works, and it will never work not even on a site like this.
Wow at least you admit this is your opinion and one that is probably only shared by about 0.001% of actual gamers. It's really neat you are this much of a fan of Skyrim but it's also really weird you are this afraid of the witcher 3 that you need to create a new definition of what an RPG is. What you are doing and failing in my opinion is like a basketball fan saying hockey isn't a sport because it's not played on hardwood. Sorry no matter how many Witcher post you spam on this site or the internet it won't change the FACT that The Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best RPGs.
I really don't care what the public's opinion of RPG is. My definition is not "new" The definition of RPG HAS changed in the past few years, my definition is probably the one that existed about 10 years ago. These days any game where you play a role (which is basically every single one) is considered an RPG. I am sure Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best games and that's great.
Your definition wasn't the definition of RPG 10 years ago. Not 20 years ago, either. Betrayal at Krondor (1993) is regarded as one of the all-time classical RPGs and during the course of the game you assume the role of various characters, none of which you create yourself.
You're right maybe I am being too strict on my definition. However I see RPG being slapped on everything these days. Just because it is a fantasy setting it's now an RPG. It has slight character progression, it is now an RPG. It has crafting, it is now an RPG. All I know is, if they made an MMORPG of the Witcher, and we all had the same weapon, skills, and character, we'd have a lot of upset people.
Umm they made a mmorog called Conan not everyone is a barbarian. If they made an mmorpg of the witcher I'm sure they would have sorcerers and Hunter (elfs) again clearly showing you have no knowledge on the witcher.
They made an mmorpg on Swtor not everyone is Revan? But keep it coming
Lol why so hostile? but you proved my point.
If they made an MMO they would have given us a choice, because people like that sort of thing. So why not in single player? Because the developers want you to play the role they created for you. Sure you have some options, but the character you are playing is 75% developer created and 25% based on decisions through the game, roughly. You are roleplaying the developer's creation, not your own. If you want to think that is how a roleplaying game should be, fine. I will agree that it is an RPG, just one that you don't get to play the role you might have wanted to.
I just see this giant open world, full of exceptional production quality...Geralt would definitely still be involved as a character, but I wished this time they would have allowed you and your avatar to explore the world this time instead.
Haha I'm not hostile just hilarious watching you come up with your own definitions and talking about a game you clearly have no clue on.
IF you played the witcher THEN you would KNOW you are more invested in Geralt and the world in the witcher then any character you could create. You have nothing to stand on to base your new founded definition of the witcher "sort of being an RPG" other then "oh I can't make my own toon". But the facts are the witcher destroy you new found definition.
I'll give you one example (leaving out spoilers). Before level ten you become more involved in one character in the witcher then you would in most of your so called "real RPGs" you meet the blood baron he is part of the early main story. He is not a main character but as you progress as GERALT your immersion towards the baron changes. At first he comes off and a drunk who deserves everything that has happened, by the end your (AS GERALT) views of him will change, this wouldn't be any different if I had created a toon and named him tasslehoff I would have felt and made the exact same choices. You see I'm Geralt I'm invested in him just like I would be in a character in a book or a toon in the witcher named tasslehoff. Just because I didn't create him doesn't mean I don't get to create this unique special Geralt the way I want.
Sorry you are just trying to create this fictious definition of an RPG just to suit your opinion. That is not how the real world works, and it will never work not even on a site like this.
Isn't this being somewhat hypocritical?
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
You say choices don't have meaning in Skyrim, but I kind of disagree. While there is only one ending for each set path, most have a permanent effect on the world. There is the civil war and depending on which side you choose becomes the victor. Taking up the path of Mage's or Fighter's guild and after the storyline is complete you now run the guild, can send people on missions, etc.
Theives guild provides you with fences to sell stolen goods, Being a thane you can have guards turn a blind eye to your petty crimes, etc.
Nearly all single player adventure games have some sort of character progression not unlike Witcher series. The Arkham batman games, Tomb Raider, Far Cry, Assassin's creed. Granted they don't really offer meaningful choices.. which is really the only reason I think Witcher could ever be called an RPG of sorts.
But that's why I was saying that skyrim's choices were shallow or didn't make sense.
this has always been a shortcoming of Bethesda's games from Morrowind on (I can't comment on earlier games).
There really isn't a lot of choice that sticks with your character.
In skyrim, as I mentioned, I don't even have to be a mage to be head of the mage's guild. The civil war only really affects your character in the city you lay siege to.
If I sided with the imperials, win and then go to the King's wife she doesn't even acknowledge you. No one in Solitude does to my memory (in regards to the civil war).
The assassin's guild has a nice bit where you can join or take them down.
Being a bard has nothing to do with being a bard (you have to rely upon mods for that).
For the group that is in Whiterun that has the werewolves, you are given a choice, become a werewolf or um, not do much else. You can't tell them no. You can't really "betray them" other than attack them but many are protected and are essential so that doesn't do much.
Each role playing game has its parameters,things it's strong in and weaknesses.
so "no" I don't consider the new tomb raider game a role playing game as you are pretty much going in a line and just making your character along the way.
And by line I really mean "in a line" the world is pretty much a straight line with some slightly open areas. It has role play elements but it's pretty much an action game.
Other than buildign a character there's not much choice at all.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Sorry you are just trying to create this fictious definition of an RPG just to suit your opinion. That is not how the real world works, and it will never work not even on a site like this.
Isn't this being somewhat hypocritical?
Yeah I don't believe there is a set in stone definition on an RPG. I actually came around and agreed that witcher is an RPG. Maybe it was the other glowing thread on here, but yeah. It's not my type of RPG I guess would be the wording that will get me out of most trouble.
Now Playing: Bless / Summoners War Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
Sorry you are just trying to create this fictious definition of an RPG just to suit your opinion. That is not how the real world works, and it will never work not even on a site like this.
Isn't this being somewhat hypocritical?
Yeah I don't believe there is a set in stone definition on an RPG. I actually came around and agreed that witcher is an RPG. Maybe it was the other glowing thread on here, but yeah. It's not my type of RPG I guess would be the wording that will get me out of most trouble.
Ok now this I can understand and wouldn't question you on. Not every game is for every player which is perfectly normal.
Sometimes I forget when playing this game that I,m playing a solo rpg and not an mmo such is the size of the world and the content that's in it.Not only that its the brilliance of some of the quests as well.Every quest is done in such a way that kind of reflects on whats wrong with society today.Would gladly pay $25 a month to play in a witcher world.Somehow I don't think we will ever get it though.All I can say is the cost of this game was well worth it.Would have gladly paid more if I had to seen has I already played and completed the first 2 games.Only 60+ hours in on this so I have a long way to go yet.
On a serious note though, I'm looking forward to getting this. I'm only the fence because I 'm trying to decide if I should get it with my current GTX 680 or wait until I upgrade so my experience isn't marred to much.
On a serious note though, I'm looking forward to getting this. I'm only the fence because I 'm trying to decide if I should get it with my current GTX 680 or wait until I upgrade so my experience isn't marred to much.
I run it on a GTX 680 and it is just fine. Looks great and runs great.
As to the game itself....I like it....but I do not like it a lot. Not based upon looks or preformance but rather perception of what I was getting into when I purchased the game. I really thought that this was going to be a seamless open world type game. It is ... sort of. Each "area" is open world. Trouble is, when the ajoin boarders and you attempt to travel back or forth you are told "you have travelled too far". What? I know, it may not be possible to do this all in a seamless manner. I just thought that it was going to be seamless when I purchased the game.
Also, quests. I like them and I hate them. Some are straight forward and some are just difficult to follow. Some of this has to do with the map. When is says "go to the Gorlund swamplands", I expect that to be titled such on my map. If it because I haven't discovered it yet, why can't I just ask people where it is and have it marked on my map?
Don't get me wrong, I like Witcher 3. I just don't think it is "great".
The terrible controls and camera make the game unplayable. The whole game feels like a clunky console port. Also got tired of the repetitive derpy combat. I'd give it a 6/10. HIGHLY overrated.
Comments
Character movement is more than challenging, it is a downright pain the ass. If I walk too far, and miss what I am trying to interact with, turning around to get it is like,,, well bad comedy.
The game is very very good. Very good. Too bad there isn't a multiplayer element to it.
60 hours into this game and still only lvl 18.cap is 60 i believe. the game is amssive!
loving it!
If someone is talking in general chat in a language you dont understand, chances are they're not talking to you. So chill out and stop bitching about it!
Yeah so I guess maybe our RPG definition differs. To me an RPG means unique, it means playing a unique character and setting yourself on a path of your own. Choices matter as well, in Skyrim your choices are more "what do I want to do with my life in Skyrim" granted anything you choose to pursue will have a singular ending, its the amount of roles you can play that make the difference.
In Witcher, you are a witcher and will always be a witcher. You indeed have more choices following this one path of being a witcher, which I love and with multiple endings! But you can never play the role of an assassin, bandit, or a cultist in this universe. You can't be a king, or rise the ranks of the military etc. (to my knowledge). You are Geralt, you have your two handed sword, your 5 spells, and your potions, just like everyone else who plays the game.
You say choices don't have meaning in Skyrim, but I kind of disagree. While there is only one ending for each set path, most have a permanent effect on the world. There is the civil war and depending on which side you choose becomes the victor. Taking up the path of Mage's or Fighter's guild and after the storyline is complete you now run the guild, can send people on missions, etc.
Theives guild provides you with fences to sell stolen goods, Being a thane you can have guards turn a blind eye to your petty crimes, etc.
Nearly all single player adventure games have some sort of character progression not unlike Witcher series. The Arkham batman games, Tomb Raider, Far Cry, Assassin's creed. Granted they don't really offer meaningful choices.. which is really the only reason I think Witcher could ever be called an RPG of sorts.
Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
Wow at least you admit this is your opinion and one that is probably only shared by about 0.001% of actual gamers. It's really neat you are this much of a fan of Skyrim but it's also really weird you are this afraid of the witcher 3 that you need to create a new definition of what an RPG is.
What you are doing and failing in my opinion is like a basketball fan saying hockey isn't a sport because it's not played on hardwood.
Sorry no matter how many Witcher post you spam on this site or the internet it won't change the FACT that The Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best RPGs.
I agree
I refuse to keep upgrading my PC for anymore games. Heck i'm still not done with Skyrim and all the mods for it. And i just don't like not being able to make my own character.
I really don't care what the public's opinion of RPG is. My definition is not "new" The definition of RPG HAS changed in the past few years, my definition is probably the one that existed about 10 years ago. These days any game where you play a role (which is basically every single one) is considered an RPG. I am sure Witcher 3 will go down as one of the best games and that's great.
Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
You're right maybe I am being too strict on my definition. However I see RPG being slapped on everything these days. Just because it is a fantasy setting it's now an RPG. It has slight character progression, it is now an RPG. It has crafting, it is now an RPG. All I know is, if they made an MMORPG of the Witcher, and we all had the same weapon, skills, and character, we'd have a lot of upset people.
Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
Umm they made a mmorog called Conan not everyone is a barbarian. If they made an mmorpg of the witcher I'm sure they would have sorcerers and Hunter (elfs) again clearly showing you have no knowledge on the witcher.
They made an mmorpg on Swtor not everyone is Revan? But keep it coming
all the signs have a diffreant attack to it or extra lol onle 1 weapon lol you have 2 swords you can use axes or bows too and bombs and fist
Lol why so hostile? but you proved my point.
If they made an MMO they would have given us a choice, because people like that sort of thing. So why not in single player? Because the developers want you to play the role they created for you. Sure you have some options, but the character you are playing is 75% developer created and 25% based on decisions through the game, roughly. You are roleplaying the developer's creation, not your own. If you want to think that is how a roleplaying game should be, fine. I will agree that it is an RPG, just one that you don't get to play the role you might have wanted to.
I just see this giant open world, full of exceptional production quality...Geralt would definitely still be involved as a character, but I wished this time they would have allowed you and your avatar to explore the world this time instead.
Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
By your definition I guess "Call of Duty" is an RPG.
You are playing the "role" of a soldier...
I think too many people think these dialog simulators are RPG's.
I think what he is getting at is rpg's basically came from the tabletop games like AD&D. I have played a few times, hardly a pro, but every time I played I was given a character sheet and rolled "my" character. The GM never said "here is your character you are going to play. You other guys sitting around the table, guess what? You are going to play the same character."
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
That's what I am saying. I was never "knocking" the Witcher, but I do think it would have been better with more personalization in that respect. I think even Call of Duty has specializations and levels now haha. Everyone gets to be an RPG!
Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
Haha I'm not hostile just hilarious watching you come up with your own definitions and talking about a game you clearly have no clue on.
IF you played the witcher THEN you would KNOW you are more invested in Geralt and the world in the witcher then any character you could create. You have nothing to stand on to base your new founded definition of the witcher "sort of being an RPG" other then "oh I can't make my own toon". But the facts are the witcher destroy you new found definition.
I'll give you one example (leaving out spoilers). Before level ten you become more involved in one character in the witcher then you would in most of your so called "real RPGs" you meet the blood baron he is part of the early main story. He is not a main character but as you progress as GERALT your immersion towards the baron changes. At first he comes off and a drunk who deserves everything that has happened, by the end your (AS GERALT) views of him will change, this wouldn't be any different if I had created a toon and named him tasslehoff I would have felt and made the exact same choices. You see I'm Geralt I'm invested in him just like I would be in a character in a book or a toon in the witcher named tasslehoff. Just because I didn't create him doesn't mean I don't get to create this unique special Geralt the way I want.
Sorry you are just trying to create this fictious definition of an RPG just to suit your opinion. That is not how the real world works, and it will never work not even on a site like this.
Isn't this being somewhat hypocritical?
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
But that's why I was saying that skyrim's choices were shallow or didn't make sense.
this has always been a shortcoming of Bethesda's games from Morrowind on (I can't comment on earlier games).
There really isn't a lot of choice that sticks with your character.
In skyrim, as I mentioned, I don't even have to be a mage to be head of the mage's guild. The civil war only really affects your character in the city you lay siege to.
If I sided with the imperials, win and then go to the King's wife she doesn't even acknowledge you. No one in Solitude does to my memory (in regards to the civil war).
The assassin's guild has a nice bit where you can join or take them down.
Being a bard has nothing to do with being a bard (you have to rely upon mods for that).
For the group that is in Whiterun that has the werewolves, you are given a choice, become a werewolf or um, not do much else. You can't tell them no. You can't really "betray them" other than attack them but many are protected and are essential so that doesn't do much.
Each role playing game has its parameters,things it's strong in and weaknesses.
so "no" I don't consider the new tomb raider game a role playing game as you are pretty much going in a line and just making your character along the way.
And by line I really mean "in a line" the world is pretty much a straight line with some slightly open areas. It has role play elements but it's pretty much an action game.
Other than buildign a character there's not much choice at all.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Most top quality SP RPG i ever played.
Every char in game is interesting and i want more and more to hear what they got to say.
10/10. just must buy.
Yeah I don't believe there is a set in stone definition on an RPG. I actually came around and agreed that witcher is an RPG. Maybe it was the other glowing thread on here, but yeah. It's not my type of RPG I guess would be the wording that will get me out of most trouble.
Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
Ok now this I can understand and wouldn't question you on. Not every game is for every player which is perfectly normal.
I guess I'll let a bad pug get me down
On a serious note though, I'm looking forward to getting this. I'm only the fence because I 'm trying to decide if I should get it with my current GTX 680 or wait until I upgrade so my experience isn't marred to much.
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
I run it on a GTX 680 and it is just fine. Looks great and runs great.
As to the game itself....I like it....but I do not like it a lot. Not based upon looks or preformance but rather perception of what I was getting into when I purchased the game. I really thought that this was going to be a seamless open world type game. It is ... sort of. Each "area" is open world. Trouble is, when the ajoin boarders and you attempt to travel back or forth you are told "you have travelled too far". What? I know, it may not be possible to do this all in a seamless manner. I just thought that it was going to be seamless when I purchased the game.
Also, quests. I like them and I hate them. Some are straight forward and some are just difficult to follow. Some of this has to do with the map. When is says "go to the Gorlund swamplands", I expect that to be titled such on my map. If it because I haven't discovered it yet, why can't I just ask people where it is and have it marked on my map?
Don't get me wrong, I like Witcher 3. I just don't think it is "great".
Let's party like it is 1863!