[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/v/ - Video Games


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: witcher.png (293 KB, 1525x1525)
293 KB
293 KB PNG
Are the witcher 1 and 2 worth playing at all? Do they really offer anything 3 doesn't?
>>
>>728955749
Better paced and more immersive.
>>
Witcher 1? More like 1 of the worst games ever made
>>
>>728955749
1 > 3 > 2
2 isn't bad either but it has rollslop combat that's worse than the other two
>>
Witcher 2 was the best of trilogy
>>
>>728955749
1 is a great game, somewhat tedious with it's backspacing if you don't know what you are doing

2 isa great game too, the combat feels a bit clunky but nothing overly terrible
>>
>>728955749
1 is the best in the series and 2's story is good, but the combat is so fucking horrendous it makes the other 2 game's combat seem fun in comparison
>>728955917
this
>>
File: Witcher inventory 1 vs 2.jpg (1.34 MB, 3628x1646)
1.34 MB
1.34 MB JPG
>>728955749
TW1:EE is literally the ONLY good game in the entire franchise.

2 ruined the IP instantly by turning it into a literal "WE WANT ASSCREED+SOULS AUDIENCES!!" console slop. 3 is just Ubishit.
>>
>>728955749
Yea they're good, 1 is longer than 2 but 2 is higher quality.
1 is about 40 hours
2 is about 30 hours
>>
>>728955749
1 is very old feeling and kinda strange but still worth checking out maybe if you get it on a discount.
2 is one of my favorite games of all time. It's a bit more "gamey" but still challenging and doesn't feel like it sacrificed anything to be overly gamey.
>>
File: W2.png (1.45 MB, 1280x800)
1.45 MB
1.45 MB PNG
>>728955749
I like 2 a lot, it offers second act completely different depending on a choice which character/faction you are aligned with.

Iorwethall the way!

Also, some of the boss fights are great, Draug being one of examples.

Chapter 1 after prologue I also like a lot, it's wildland, offer great immersion imho.

Geralt is the most bookish one, which is a plus to me, it's not like in first game which isn't flushed out, or in third one where he is the most charismatic and buffed (anti)hero, which aren't really what books depicted him (don't get me wrong I like W3 and W3's Geralt a lot).
>>
>>728955749
Witcher 1 combat is boring but has the best story imo.
Witcher 2 has the worst combat in the series (super frustrating when you're playing on max difficulty and you're dying to a melee attack while you're 10 m away).
Story : Witcher 1 > Witcher 3 > Witcher 2
Combat : Witcher 3 > Witcher 1 > Witcher 2
While it might look like I don't like Witcher 2, I do, but at the same time I wouldn't want to play it again.
Both games are worth playing overall.
>>
>>728956752
>>728957029
TW2 is irredeemable garbage, and THE most insulting case of extreme consolification I have ever seen.
>>
>>728955749
3 >>>>>>>>> 1 > 2
play TW3 first, then read all the books in order of short stories -> novels -> prequels, dont go chronological go by release order its better, then play through 1 and 2 and save import and replay tw3 now that you know all the characters and plot points from the books and prequels
>>
>>728957378
Not OP but I decided to read the books before playing the games, I'm a fucking slow reader though so Witcher 1 remaked might be out by the time I'm done.
>>
File: 1744826695541332.jpg (35 KB, 382x341)
35 KB
35 KB JPG
>>728955749
1 is the best game of the series
>>
>does <completely different story> offer anything different?
Why are you even playing RPGs if you have to ask this question?
>>
>>728956513
consoles were a fucking mistake holy shit
>>
>>728955749
1 is pretty janky, and two improves on a lot. If you want to play 1-3, go for it. But 3 is like the fucking epitome. God damn, what a game.
>>
>>728955917
this guy knows what he's on
Witcher games peaked at 1
Ditto for the books honestly, it's all downhill after The Last Wish
>>
>>728955749
Witcher 1 has the best story, focuses more on Geralt than the other games
Witcher 2 sucks but sets up 3
>>
File: TCG.png (1.4 MB, 1200x1500)
1.4 MB
1.4 MB PNG
>Witcher 1
Most SOVL
>Witcher 2
Best sex scene
>Witcher 3
Best minigame
>>
Damn, I was expecting "1 is shit and if you like it you deserve to die in a fire because I got filtered by combat" responses when I entered this thread.

Yes, 1 is the best both gameplay and story-wise, the only thing that's bad about is the awkward voice acting and dialogues.
Books are kinda shit though... I mean I've read worse but they feel like edgy generic fantasy garbage, I've suffered through the first two and gave up.
>>
File: 1735508398178655.jpg (379 KB, 1200x800)
379 KB
379 KB JPG
>>728955749
>Are the witcher 1
Yes
>>
>>728955749
I'm convinced this place has bots, the exact same posts since 10 years about Witcher 1, holy fuck.

Who is this terminally online loser?
>>
>>728957563
The witcher 1 remake will most likely remove one of the most important aspect of that game. The sex cards.
So you might have to play it twice.
>>
>>728955917
>>728955971
>>728955991
Witcher 2's combat is signficantly more auto target based. And most people don't know that your attack animation depends on the direction that Geralt faces. For example, I found out that starting your attack from one of the sideway direction (i.e. perpendicular to the enemy) always makes Geralt do the AOE multi-hit whirl attacks that is great for groups.

And your distance from the target enemy also influences the attack animation.

This still creates issues that are still prevalent in Witcher 3 like:
>Witcher 3's animations are somewhat reliable, the contextual attacks just choose wrong 100% of the time because they choose according to the current distance between the player and enemy, whereas a player that is used to tight combat is making decisions based on the future distance between the player and enemy.

>If a drowner is lunging at geralt, you want to counter hit. Ideally you will press light attack and he will do the quick upward slash, the drowner will jump into it and get staggered, and then you have a chance for big offense. Of course this never happens, because the drowner is currently out of sword range when telegraphing the lunge, so Geralt will instead choose to twirl 100% of the time and completely lose the exchange 100% of the time. Player is punished, not rewarded, for predicting and reacting to the telegraphed attack.

>In the same vein, if an enemy is dodging away, you want to do the twirl to chase and punish their backdash. However, since they are currently within sword range, Geralt will do a quick sword attack and miss 100% of the time. Player identified the enemy's next action and the counterplay, but is thwarted by the game from capitalizing on it.

>This is what it means that Witcher's combat is low skill. Any rewards for spacing, timing and anticipation are completely removed. I dislike the batman clones like Shadow of Mordor for the same reason.
>>
>>728959604
>most people don't know that your attack animation depends on the direction that Geralt faces
that's one of the worst things about the game, once you figure out how it works you'll probably just end up spamming the left side heavy attack since that is a lunge with high range, high damage and you can roll back out to not get hit, and you'll just end up doing the same thing over and over again



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.