184 réponses à ce sujet

[HiroVoid]

It's a good thing I've never cared that much for save importing.

[workforme]

Sigh... Why why why why??? Why can't people be excited that there's 2 AAA RPG's that are awesome, instead of trying to bash one in favor of the other?

 

Its really sad this kind of attitude. If there's 2 great games trying to stay on the spotlight, thats a win-win situation for gamers.... not cause for burning one while praising the other..

Because DAI is not a great game?

[Han Shot First]

TW3 has betrer side quests but it's ridiculous to say TW3 isn't a grind. It has lots of grindy content. From wiping out bandit camps (i.e., rifts) to wiping out monster dens (i.e., rifts) to "treasure hunts", a substantial portion of the game is non-cinematic, non-dialogue based filler content. It's better fillr content than DAI mind but it's not some superlative achievement. It's mostly just AC style stuff.

 

TW3 doesn't feel like a grind at all. It's not just content that is light on story that makes questing feel like a grind in an RPG. It is the amount of that content. While TW3 has some content that is light on story, there is a lot less of it than there is in DA:I. Wiping out bandit camps or treasure hunts is broken up by lots of side content that has quite a bit of cinematic content, dialogue, and story, like the Witcher contracts. In contrast with DA:I if you're a completionist you spend much more of your time hunting down shards, establishing Inquisition camps, closing rifts, or filling requisitions than you do completing side quests with dialogue, a story, and some cinematic content.

 

There is simply no comparison between the TW3 and DA:I when it comes to side content. DA:I was largely dull, TW3 was largely not. That isn't to say however that DA:I didn't have some good side quests or TW3 some boring ones, but overall CD Projekt Red did a better job with the content not related to the main plot.

[Ennai and 54 others]

"What do you know about saving the world,you are merely a witcher"-Ciri

I have a problem with how high the stakes have risen in the witcher,the low fantasy elements were of more interest (breaking complicated curses,killing particularly dangerous monsters and demons).Although the game has them,I would have preferred they had become center stage.

Which is why I wish Ciri-sue wasn't in this game.Because it has gotten ridiculous (dragon ball Z,naruto, levels of ridiculous)


At first it was a story about a hunter who has regained his memory and is now looking to put his family back together.

Now

Spoiler

its about stopping two universe from colliding into eachother and saving all living things in all universes from the white frost,the ONLY person who can do this is the princess of the largest empire the world has ever known,who is a witcher ,a sorcerer AND a teleporting swordwoman,she is also charismatic and physically attractive

The witcher 3 still succeeded in making me care about what happens to Geralt.The only epilogue slide that mattered to me was the one mentioning him.Couldn't find myself caring about anyone else,cept maybe pricilla and lambert.

[Torgette]

TW3 doesn't feel like a grind at all. It's not just content that is light on story that makes questing feel like a grind in an RPG. It is the amount of that content. While TW3 has some content that is light on story, there is a lot less of it than there is in DA:I. Wiping out bandit camps or treasure hunts is broken up by lots of side content that has quite a bit of cinematic content, dialogue, and story, like the Witcher contracts. In contrast with DA:I if you're a completionist you spend much more of your time hunting down shards, establishing Inquisition camps, closing rifts, or filling requisitions than you do completing side quests with dialogue, a story, and some cinematic content.

 

There is simply no comparison between the TW3 and DA:I when it comes to side content. DA:I was largely dull, TW3 was largely not. That isn't to say however that DA:I didn't have some good side quests or TW3 some boring ones, but overall CD Projekt Red did a better job with the content not related to the main plot.

 

Definitely, in fact my second playthrough I purposefully avoided all shards/dragons and any ridiculous fetch quests for npc's as well as avoided the forbidden oasis - i still tried to close rifts and establish camps for xp and influence but other than that just focused on the interesting stuff. The game was much smoother for it, there's just too much stuff to do scattered every map - which is too bad because there's some good premises and setups for some of the side stuff like the Red Lyrium templars in Emprise Du Lion and the drowned old crestwood. Even those completely lack cutscenes which is too bad as they deserved better treatment.

[Mykel54]

I recently finished the witcher 3 and i gotta say it had a lot of memorable moments (many of the sidequests are very fun, unlike DAI where they´re filler and boring), the main plot felt a bit unfinished and the game certainly felt less polished that the witcher 2. Overall it is a great game, it also achieved the open-world sandbox gameplay much better that DAI did - in the witcher 3 it feels rewarding to explore, in DAI it quickly feels like a grind.

 

I´m not going to say that the witcher 3 is superior in everyway, there are many things DAI does better like companion interactions, romances, customization of PC and base, imported decisions showing consequences, etc. but overall i enjoyed more the former and found the wild hunt more interesting than corypheus. I would play DAI for the story but get bored with the gameplay which feels nothing like DAO, however i can keep playing the witcher 3 because i enjoy the gameplay.

[Mihura]

This seems kind of annoying, and is another mark against even considering starting the franchise from the very beginning. I really dislike starting anything from the end or a few games in (ME3 jokes aside). I've been very curious about the game with all the TW3 hubbub, so I was very tempted to just muscle through the first two games so that I can get a feel for the characters and that world, because I suspect that if I just jump into this game knowing so little about it, I might not care as much about certain things. But anyway, this seems worse than some of the import niggles of DA or even ME.

 

I would advise to play TW 3 first and read only the books, ignoring TW 1 and TW 2 altogether. You will be having a better experienced that way. 

If you like politics and backstabbing play TW 2 as a stand alone thing and TW 1 if you like old rpgs with an eastern fantasy vibe.

[Fredward]

The Witcher series just isn't for me. Played 1 & 2 and came away lukewarm on both. Not gonna get 3.

[Rawgrim]

I would advise to play TW 3 first and read only the books, ignoring TW 1 and TW 2 altogether. You will be having a better experienced that way. 

If you like politics and backstabbing play TW 2 as a stand alone thing and TW 1 if you like old rpgs with an eastern fantasy vibe.

 

TW1 isn't old.

[Fredward]

TW1 isn't old.

 

Eight years isn't  young.

[Rawgrim]

Eight years isn't  young.

 

Somewhat if your first rpg was in the late 80s....

[In Exile]

You're really making me want to play the game just to see how well this works.

Because, based on this description, it sounds like it could go so wrong, and yet you all talk about this as if it's a good feature.

I'm worried that the gaps in our knowledge, or the need to make a decision now versus waiting until we know more, will look arbitrary and contrived.

As of now, I still have no plans to play the game.

There is one choice I can think of that had serious negative consequences that - to me - could only be a product of the quest giver refusing to give adequate information on what you were doing and otherwise behaving in such a villainous manner that deciding who to side with was a coin flip.

[In Exile]

TW3 doesn't feel like a grind at all. It's not just content that is light on story that makes questing feel like a grind in an RPG. It is the amount of that content. While TW3 has some content that is light on story, there is a lot less of it than there is in DA:I. Wiping out bandit camps or treasure hunts is broken up by lots of side content that has quite a bit of cinematic content, dialogue, and story, like the Witcher contracts. In contrast with DA:I if you're a completionist you spend much more of your time hunting down shards, establishing Inquisition camps, closing rifts, or filling requisitions than you do completing side quests with dialogue, a story, and some cinematic content.

There is simply no comparison between the TW3 and DA:I when it comes to side content. DA:I was largely dull, TW3 was largely not. That isn't to say however that DA:I didn't have some good side quests or TW3 some boring ones, but overall CD Projekt Red did a better job with the content not related to the main plot.

I'm sorry Han but that's not true. If that's how you played TW3 that's quite fair but my experience is very different. If you avoid villages and go for points of interests on a map you will grind out an obscene amount of content. By volume "treasure hunts" outnumber the main quests and secondary quests when combined with the other points of interest.

The game is paced well ONLY if you pace yourself.

Edit: Again I think the side content in TW3 is just better. And now that I got to Novigrad superior is an understatement. But understand that I grinded out basically all Velven before even finishing the first Ciri quest with the Baron.

[In Exile]

TW1 isn't old.

TW1 is really dated, however.

[Mihura]

TW1 isn't old.

 

Old for today standards, of course for me it is quite modern since my first RPG is from the 90s.

[Silith]

The side quests in DA:I are on the whole a lot less interesting than their equivalent content in The Witcher 3. That is what people mean when they saw that DA:I had a lot of fetch quests in comparison. Much of the side content in DA:I feels like uninteresting busywork that you reluctantly tolerate just to get the next level so you can move on to another main quest. TW3 in contrast never feels like a grind.

 

Without having played Witcher 3 yet (it's downloading as I type) I suspect that this is mostly a matter of presentation. As far as I could see from various videos I've watched, all sidequests in W3 have cinematic dialogue, a proper cutscene and a couple of more lines of dialogue all in all. I'm pretty sure that if you gave the infamous "Templars killed my husband, bring me back the ring they stole" lady cutscenes and more dialogue, more options for the Inquisitor to react ("F*** Templars how could they do that!", "It's your fault for staying here, there is a war going on lady!", "You really should leave the area!", "I got your ring back but how about some contribution to the Inquisiton effort?") the sidequest couldn't be so easily devaluated as "senseless fetch quest". I feel like this is something the Witcher 3 does much better.

Or take the bear "ass" fetch quest - how about a cutscene when the Inquisitor finds the item that starts the quest? Cutscenes of heroic bear slaying? I bet that quest would have attracted far less criticism.

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced it's not the fetch questy nature per se (obviously, because most quests in all games are fetch quests at their core) but the (lack of) presentation that makes them seem unimportant and thus make them a target for criticism.

 

Disclaimer - I love, love, LOVE DA:I. It's one of my favorite games ever made. I also fully expect to love Witcher 3. It's almost unfortunate that two great (and successful! never underestimated that!) games like these release so shortly after one another - where am I supposed to take the time for both? I'm still not done with DA:I! A great problem to have I think. Also (again, without having played W3 yet) I bet the DA team will have a close eye on the things Witcher 3 does well and I bet we'll see some of those things incorporated in DA4 so it's a win for everyone.

(and now I'll bow out of this thread because I really fear Witcher 3 spoilers)

[Teddie Sage]

This isn't a bloody competition, just saying.

[Akrabra]

This isn't a bloody competition, just saying.

It is in Human nature to seek conflict, even about entertainment we find enjoyable. Which i in turn find even more enjoyable

[Saphiron123]

Because DAI is not a great game?

Agreed, I love DAI, but is'a  short story buried in fluff quests. It has giant maps but they're empty. The combat is easy and watered down... I love dragon age, but they could have done better.

[Seraphim24]

This isn't a bloody competition, just saying.

It is in Human nature to seek conflict, even about entertainment we find enjoyable. Which i in turn find even more enjoyable

 

Pretty much.

[sunnydxmen]

Nevered liked the witcher series i like dragon age better.

[Cydh]

Alright, I know I'm not going to be popular with this post, but I've been pondering investing time on TW3.

 

I'm an all-time fan of western RPGs since, well, the mid-80s (jeez I feel old), and I'm a firm believer that a proper RPG should start with a character creation screen. For that reason I don't consider The Witcher series to be an RPG, but more of an action/adventure game, and shouldn't be compared with DA:I or Skyrim but rather with Final Fantasy or Assassin's Creed.

 

The only thing I know from The Witcher is the tutorial of the first game, which was enough for me to shelve it after 30 minutes. I simply can't roleplay Geralt, whom I see like an emo morally gray Mary Sue psychopath who talks like Batman.

 

Now that doesn't prevent it from being a great game, just not my cup of tea. Should my biased-as-hell present self give TW3 a try?