15882 réponses à ce sujet

[MoonDrummer]

I really wanted to organise a play date with Johnny and Sarah.

That romance story would eclipse Geralt and Yen's in a day or two.

[I SOLD MY SOUL TO BIOWARE]

Also, The Bloody Baron of course.

 

Who I'd go as far as to say is the greatest character to come out of a game in years. 

[Ariella]

Also, The Bloody Baron of course.
 
Who I'd go as far as to say is the greatest character to come out of a game in years.

Really? I pretty much lost interest as soon as I met him. I don't mind seeing the gun used in act three on the wall in act one, but I don't enjoy having it jammed in my eye in act one.

[I SOLD MY SOUL TO BIOWARE]

Really? I pretty much lost interest as soon as I met him.

 

Different strokes for different folks I guess. He reminded me a lot of Robert Baratheon, and just as divisive. Obviously him as a person is a matter for debate, but pretty much everywhere I go the consensus I see is that his arc was one of the stronger parts of the game. Something I most definitely agree with. Dem feels.

[panzerwzh]

Different strokes for different folks I guess. He reminded me a lot of Robert Baratheon, and just as divisive. Obviously him as a person is a matter for debate, but pretty much everywhere I go the consensus I see is that his arc was one of the stronger parts of the game. Something I most definitely agree with. Dem feels.

Characters with such complexity is not for everyone. Pereonally I think Bloody Baron is one of the most memorable husband in gaming history.

[FKA_Servo]

Really? I pretty much lost interest as soon as I met him. I don't mind seeing the gun used in act three on the wall in act one, but I don't enjoy having it jammed in my eye in act one.

 

It was a good story with some real interesting parts, and one I definitely enjoyed despite it being more or less completely spoiled a couple of months before the game. I have to say I'm not seeing the complexity that everyone else sees. It all seemed pretty straightforward.

 

I'm enjoying hanging out with Triss in Novigrad a lot more. Maybe I'm just simple.

[Ariella]

Characters with such complexity is not for everyone. Pereonally I think Bloody Baron is one of the most memorable husband in gaming history.

I'd call him cliché rather than complex. Seen one abusive husband, seen them all. He could have come out of a police procedural.

Hell, if you want a much better and more clever take on abusive husband looking for his wife and child... Castle Season 4 Cops and Robbers.

Same basic premise, a much better twist.

[Ariella]

It was a good story with some real interesting parts, and one I definitely enjoyed despite it being more or less completely spoiled a couple of months before the game. I have to say I'm not seeing the complexity that everyone else sees. It all seemed pretty straightforward.
 
I'm enjoying hanging out with Triss in Novigrad a lot more. Maybe I'm just simple.

Simple is not a bad thing, simple remembers what happens when you hang one too many ornaments on the tree.

KISS principle rocks.

I like Triss. I just wasn't all that thrilled with what they did between games. I would have rather had her involved from the get go rather than Miranda Lawson err Yennifer.

She really does remind me of Miranda, right at the beginning, at her very arrogant worst.

Sigh...

[I SOLD MY SOUL TO BIOWARE]

I'm enjoying hanging out with Triss in Novigrad a lot more. Maybe I'm just simple.

 

That's probably my least favourite part of the game, personally. Though I guess I just don't like Triss that much. 

 

Hanging out with ol' Uncle Vesemir, Lambert and Eskel is my favourite sequence tbh. 

[KBomb]

I'd call him cliché rather than complex. Seen one abusive husband, seen them all. He could have come out of a police procedural.

Hell, if you want a much better and more clever take on abusive husband looking for his wife and child... Castle Season 4 Cops and Robbers.

Same basic premise, a much better twist.

Cliché? Disagree. I also think you're missing the point of why he is considered a complex character by some. He isn't just another abusive husband and the situation isn't just another mission you find in a game, though I am sure Castle is a great show. 

 

If anything can lend to it's believed complexity, I would say it's the sheer amount of people who don't understand it (or won't understand it) and who are quick to summarize it as a, "Bad husband, poor wife" scenario. It's been a long time since I have seen a mission that needs so much explaining. Don't get me wrong, as I don't see that as a bad thing. It certainly seems more multifarious than anything I saw in DAI. However, I suppose it's a YMMV sort of thing. 

 

Whether one likes him or not doesn't alter the fact that on most forums I have read and most discussions I have had, he is brought up more than anyone else in the game. That mission has been the score of many discussions. That says a lot in how people view it. 

 

TommyServo, on 13 Aug 2015 - 9:00 PM, said:
I'm enjoying hanging out with Triss in Novigrad a lot more. Maybe I'm just simple.

 

That's my kind of simple. 

[panzerwzh]

I'd call him cliché rather than complex. Seen one abusive husband, seen them all. He could have come out of a police procedural.

Hell, if you want a much better and more clever take on abusive husband looking for his wife and child... Castle Season 4 Cops and Robbers.

Same basic premise, a much better twist.

"Abusive husband" really? That is all you see from him?

 

This exemplify my point, characters with such complexity is not for everyone.

[Ariella]

That's probably my least favourite part of the game, personally. Though I guess I just don't like Triss that much.

Hanging out with ol' Uncle Vesemir, Lambert and Eskel is my favourite sequence tbh.

The prologue was good. Could have done without the nudity three minutes into the game, but that's The Witcher. Ciri's va was a little shrill, I was so glad her adult self was voiced by Jo Wyatt, but the end sequence was wonderful. And I do like Vesemir. He was a treat.

I wish they'd gotten the va they used for Dandelion in TW2. The actor in three was just too deep voiced, and his lines ended up sounding just blaah because of it.

Whatever else anyone might think of Bioware, they have a great stable of voice talent, and their casting directors get a lot more hits than misses with the characters.

HALO 5 looks to have a good voice cast. But of the major rpg devs Bioware is still the best.

[KBomb]

The prologue was good. Could have done without the nudity three minutes into the game, but that's The Witcher. Ciri's va was a little shrill, I was so glad her adult self was voiced by Jo Wyatt, but the end sequence was wonderful. And I do like Vesemir. He was a treat.

I wish they'd gotten the va they used for Dandelion in TW2. The actor in three was just too deep voiced, and his lines ended up sounding just blaah because of it.

Whatever else anyone might think of Bioware, they have a great stable of voice talent, and their casting directors get a lot more hits than misses with the characters.

HALO 5 looks to have a good voice cast. But of the major rpg devs Bioware is still the best.

Oh, yeah. I adore Vesemir. I didn't mind Dandelion's voice so much in the game, but I didn't like his voice overs. I know he was meant to be older in the re-telling, but it was a bit jarring.

You're right about Bioware's VA. I think they've always been brilliant.

Edit: I think the nudity was simple and it was a nice way of bridging the intimacy and familiarity of Geralt and Yennifer without a lot of exposition. They were very much a comfortable couple, doing what comfortable couples do. Nothig torrid, just a nice, relaxing scene one might encounter on a lazy morning.

[Gwydden]

I've been meaning to ask a question.

 

I've been hearing all sorts of praise for The Witcher but have yet to play any of the games. Now, I've discovered the trilogy is for sale on Steam for the sterling price of $80 (ouch). Before making an investment of such caliber, I wanted an informed opinion on whether the first two games are worth playing, whether they still hold up, and how necessary they are to understand what's going on in Wild Hunt.

 

Anyone care to help?

[I SOLD MY SOUL TO BIOWARE]

Vesemir is without a doubt one of the best characters. Lovable Witcher grandpa ftw. Could really feel how close he was to both Geralt and Ciri. 

 

Spoiler

 

RIP.

 

 

 

And I'm pretty sure Dandelion's VA hasn't changed. Unless we're talking about the narrator, who is supposed to be Dandelion as an old man. 

 

I've been meaning to ask a question.

 

I've been hearing all sorts of praise for The Witcher but have yet to play any of the games. Now, I've discovered the trilogy is for sale on Steam for the sterling price of $80 (ouch). Before making an investment of such caliber, I wanted an informed opinion on whether the first two games are worth playing, whether they still hold up, and how necessary they are to understand what's going on in Wild Hunt.

 

Anyone care to help?

 

First one hasn't aged well. It has its moments, has a fantastic atmosphere/music/etc, but the combat and shaky presentation turns many off, understandably. It was CDPR's debut game, mind you. 

 

TW2 improved on TW1 in pretty much every respect. Combat is still shaky, but I'd still recommend it to just about any RPG fan. 

 

The first two aren't entirely vital to understanding TW3, and the import feature doesn't do much anyway, but I think they make TW3 a better experience. Knowledge of the books does too. I'd at least look into a recap or something. 

[KBomb]

I've been meaning to ask a question.

I've been hearing all sorts of praise for The Witcher but have yet to play any of the games. Now, I've discovered the trilogy is for sale on Steam for the sterling price of $80 (ouch). Before making an investment of such caliber, I wanted an informed opinion on whether the first two games are worth playing, whether they still hold up, and how necessary they are to understand what's going on in Wild Hunt.

Anyone care to help?

The first Witcher seems a mixed bag, some hate it, some love it. I actually played TW1 after I played TW2. It really kind of felt outdated, but I enjoyed it. Not love it, mind you. Just enjoyed it.

I love TW2. It starts off a bit slow, but then it's completely engrossing. If you want to see the lead up to TW3, it might be a good place to start. However, I don't think you'd miss anything important if you skip it. A talked a friend of mine into playing TW3 and he had absolutely no knowledge of the prior game/lore and he was able to catch on quickly between a few snippets of wiki and asking me questions, the game helped him understand the important stuff.

I would say play them just to get the entire feel. I think you'll learn more about the politics and world and it will help the feeling of being attached to the characters, however if you jump feet first into TW3, I think you'll be okay.

[panzerwzh]

TW1 is good RPG, TW2 is amazing and TW3 is legendary. So, I would say $80 for three of them is a bargain. Also, I would recommend get them from GOG.com, which directly support CDPR and not DRM attached.

[FKA_Servo]

I've been meaning to ask a question.

 

I've been hearing all sorts of praise for The Witcher but have yet to play any of the games. Now, I've discovered the trilogy is for sale on Steam for the sterling price of $80 (ouch). Before making an investment of such caliber, I wanted an informed opinion on whether the first two games are worth playing, whether they still hold up, and how necessary they are to understand what's going on in Wild Hunt.

 

Anyone care to help?

 

I'm a newcomer to the series, pretty much. I bought TW1 and TW2 on steam sale three years ago, but I was put off the series by the first act of TW1.

 

After I finally finished the first game, I tried very hard to think of five things I liked about it. I got four. It's honestly one of the worst games I've ever played (and the story and characters aren't interesting enough to redeem it if you ask me). Others here will certainly disagree with me. The only reason I went back to soldier through it was because I hate starting midway in a series, and I really wanted to play the third one.

 

TW2 is very, very good. Much better in nearly every way I can name, some terrific performances, and a very good, highly variable story. Dramatically improved gameplay. TW3 would make up for any missteps throughout the whole series, so far. It's fantastic.

 

I'd probably start with TW2. It provides enough background for the third (but honestly, you could start at the third I think. The stories are all pretty self-contained), and it's actually really good. If you're buying the whole series, then I guess give the first a try. It's not fun.

[Ariella]

Vesemir is without a doubt one of the best characters. Lovable Witcher grandpa ftw. Could really feel how close he was to both Geralt and Ciri. 
 

Spoiler

 
RIP.
 

 
 
And I'm pretty sure Dandelion's VA hasn't changed. Unless we're talking about the narrator, who is supposed to be Dandelion as an old man. 

I didn't get far enough to find him as the game progressed. Combination of rental being up and I really just could not take the Baron. I'd finished that hags, and went to find Triss (having to swim while being shot at did little for my sunny cheerfulness), and finding the dwarf was about as far as I got, so it was the narrator version. I remember Dandelion being a tenor in TW2, which older narrator Dandelion is not. I suppose some gravel from aging, but not that exstensive.

[Saphiron123]

Welp, I held my breath for the descent reviews and they are not good. Little done with the lore, muddied story... Back to novigrad it is.

I hoped Weekes might turn DAI around, but it looks like more of the same.

[Saphiron123]

PS the Baron was amazingly well done. I had a lot of conflicting emotions about him, even felt sorry for him. It was a powerfully delivered story about a deeply flawed man and the pain he caused everyone around him.

Jesus, the botchling was heart breaking.

DAI had nothing on that.

[Lawrence0294]

Welp, I held my breath for the descent reviews and they are not good. Little done with the lore, muddied story... Back to novigrad it is.

I hoped Weekes might turn DAI around, but it looks like more of the same.

To be faire, Weeks didn't participate in the writing process of the DLC. Bioware Austin did. I better judgement for his work might be the following DLC.

[Corto81]

I'd call him cliché rather than complex. Seen one abusive husband, seen them all. He could have come out of a police procedural.

Hell, if you want a much better and more clever take on abusive husband looking for his wife and child... Castle Season 4 Cops and Robbers.

Same basic premise, a much better twist.

 

This is fantasy. Until GRRM came along, it was a genre that was basically defined by a young adult becoming a hero and saving the world, in a battle of good vs evil.

Characters with moral ambiguity or proper depth to them were nearly non-existent.

Tolkien basically created the genre. GRRM made it an adult genre.

 

And saying that, calling a character like the Bloody Baron "cliche" in a fantasy game is just missing the mark completely.

 

Spoiler

He's a medieval soldier, ascended to basically lordhood from being a common soldier or low ranking officer.

He was (presumably) a loving husband, until the wife cheated on him and wanted to leave him.

From then on, the road to his drinking and beatings starts, to mutual resentment and unhappiness.

As you go through the story, however, you see he genuinely repents and stops drinking and loves his wife and daughter more than anything.

You see that he was NOT, in fact, responsible for Anna miscarrying.

You see that he was kind to Ciri, that he gave that little girl (Gretka IIRC) who came with Ciri a home.

He asked for nothing in return from either of them, noone ever laid a hand on them.

Even Uma is beyond corporal punishment from any of his lackeys because he forbids it.

 

Not to mention him getting to hold his dead, unwanted baby in the form of a monster, killing it or laying to rest etc.

It's not just the story that develops with such events, it's his character.

 

And yet, despite how he evolves as you go along (when you start out he just seems like a straight forward violent bully with not a hint of depth to him) he doesn't get a happy ending. Because that's how Witcher works, realistic consequences for "real" people.

Best he can hope for is losing his daughter and his wife going crazy. The alternative is even worse (him and Anna dead).

 

That is depth. Proper depth. 

It's hardly cliche even across multiple genres, and certainly not in a fantasy setting, dark, high or otherwise.

 

Cliche? No not really. Complex is actually the right word in this case.

Which is why a vast majority of the fans found his character and his story absolutely amazing.

(easy enough to check on reddit or witcher forums etc.)

 

Now, you can not like him. Or his story. He's an abusive husband after all, very little in this world is more despicable or cowardly then beating on women - especially if you're a soldier-type, bear of a man.

You can not like him... But not because "he's cliche".

 

Giving him so many redeeming qualities is what makes him so very different than the "abusive father coming out of a police procedural". Giving us so many reasons to like him and struggle to decide whether he's nice people or not is something that happens very often in fantasy games, or games in general.

[Xetykins]

I'd call him cliché rather than complex. Seen one abusive husband, seen them all. He could have come out of a police procedural.
Hell, if you want a much better and more clever take on abusive husband looking for his wife and child... Castle Season 4 Cops and Robbers.
Same basic premise, a much better twist.

I'm sorry you only saw him as an abusive husband.

[Saphiron123]

I'm a newcomer to the series, pretty much. I bought TW1 and TW2 on steam sale three years ago, but I was put off the series by the first act of TW1.

 

After I finally finished the first game, I tried very hard to think of five things I liked about it. I got four. It's honestly one of the worst games I've ever played (and the story and characters aren't interesting enough to redeem it if you ask me). Others here will certainly disagree with me. The only reason I went back to soldier through it was because I hate starting midway in a series, and I really wanted to play the third one.

 

TW2 is very, very good. Much better in nearly every way I can name, some terrific performances, and a very good, highly variable story. Dramatically improved gameplay. TW3 would make up for any missteps throughout the whole series, so far. It's fantastic.

 

I'd probably start with TW2. It provides enough background for the third (but honestly, you could start at the third I think. The stories are all pretty self-contained), and it's actually really good. If you're buying the whole series, then I guess give the first a try. It's not fun.

I'm with Tommyservo on this: I can't play tw1... just can't do it. The combat, the voice acting, the graphics, I couldn't get into it in the origins days and it hasn't aged well.

TW2 though is very very cool, and i didn't find it hard to follow... and tw3 is amazing. There's no other way to put it.