131 réponses à ce sujet

[Sleepy Mind]

Witcher is an alright game, but when I first played DAO i couldn't stop playing until I was already 8 hours in. Witcher on the other hand i had to really force myself to keep playing through the first hour..

Plus I get way more replay value with Dragon Age.

[Wyndham711]

Witcher was a dull game which let most of its potential linger untapped. I tried to like it more, but it didn't let me. I expect the sequel to be what the first game should have been - I have high hopes. Dragon Age, on the other hand, is the single greatest experience I've ever had with any game.

[wanderon]

I finished DA:O once already and have numerous other characters at different stages of the game (most still expected to finish at some point) while I gave up on the Witcher fairly early on - (shortly after entering the first major "town") - it's definately not better than DA in my view

[Merci357]

I didn't like The Witcher. Might not be a bad game, however I tried to play it, shortly after release, but it was bugged as hell back then. So I gave it a 2nd try once the "enhanced edition" was released, but still, I didn't like the combat system at all, and I never finished it, since I had to force myself to play it further. I really wanted to like it, but sadly, it's not my game.

If anyone is looking out for a new RPG to play, I'd rather recommend the mediocre Drakensang (or the better Drakensang 2: River of Time, though I've no idea if the english version is released) then The Witcher.

I might try The Witcher 2 if it get's positive reviews, though, after all there aren't that many RPGs released once a year.



So, in short, no, DA is far better then TW - but that's just my opinion.

[superjeno]

This really makes me want to go play that game... lets find that site where i can get it ;-)

no, seriously, i'm not buying it xD

[Loerwyn]

Behindyounow wrote...

Oh, then I'll give it a miss then. I dont want to play the game as some silver haired douche.

So you're going to miss out on a game because the character is set in stone? Geralt's a pre-existing character, but it's still very open in how you build him etc.
It's just like ME - No matter which way you look at it, you're always going to be Shep and that won't change.

[Stanley Woo]

Please remember that swearing and objectionable language are not permitted in our community.

[Darkshore]

I'm just curious as to if this poster is a troll or what. It seems that every single post by him is bashing dragon age..why come to the forum then? No offense intended.

[MindYerBeak]

VVh!ch3r? 0ooo s3x. Sw3@r!ng. 0oooo. H@xxor m3 a cop33. VVh!ch3r pwns, 0oooo. M@ture svv3@rz @nd s3x r00lz, 0oooo.

[Behindyounow]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

Behindyounow wrote...

Oh, then I'll give it a miss then. I dont want to play the game as some silver haired douche.

So you're going to miss out on a game because the character is set in stone? Geralt's a pre-existing character, but it's still very open in how you build him etc.
It's just like ME - No matter which way you look at it, you're always going to be Shep and that won't change.

Yeah, but at least you can choose Shep's gender, face and attitude.

And its not the fact that the character is un changeable. Its because the character is defined in a way I dislike.

[Loerwyn]

Behindyounow wrote...
And its not the fact that the character is un changeable. Its because the character is defined in a way I dislike.

It's your call.
You're still missing out on an absolutely brilliant RPG, though. I urge you to try the demo if you haven't already.

[HoonDing]

This thread failed to deliver.

[taine]

JSS wrote...

oh and i have been insulted by some guy i was in a fist fight with that "my mother sucks dwarf ****"

This game rules!!!

I agree that the Witcher is really good, but you sound like a 12 year old getting all excited over seeing his first R rated movie... 

[HoonDing]

taine wrote...

JSS wrote...

oh and i have been insulted by some guy i was in a fist fight with that "my mother sucks dwarf ****"

This game rules!!!

I agree that the Witcher is really good, but you sound like a 12 year old getting all excited over seeing his first R rated movie... 

Have you browsed through any of the 1,001 romance threads on this here forum?

[Fntsybks]

The Witcher has much better atmosphere and gray decisions, but DAO has better combat/characters. So for me, DAO > Witcher, but it should learn from the Witcher's cities, varied monsters and overall atmosphere. And having a preset Geralt, who does most of the talking for you can get annoying.

[Sharpus]

I agree with the title of this thread, Witcher is great I played many hours with Awe, and with DA:O with all its hype and big campaign I just bounced off after few hours. Especially after the fake trailers made by third party. For DA:O game starts and ends at the title Origins which let say half (both Dwarven, Dalish and Elven) where good and fresh ideas. But as soon as the game goes to Ostagar it start to suck, become unoriginal, boring and tedious. I'm definitely looking for TW2 and would never bother with DA:O2. Oh and one more thing TW makers win by far with DA:O makers with their policy of customer service both with help and delivering patches and addons. There are numerous fun addons for TW which are free. For DA:O from what I heard only Awakening and the last DLC that lets you play Darkspawn are worth any money.

[taine]

virumor wrote...

taine wrote...

JSS wrote...

oh and i have been insulted by some guy i was in a fist fight with that "my mother sucks dwarf ****"

This game rules!!!

I agree that the Witcher is really good, but you sound like a 12 year old getting all excited over seeing his first R rated movie... 

Have you browsed through any of the 1,001 romance threads on this here forum?

Sadly, yes.

[Velmarg]

I think a lot has to be taken into account when you compare the two. Dragon Age: Origins is from Bioware, published by EA. These are some big dogs, nahmean? Grizzled veterans of top-notch RPG development Bioware are, and what's more, they come from the English speaking world, and don't have to grapple with translation issues (at least not for us fellow English speaking folk).



The Witcher comes to us from CD Projekt, a (the?) Polish RPG developer with zero name recognition and far less experience. That the two might even be mentioned in the same breath is a testament to what CD Projekt managed to accomplish with Witcher. It's rough around its edges, make no mistake. The translation's sometimes a little stilted, and the combat can feel a little wonky at times... but it has a compelling story, a great setting, and an atmosphere all its own.



I remember watching the "making of" feature on the DVD that came with my DA:O collector's edition - the main writer talked about how DA contains a lot of fantasy elements that, while familiar to us (elves, dwarves, etc.), are given a unique spin in the game such that we really won't know what to expect.



If you really want to see a game take the generic fantasy and put a truly dark and unique spin on it, look no further than The Witcher. As someone else pointed out, it makes Dragon Age Origins look almost light and fluffy by comparison. For all the game accomplishes considering where it came from and what it's up against, it deserves nothing but pats on backs and fist bumps.

[Lord Gremlin]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

Behindyounow wrote...

Oh, then I'll give it a miss then. I dont want to play the game as some silver haired douche.

So you're going to miss out on a game because the character is set in stone? Geralt's a pre-existing character, but it's still very open in how you build him etc.
It's just like ME - No matter which way you look at it, you're always going to be Shep and that won't change.

No, Geralt is not very open in how you build him. As a person who started the game twice and didn't finished it because it's too boring, I can tell that there are 2 possible ways of playing/development: right-clicking everything or left-clicking everything to death. The former are signs, the latter swordfight. There is no strategy, except for some obvious limitations (heavy characters block all quick/group attacks, but you can always use Igni and right-click it to death).
Oh, and there are about 3 types of armor and only several decent weapons in the whole game. 99% of loot - garbage and alchemy ingredients. After playing for 10 hours with generally same ****ing equipment you can really tell that this game is garbage. YES it has nice dialogue and story. And hookers. But that's it and that's not enough.
DAO is a masterpiece that you enjoy throughout and want to replay again and again, Witcher is a bad, boring game with surprisingly good story and dialogue, so you either tolerate all the crapness to see the ending, or you respect yourself and uninstall it.
Of course all this is my personal opinion. For some people no customization, no new equipment and POS gameplay is alright if story and dialogue is good.

[Funkjoker]

The combat in TW is superior to the system of DA. You are able to click in the right moment to let him start combos etc., which is far more interactive than just to "look at the actions". Furthermore, the girl cards are nice to have, it lets you know who you bedded etc. and there are far more girls you can bed than in DA.
One of the posters here critized the graphic of TW. Well, you must know, the game's release was two years prior to the release of DA. Guess what? Newer games always have better graphics.
The alchemy system was better because you actually have to use the stuff you find in order to survive and enhance your fighting capabilities. In DA, all stuff for bombs and traps are never used because you never need them.
I love both games. In many aspects TW is better, DA is better in other aspects.

TM13h wrote...
There are far better points to understand why The Witcher is the atmospheric and why DA pales in comparison as a kind of Lord of the Rings - Red Edition. There is real racism to be found in the Witcher's universe, with all the nasty consequences. Denerim's alienage is looking like a kindergarden compared to what elves and dwarves have to endure in The Witcher. War is not glorious like in Ferelden but ugly business. All in all there is no place for heroes, not even the witchers are. Nearly every decision is no simple black and white stuff but all of the consequences make you feel bad. The closes thing in DA are the quests around the next king in Orzammar and maybe the part about the Dalish and the werewolves.

Finally someone who does not disapprove of everything TW has to offer and makes a clear statement. Jean-Funk approves +1.
In the Witcher, you NEVER feel to be the hero. You are in a dirty world and this feeling is great, because even if you beat the game, there is no "happily ever after" with other races.

[Funkjoker]

Lord Gremlin wrote...
Of course all this is my personal opinion. For some people no customization, no new equipment and POS gameplay is alright if story and dialogue is good.

You obviously didn't get into the game. While your statements about the quantity of armor (and maybe weapons) are true, they aren't that bad that the whole game is supposed to be garbage.

Modifié par Jean-Funk Van Damme, 07 juin 2010 - 06:38 .

[Lord Gremlin]

Jean-Funk Van Damme wrote...

Lord Gremlin wrote...
Of course all this is my personal opinion. For some people no customization, no new equipment and POS gameplay is alright if story and dialogue is good.

You obviously didn't get into the game. While your statements about the quantity of armor (and maybe weapons) are true, they aren't that bad that the whole game is supposed to be garbage.

Well, this game was bad enough to actually bore me to the point that I stopped playing, deleted it and never returned to it. It's just generally bad when a game - product, that's meant to entertain people - can be so boring.
I don't know what happens to the detective you hire, but I bet he'll be killed. This game is sometimes very predictable, boring and full of stereotypes. And, just saying, I loved Sapkowski's books.

[Dreadstruck]

Lord Gremlin wrote...
 And, just saying, I loved Sapkowski's books.

Yesh! You are my man! Or girl. Or whatever.
The game itself isn't that bad but I think it doesn't do a big justice to the books.

[Velmarg]

I could certainly understand why someone would be put off by the game's lack of variety in weapons and armor, but I think it fits the mood and atmosphere the developers were going for. Geralt isn't your average dandy do-gooder adventurer always on the look to score wicked loot - he's a witcher. He has a steel for humans, silver for beasts, and potions and signs to complement.



I think it's just another aspect of the game that departs from the norm, and feels very in line with a fantasy novel in which a character has his weapon, knows it, and sticks with it. From a game design standpoint, this is sort of detrimental to the typical RPG approach that rewards you with better and better equipment as you grow more powerful and slay more powerful creatures...



By no means did it ruin the game for me, though...