160
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2024
160 points (97.1% liked)
Patient Gamers
10292 readers
52 users here now
A gaming community free from the hype and oversaturation of current releases, catering to gamers who wait at least 12 months after release to play a game. Whether it's price, waiting for bugs/issues to be patched, DLC to be released, don't meet the system requirements, or just haven't had the time to keep up with the latest releases.
^(placeholder)^
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
When Witcher 3 was winning all those awards, I wanted to give the original game a go.
Don't. I imagine it's nothing like Witcher 3. It aged terribly poorly.
I bought a bundle with all the 3 witcher games and tried both 1 and 2. I could jot even get through the tutorial in 1 and could jot beat the first boss of 2. Each game controls completely differently from one another.
I really liked Witcher 2 though. It's a good game.
Yea, I don't know. I disagree with the others. They're definitely not modern games, but I think they're both still quite good games individually.
That Kayran fight is one of the most unfortunate things about Witcher 2. It's far too difficult a fight for a first boss, and almost all of that chapter is a drag to boot. The game is so much better after that point.
My favorite moment in that game is a serious case of understatement in dialogue prompt. You have an option to help one of two diametrically opposed people and if you choose "Help person A" you draw your sword on person B. If you choose "Help person B" you immediately throat punch person A.
Similar to how "push dijkstra aside" leads to Geralt breaking his ankle in a really violent matter.
Yeah, Witcher 2 felt like something completely new when I started it up right after finishing the first game.
I imagine going from 2 to 3 will feel the same.
Not so much to be honest. The 3rd one is just way more open world and the combat is so much smoother and more responsive.
I remember playing the first game and getting stuck on the tutorial because I was mashing the left click button trying to swing my sword only to have Geralt hip thrust at the enemies.
But once you figure out how to swing the sword, the game's actually pretty fun. One thing I particularly liked is that there's an investigative storyline where you actually have to go and investigate and figure out the answer with the clues provided, and you can fail. I went into it thinking it would be like most modern games where you only get obviously correct or incorrect dialog options and angered everyone in the process.
It did have some positive traits, but the gameplay just didn't do it for me at all.
I did make it through the whole game, so I feel like I can hold that opinion, haha
People didn't like its mechanics even back when it launched. Personally, it's still somehow my favorite even tho objectively it's less fun to play and less polished than the other two. Something about its story and the atmosphere makes it more unique and genuine.
It does have a great story!
The typical advice for people looking to get into the Witcher games is to watch a cutscene compilation of the first game, then start with the second. Don’t bother with too many side quests in the second; Just make it through the story so you know the broad strokes and major decisions. Then take that save to the Witcher 3, and just play that one from now on.
Because going backwards is so incredibly difficult; Each game adds a ton of quality of life improvements, so going back to older games feels horribly sluggish and clunky.
Yeah, I actually enjoyed the plot. But the gameplay kept getting in the way of that...lol
Yeah, I don't know how unpopular the opinion is, but the original Witcher didn't strike me as a particularly good game. It was a... fine... I guess game, but with mature elements and tone that other games in the genre lacked. I slogged through it in preparation of playing Witcher 3.