81 réponses à ce sujet

[fast55]

The Witcher has one the the best opening scenes and ending scenes that I have ever seen in any video game to date.  Completing the game on hard is really rewarding.  Some of the realtime knock-down abilitlies remind me of jedi powers

I like both games for different reasons.  The Witcher is really a "Mans-Man" game.

[no_subject]

The Witcher is one of my favourite games. I like the arcade-ish timed combat as opposed to the usual *click*, *wait*, *hotkey 1*, *hotkey2* etc. It's also one of the few games that really makes you think about your decisions, rather than the usually straightforward good/evil, save/kill ones. For example, do you hand the parentless boy to a woman with strong maternal instincts although she lives a bit rough, or to a stronger woman in a safer environment, although she really knows nothing about how to raise a child?

I also liked the fact that the game wasn't all about stats, DPS etc. I mean there were only a few swords and 1 or 2 sets of armour if I remember rightly. Geralt was also the least stereotypical hero as well, I loved his sarcasm and cynicism. The loading times did suck though, and it ran a bit choppy on my rig, but not a bad first attempt from CD Projekt RED.

Modifié par no_subject, 04 décembre 2009 - 03:20 .

[Damar Stiehl]

I enjoyed the Witcher a lot, never had a problem with the combat system (hey, it was better than Gothic's), loved the atmosphere, loved the magic system.



With the exception of having to play a premade character (though customizable) and lack of gear beyond swords, it is one of the best RPGs I've ever played. And yes, it is a "single player mumorpuger" at times (thank you Yahtzee), but I didn't mind that aspect.

[casadechrisso]

I don't get why people still first mention the sex in The Witcher, as if there was nothing else in it. Actually, while the Witcher had some "random encounters" in that direction, don't tell me that in DA there wasn't at least a year of development only spent on the various ways to get your companions laid. If you don't strictly avoid the romance options, Dragon Age is all about sex, although in a rather uptight way. The Witcher was a little more straight forward, but the scenes were still as avoidable and harmless as DA's.



Besides that, I consider the Witcher a gem, and it brought a lot of fresh wind into the somewhat stereotypical medieval fantasy genre. I loved the Witcher for the amazing world detail, the artwork, the love the developers spent on every corner, a really good storyline and whatnot. Last but not least, CDPR's customer support and care for the game set an example. I mean, I played the Witcher at version 1.01 and already considered it as good as bug-free, and yet I got a patch in form of a totally rework of the game... for free.

Dragon Age isn't that new and fresh at all, it's pretty much a Bioware standard. The whole system with taking care of your companions, managing battles, romance plots... if you played one Bioware game, you played them all. And still, Bioware is a master at storytelling, and I have found myself again emotionally attached to the story and the companions and everything like in no other game. That's Bioware and what I love them for, Dragon Age is a wonderful game. But The Witcher was more innovative, or "newer". And had better area design.

Oh, and of course did the Bioware guys play it. They advertised the game on their site when it came out, and if you haven't had the feeling you saw Shianni in the alienage somewhere else before, you probably haven't played the Witcher yet.

[Andulias]

It's hard to say, really. I mean, the two games are quite different. In the end however I feel that The Witcher was more... unique. Where Dragon Age feels incredibly generic at times, The Witcher never loses it's very specific dark atmosphere that made the game so great. The story was also superior in The Witcher IMO and featured much harder moral choices. All in all CD Project's game was just... unique. It had it's flaws - the combat system got boring quite fast and from pure technical standpoint of view it had some serious problems, but it was still something quite amazing.



On the other hand DAO has a much deeper, if a bit imbalanced at the moment, RPG system, deeper lore, (I should know, I've read the first 4 Witcher books) and it does have higher replay value. The amount of content in this game is amazing and I don't think there is a longer story driven RPG out there. Still, it falls short on the most critical aspect IMO - the uniqueness of the world. Where DAO desperately tries to prove it's a "dark and gritty fantasy epic"The Witcher delivers and man, it does it great.



All in all, the two games aren't comparable IMO, but I found The Witcher more immersive and engaging.



What I find funny is that DAO and The Witcher are the two games, which I've anticipated for the longest period of time - DAO from 2004 till now and The Witcher from 2003 till 2007.

[rmp]

Witchers are very similar to wardens. Few in number now but in the past there were many more, trained to fight monsters, not as appreciated anymore by the general populace, and both do things to their body to enhance themselves at a cost.

The history and status of the elves are also very similar in both games.

Modifié par rmp, 04 décembre 2009 - 05:04 .

[Andulias]

I completely disagree - there are quite many differences between the wardens and witchers. Where wardens are heroes, ready to give their lives to defeat Evil ™, the witchers are just mutants, trained to kill. Mutants with no morale, taking no sides, silent killing machines and mercenaries without a cause. And while the wardens are anathematized for pure political reasons and only in Ferelden, the witchers are hated everywhere, because they aren't human, they are different from the crowd. And while the wardens have a long history of glorious battles and proud heroes, all that's left of the witchers are the ruins of an old crumbling castle. And in the end - while the wardens still have a bright future, the witchers are doomed. The Grey Wardens are closer to the Jedi as to the witchers IMO 

Modifié par Andulias, 04 décembre 2009 - 05:51 .

[0mar]

Silver sword alone makes Witcher > Dragon Age IMO.

[JaegerBane]

I would probably say that if you enjoyed Dragon Age, try Witcher. OR Vice versa. Clearly there are differences but whole idea of playing a contaminated/souped-up member of an order of badasses trained to wipe out monsters is a very something common to both games, and often plays a role in the kind of decisions that need to be made. 

Hell, my own Grey Warden is effectively a Witcher (AW/Blood Mage) who backs up swords and spells with poison and bombs

[amrose2]

For me, I find I enjoyed Witcher more. I loved the combat, and the story, and the overall coolness factor I felt from interacting with the characters as a Witcher. In DA, you are treated similarly, but you have no uniqueness other than the title. The lack of special powers or abilities in a gameplay sense really made me feel like anyone could be doing what I was. The DLC sort of attempted at giving you some of what I felt was missing, but the bonuses were extremely minimal. Especially since they caused damage to you.



Witcher also had the best consequence system I've ever seen in a RPG so far. Decisions you made didn't have a direct impact untill farther into the story. So often if I don't like how something plays out I simply reload and choose different options. Not possible in Witcher - and it really made me weigh my choices heavier and increased the fun of my replays.



There's alot I loved about DA more than Witcher, especially the characters. Unfortunately this aspect of the game all but dissapears once I left Lothering. I could probably count on one hand the number of times my party piped in on a choice I made, or when I could consult them for advice. The ending was extremely disappointing for me, all kinds of developments occur and only until the very last battle do I hear anything about it from my comrades.



TL;DR : Witcher was more conclusive and satisfying for me

[Alexus_VG]

I remember checking out the Witcher on someone else's PC and seeing there was no character creation. That was it for me I'm affraid so I never bothered buying it. Maybe I missed out but that is just that one thing I can not compromise on when it comes to games.

[Alexus_VG]

DP

Modifié par Alexus_VG, 04 décembre 2009 - 06:31 .

[Few87]

I only managed to play 6 hours or so of the witcher so maybe i didnt experiance enough for my opinion to matter to many people, however i only managed 6 hours for a reason. It was terrible. The animations were so wooden it was untrue, and i am not a graphics must be good person (one of my my fave games is arcanum), the story was weak, the quests more suited to a mmorpg, no character creator (you have to play as a drugged up mad man). And worst of all was the card collecting for the women he uses. arr its making my head hurt just thinking about it. If you are considering it, dont, just get VtM:BL or Arcanum instead.

[maggitPL]

bjdbwea wrote...

Never finished the Witcher. Played through DA more than once. Enough said?
What bothered me most with the Witcher was the impossibility to give your player character customized looks. A 3D RPG needs to have that, period.

The reason you couldn't change the character is because Geralt is a hero from a book. The whole game is based on books by Andrzej Sapkowski. CDP Red were thinking of making the game about a new witcher but then they decided to revive Geralt (who apparently was last seen slaughtered by an angry mob in one of the last books about him).

Knowing that I had no problem with the lack of character customization. However I can understand where you're coming from. I hated the fact that I couldn't change my character (gender & looks) in the Gothic series.

What Witcher did better than Dragon Age was the fact that you could see the consequences of your choices only after some time. That really didn't encourage you to reload and see 'what if'. What I didn't like about the game was the lack of companions as such. Bioware was always good with companions. Even lousy NWN1 (which was the only Bioware game I simply couldn't finish because it was so boring) had likeable companions.

Oh, and if you played the premiere version of the game I heard that most of the dialogue was cut (unlike in the Polish version) because of time-constraints. Atari wanted the game fast. Fortunately the enhanced edition fixed the problems. 

Modifié par maggitPL, 04 décembre 2009 - 06:50 .

[Alexus_VG]

Urgh! This one was meant for another thread. Sorry guys.

Modifié par Alexus_VG, 04 décembre 2009 - 06:33 .

[wonko33]

The Angry One wrote...

Isn't the Witcher some sort of brothel simulator?
You even get erotic cards for completing it.

you my friend are as just as bad as Fox news with their reference to  FPS games being murder simulators. The Witcher is a wonderful game with amazing gameplay and a deep storyline (yes you do get achievements cards for bedding some NPCs, welcome to European humor. )

I loved both DAO and The Witcher. I  think DAO is more of a consumer product where The Witcher seems like a labor of love from people who are just incredible RPG enthusiasts. (I'm not saying gamemakers at Bioware are not like that but I think they get a bit more pressured by the business/retail side of the equation).

The people who worked on the The Witcher did get pressured to release early,  by Activision I believe,  but keept working and released the directors cut to get the game up to their standards, and they did not make me have to buy it, it was available for free to the original owners of the game.

Modifié par wonko33, 04 décembre 2009 - 07:12 .

[mmu1]

I think The Witcher Extended Edition is one of the best RPGs ever made, while I would rate DAO as the 2nd worst Bioware RPG, better only than the original NWN.

In other words, while DAO is still a good game (and I try to judge it fairly - though it's hard, considering how disappointing it was, in many ways), it doesn't really come close.

The two games are actually a great example of how biased the whole review industry is... if The Witcher had been released, as it was, but labeled as a Bioware game, it'd have been heralded as "a brilliant new direction from the best RPG developer in the business, with some minor problems that shouldn't stop anyone looking for the next great RPG from giving it a try", or something like that.

The Witcher has better art direction, graphics, combat animations, alchemy system, quests and storyline. In addition, the world in The Witcher actually feels like a real, living place, despite the repetitive NPCs - something which DAO only manages to achieve rarely. (and those rare moments just make all the other parts of DAO look incredibly drab and generic in comparison)

DAO edges ahead when it comes to the writing for some of the characters, and some of the character interactions... It also has better voice acting than the English version of The Witcher. (and I don't expect the fact that the original, Polish voice acting is actually very good to matter to English speakers)

Finally, comparing the combat is kind of apples and oranges, but I never found the combat in The Witcher tedious, and the game actually relies much less on combat than DAO to add length to the game and pad out areas. Most quests in The Witcher don't actually base XP rewards on how much stuff you've killed. As a result of this, hearing people say they love the combat in DAO but that The Witcher was a boring grind-fest blows my mind, but I guess if you really enjoy the DAO style of combat, it goes by quickly, and if you don't like the way The Witcher does it, it can drag... or something.

[wonko33]

bjdbwea wrote...
What bothered me most with the Witcher was the impossibility to give your player character customized looks. A 3D RPG needs to have that, period.

Are you serious? Why? 

Customized characters are fun but they certainly are not deal breakers. Sometimes characters are "imposed" on you because they are integral part of the story and that is fun too, make it feel like you really belong in this world.

In DAO many people complain that you can customize your character but the environment doesn't reflect the choices you've made at all. Like a black human noble character that looks nothing like the rest of his family.

IMO both can be fun, you can mold your avatars personality the way you want but playing Gerald who can be kind of a jerk is fun too, just different and certainly a deal breaker. It would be a sad day indeed if all the games followed the same recipe.....PERIOD.

[reservoirfrog]

Andulias wrote...

I completely disagree - there are quite many differences between the wardens and witchers. Where wardens are heroes, ready to give their lives to defeat Evil ™, the witchers are just mutants, trained to kill. Mutants with no morale, taking no sides, silent killing machines and mercenaries without a cause. And while the wardens are anathematized for pure political reasons and only in Ferelden, the witchers are hated everywhere, because they aren't human, they are different from the crowd. And while the wardens have a long history of glorious battles and proud heroes, all that's left of the witchers are the ruins of an old crumbling castle. And in the end - while the wardens still have a bright future, the witchers are doomed. The Grey Wardens are closer to the Jedi as to the witchers IMO 

someone who can't use the word morale properly and is openly supportive of bigotry shouldn't be listened to  

[wonko33]

Andulias wrote...

I completely disagree - there are quite many differences between the wardens and witchers. Where wardens are heroes, ready to give their lives to defeat Evil ™, the witchers are just mutants, trained to kill. Mutants with no morale, taking no sides, silent killing machines and mercenaries without a cause. And while the wardens are anathematized for pure political reasons and only in Ferelden, the witchers are hated everywhere, because they aren't human, they are different from the crowd. And while the wardens have a long history of glorious battles and proud heroes, all that's left of the witchers are the ruins of an old crumbling castle. And in the end - while the wardens still have a bright future, the witchers are doomed. The Grey Wardens are closer to the Jedi as to the witchers IMO 

Tell that to Ser Jory's widow and kids

Modifié par wonko33, 04 décembre 2009 - 07:10 .

[Magic Zarim]

Reading this thread made me fire up The Witcher and continue my Xth playthrough (forgot the actual #) for a couple of hours of epic sound tracks, highly atmospheric environments that really set a grim tone, good dialogue and beautiful sword combat

In my book The Witcher remains to be the best xRPG in ages, offering a story arc and themes that are daring and actually portrays a lively adult world.

I still enjoy DA:O though.

Modifié par Magic Zarim, 04 décembre 2009 - 07:47 .

[Andulias]

reservoirfrog wrote...
someone who can't use the word morale properly and is openly supportive of bigotry shouldn't be listened to  

I failed to see your weak logic. Go read the books and then you'll get what I mean. By default the witchers aren't supposed to be questioning what's good and what's evil - their lives are dedicated to killing monsters and whether the real monsters are in human flesh or not shouldn't be bothering them. In that sense they don't have a morale - they don't care what's good and what - bad, they don't want to bring justice to the world, they wouldn't even care to help a defensless village suffering from constant monster attacks unless coin was involved. Geralt is different, but that's the whole point of his story. And even in the first couple of books he tries to fool himself that he doesn't care about the world and the only thing that mattered for him was killing monsters and getting paid for it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

reative24 wrote...

Combat in Witcher was bad?! My god, was different, something fresh and new. You'r funny guys, you want a every game be like Bladur's Gate or World of Warcraft, someone do something new and it's bad.

I want all RPG combat to be stat-driven.  That timing-based clickfest was a disaster.

[Magic Zarim]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

reative24 wrote...

Combat in Witcher was bad?! My god, was different, something fresh and new. You'r funny guys, you want a every game be like Bladur's Gate or World of Warcraft, someone do something new and it's bad.

I want all RPG combat to be stat-driven.  That timing-based clickfest was a disaster.

Don't tell me timing is difficult to do, heck on easy mode the game even flashes the cursor to tell you when to click. When you combat someone with a sword are you really going to approach your opponent like "Hold it right there! Let me roll my dice: *rolls dice and looks * Zomg   36 on a 6d6, woah I'm critting you! Now fall over!". No, you actually swing yer sword and time yer swing, employing different swings for different situations.

The Whitcher combat does this quite neat with 3 modes of attack and then the skill tree that adds various combo- and finishing moves to either of the three attack modes (Strong/Fast/Group mode).  Surely, the first 4 hours can be a bit boring as is any game that is not offering top tier abilities right from the start.

[MartinJHolm]

No I didn't play the witcher but I played NWN 1+2 and they were exactly the same as DA.



Enough with the apples to oranges comparieson please.