By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - The Witcher 3 Is Not Fun To Play (But The Quests Are Godly)

BloodBorne and the Witcher are 2 completely different games. Many people are bored from BB endless load screens, the repetive action that only requires fast reflexes, almost no RPG elements beyond what gear choices and pistol/weapon you use, and no decisions except to take path 1) or path 2) They both lead to the same exact goal but 1 path has harder fights.

Do you see how generalizing 2 games that are very different is problematic? I'm sure you love most JRPGs, a lot of people find them too fixated on aesthetics and story. I won't compare a game like FF15 to Dragon Age 3 because it sounds silly to think they're in the same genre. That seems to look like how you came up with this blunt comparison to air your issues on Witcher 3



Around the Network
Soriku said:
Chazore said:
I'm getting this weird vibe that some people believe every game with sword type combat has to somehow be akin to or exactly like a Souls game, I really hope that's not the case because that's kinda shitty tbh, it's not everyone's cuppa and neither will this game be.


Souls is the best of the best when it comes to seamless solo combat similar to Witcher, Zelda, and the like. The combat is challenging and responsive, flows well, and the camera is good for the most part. Bloodborne improves things even further with its speed and its dodging and healing mechanics. It also fixes some of the clunkiness in Dark Souls 2, though that was created by a different team. I don't know how you could consider Souls shitty if you like Witcher or Zelda combat unless you haven't played the series much, in which case you're not presenting a versed enough opinion.

HoloDust said:

Yeah, I find it very...let's say amusing. Souls are great games, but to be honest, there are dungeon-crawlers with better combat, like Severance: Blade of Darkness, which feels like something that actually influenced Souls. As for BB, I've tried it at friends, and tbh, I like it a lot less than Souls.

What lot of people here fail to realize is that Witcher 3 comes from very different background, it is more akin to Gothic. Unlike OP I find combat quite good, I'd prefer it to be even heavier, but I'm guessing they lightened it up a bit for mainstream gamers. As for other stuff, it's more or less different genre than Souls, so comparing the two is just silly.

IMO, for all the fans of WRPGs, specially Euro RPGs, this is a must have game. As for others, speacially those who seem to have very limited exposure to WRPGs - will you please stop comparing it to BB and Souls, only thing that they have in common to Witcher is they all fall under action-RPG genre.


You need to play BB more. The combat is definitely an improvement over the Souls games.

These BB elitist are aggravating. People don't like BB, the solution is not to "play more BB" Beyond dodging what about BB combat is so engaging? It's so repetetive it makes my eyes bleed seeing the same mobs die from the same attacks over and over and over. I don't know if they fixed it but it's hard to "play more BB" when u have to wait ~3 minutes for a load screen after each death.



Soriku said:

 

You need to play BB more. The combat is definitely an improvement over the Souls games.

Perhaps for some, maybe even most people, not for me - not saying it's bad, I've enjoyed the combat fairly enough, but not as much as Souls - honestly, bigger problem is I don't really like the setting that much, but eventually I'll play it, don't intend to skip it.

That said, I really have to say it again - only thing that Souls/BB and Witcher have in common is they both fall into action-RPGs and all comparison between two is just plain silly  and it seems to me that it's mostly done by people who really don't play WRPGs a lot.



did you expect it to be fun? i dont see how you could go into it expecting the gameplay to be captivatingly fun. its a story.



RubberWhistleHistle said:
did you expect it to be fun? i dont see how you could go into it expecting the gameplay to be captivatingly fun. its a story.

Seriously, posts like this are why people are bitching about toxicity.



I predict that the Wii U will sell a total of 18 million units in its lifetime. 

The NX will be a 900p machine

Around the Network
SubiyaCryolite said:
RubberWhistleHistle said:
did you expect it to be fun? i dont see how you could go into it expecting the gameplay to be captivatingly fun. its a story.

Seriously, posts like this are why people are bitching about toxicity.


what's that? i havent heard of it. 



Soriku said:
Nem said:
Yes, and the Witcher has story and an open world to explore.

I havent played enough yet to form a good opinion, but Bloodborn isnt a game that interests me at all. Much like monster hunter its a very aquired taste acceptable of clunky controls and tolerance to waste of time from dieing. On top of that those souls games have no story worth talking about.

I can say this, Witcher 3 looks amazing and none of the criticisms you presented are legitimate. Your post read: I dont like this game because its not another of this other game i like.
Try Lords of the Fallen.


If you don't have a problem with Witcher 3's controls, you shouldn't have a problem with Bloodborne's. Bloodborne definitely has the more fluid/smoother gameplay. Geralt really is a bit stiff and the game doesn't have great circular movement. This causes some minor issues when interacting with the environment (looting, igniting, examining). Hell Monster Hunter is better with this, it's just attacking can feel clumsy in that series. Bloodborne also has better camera tracking in combat. I hope they release a patch to address both of these things.


I havent had enough time with the game to decide wether its a problem or not, but it wasnt something that poped in my mind while playing.

With that said, i'm not defending the game. I hated the combat on the Witcher 2. But the OP's post is all about how he likes Bloodborn and wishes that this game was just like it. That is not a problem with the game, its a problem with him.

If i went into this game expecting a Xenoblade and made a thread saying how all those things are so much better and how i love it more on Xenoblade, it would be absolutely the same. Its a problem of misplaced expectations. He undermined his enjoyment of the game since the start.



Soriku said:

I think Dark Souls 1 has a better setting than Bloodborne, and Dark Souls 1 is probably a more rounded game. That said, after hours with the combat and beating all of the bosses (did you fight any boss in BB?), the combat is one aspect that I definitely think is an improvement over Souls. Especially Dark Souls 2. At minimum it just feels better.

Admittedly, I've played it only briefly, but what I've got from it is that its combat is more offensive than Souls - which is precisely why I like Souls more. That said, sometime in the future I do intend to play it, it does seem as a game worth playing, though I don't really care much for Van Helsinglish setting.

Anyway, although it's made by same dev and some similarities/comparsions are to be expected, I really don't consider BB as another Souls game, nor do I judge it by how it compars to Souls. Bottomline, again, comparing Witcher to any of those, being they are quite different games, is, again, just silly.

If anything, Witcher 3 could be compared to Gothic, and, though I can't speak for all, it seems to me that for us who are fans of later, this is the game quite up our alley.



Witcher 2 was critically acclaimed but I just could not force myself to play it. I was hoping W3 would be better and simpler.



This gen is unlike any other. People are still looking for that "next gen" feeling so anything that promises that will sell well. People that would have avoided this game years ago are now hyped for it. More power to them.



The game is very intimidating, and won't be for most. It requires you to actually plan for these encounters, spend time reading through the menu's until it makes sense. The type of game that won't come together until about 10 hours, and then you'll have a great sense of accomplishment. I agree that the going from run to stop is annoying, but otherwise it is an amazing game in all aspects.
Sounds like you'd like Dragon Age: Inquisition more as it plays a little more casual.



PSN: Saugeen-Uwo     Feel free to add me (put Vg Chartz as MSG)!

Nintendo Network ID: Saugeen-Uwo