>Sup Forums told me Witcher 1 is shit
>Disregarded it and got to experience the most atmospheric and one of the most well-written games I've ever played
>Sup Forums told me Witcher 2 is shit
>Just started and only got to play a few hours of it so far, but it seems to be better than w1 in every way
Why does Sup Forums hate good games again?
Weird, I loved TW1 but thought TW2 was disappointing console trash.
explain in what way is 2 better than 1 ?
inventory is worse, combat is worse, way less monsters, can't drink potions mid fight, just to name some of the ways it is better ?
Sup Forums is full of Xbox360 generationers, who never got to play TW1, and then get buttmad about the fact that it does not play like their beloved DaS-style console action-RPGs, but is an actual CRPG.
TW2 was fucking horrible. I seriously had to push myself to slog through it. You can see and smell the console-oriented design in everything.
The first Witcher is one of my favourite games of all time. The second is mediocte at best but when compared to 1 and 3 becomes utter shit.
Every time I see this logo I think it's Sinistar and then get really disappointed.
>Sup Forums is one person
don't forget:
>literal fucking QTEs
>ME / FO4 style vague dialog choices, that result unpredictable answers
TW2 was made exclusively for pc, best looking game at the time it was launched. They had to come up with new tech and solutions to make it work on xbox.
"console trash"
Because we're not Polack cocksuckers. Enjoy your mediocre ass games.
The UI and tiny environments were designed ground up for the xbox.
I prefered 1 and 3 to 2. 2 just felt incomplete in some way, I cant put my fingers on it though
It may as well be most of the time.
These, tw2 is trash. It completely lost the charm of the first one and what made it good in the first place.
A better question is: Why do you have utter shit taste again?
As mentioned in the OP, I havnt played much of w2 but so far it seems to expand on everything w1 did. Inventory seems clunkier sure, combat is better in my opinion, the first one was just rythmic clicking and spamming Aard for insta kills.
In the sequel you atleast need to switch between signs and dodge shit, blocking and using riposte
>The Witcher 2 is shit because it was designed with consoles in mind
Haha! Yes, my good sir, I too agree! Those filthy console peasants have stripped away the things us epic PC gamers hold dear! Have an upvote!
Witcher 1 is pretty good desu. I don't understand the complaint about the swamps, I felt like you don't even spend that much time there and Chapter 2's 'whodunit' quest was one of the highlights of my playthrough.
On the contrary, I'm having a hard time feeling interested in Witcher 2 but I've only reached the Kayran boss so far.
OR maybe, they never had the best talent to make the best inventory system. It's never been great, even with witcher 3 the inventory wasnt amazing. Maybe the inventory was designed for pc and it just wasnt great design.
>t. console peasant
TW2 is as consolized as a game can get. Terrible inventory that needs multiple clicks to do simple things, small areas with loads of loading screens etc.
It's cool
2 is the worst of all but still pretty ok
Disregard these autistic weeb shitters, all the Witcher series are good games.
W2 stands out a bit because it was rushed to release because the company was going bankrupt
Currently playing through W1. Just how different is W2 and 3? Is 3 less consolised than 2?
It is but 1 had lower lows than 2.
It has better graphics ,better writting,better characters.
Letho is maybe the best antagonist written for videogames
Don't get caught in the autism lmao.
W2 is a good game don't go in it triyng to hate it
3 is one of the best games I've played in the last 10 years I saw this without hyperbole
> one of the most well-written games I've ever played
>medieval setting where people steal your genetic materials to create a super soldier army
It's fucking stupid. This is the plot to shitty B movies.
I have unironically beat both Witcher 1 & 2 and loved them, but haven't even gotten very far in 3
There all very different from each other in that W1 is a crp, W3 is an opern world rpg and W2 is shithouse.
>but it seems to be better than w1 in every way
Nah. Only combat wise.
Anything can paraphrased to sound stupid
People complaining about W2 being compromised for consoles have forgotten about what we went through with games like KotOR. It makes a few concessions but nothing major.
My advice though OP is to get the unlimited inventory weight mod. I loved W2 but having a shuttle things back and forth from storage was just a pain.
Also
>Complaining you can't drink potions in combat
Ffs, that was one of the main complaints about W1 they changed it on purpose. You're meant to be ploughing Witcher, you're meant to be prepared with potions and oils before you fight.
Witcher 2 was fucking amazing. [Spoiler] No Saskia sex scene is fucking bullshit though [/spoiler]
>It makes a few concessions but nothing major.
Just one of the worst UIs video games have ever seen that made playing it genuinely painful.
Yeah, I hate pretty much everything these days, but I actually liked 3.
It... it reminded me what it felt like to enjoy playing a video game.
>Just started and only got to play a few hours of it so far, but it seems to be better than w1 in every way
TW2 has a lot of flaws and is in many ways weaker than the first game. The game is short and very claustrophobic, the third act feels rushed as hell, it lacks good sidequests, which were the greatest hallmark of the first game, the alchemy is annoying and much less fun, and the U.I. is absolutely terrible.
The only aspects in which I would say it's better than TW1 is main story and (related to that) it's characters, which are actually best in the series.
That said: it's still a damn good game. The Witcher games, all of them, have incredibly strong writing, atmosphere, art direction and settings in general.
It's nice to actually see someone saying the discovered something they ENJOYED instead of whinning, by the way. The Witcher series has a lot of flaws (each game has it's own unique set, for every thing they improve they fuck up something different), but it has a LOT to offer. Every game shines in some respect. TW1 has some of the best sidequests and atmosphere in the series. TW2 has absolutely fantastic characters and some trully breathtaking setpieces. And TW3 has the best world, art direction and a completely mindboggling amount of high quality content and stuff to do.
I didn't paraphrase anything. That's literally what happens. It sounds stupid because it is stupid.
>Gool bool tahl hool
Only played the first one. Does the vodyanoi return in 2 or 3?
Nope
Don't think so.
Neo-Sup Forums hates popular games
TW1 was a PC only game. It's different in many respects. It's much clunkier, the combat is completely different (and awful), it's a debut game and it's REALLY rough around the edges, but also feels most personal and has probably the most rewarding sidequests.
TW2 is a sort of middle game, where they were really just trying out AAA production for the first time.
Despite what most people claim, TW2's flaws are not caused by it being a multiplat, but rather by developer lack of experience and mistakes in design. The studio was for the first time actually trying to figure out how to make a game not almost entirely dictated by engine and budget limitations.
TW3 is both the most polished, and largest of them all. It's no less "consolised" than TW2, but it's simply better designed, and as a result, less frustrating and more fun to play.
>That's literally what happens
No it isn't...they don't steal anyone's genetic material
Witcher 1
>fucking Aurora engine
>awful combat
>story is a crappy copy of the ones from the books
>that also manages to take a shit on the book's main themes and aesthetics
Witcher 2
>okay, amazing technology for the time
>pretty good combat
>better story than 1, but that's not saying much
>still shits on the Wiedźmin's cynical-historical atmosphere with grimdark edge
Witcher 3
>no new technology, downgraded
>combat toned down from 2, repetitive and can be broken with spells
>story - have only gone through the first half, it's okay
>sidequests are good though
>less grimdark edge, but still not Wiedźmin
>the combat is completely different (and awful)
kys
So, you haven't played the game then? Just borrowed factually incorrect and most riddiculous sounding paraphrase of one of the aspects of the main storyline and thought you are justified in whinning and mocking the game?
Cool. You must be a cool guy.
41 replies, already several MUH MASTER RACE posts.
This place is fucking cancer
3 > 1 > 2
>some boring fuckers drive to California, do nothing and drive back
Wow. Grapes of Wrath is the shittiest thing ever.
Are you actually implying the combat in TW1 was not awful?
Seriously, even the developers openly admitted that. The combat in the first game is absolutely awful. I love the games to death, all three of them, but there is no actual justification of the combat system: it's terrible, dull, it's an afterthought.
TW2's combat was flawed, and TW3's combat is polished, but lacks complexity. But the first game's combat is just plain bad in every respect.
>no new technology
Completely false but alright
>legitimate arguments why tw2 is not as good as the other games
>lol fucking entitled mustards!
Neck yourself
I can admit objectively that it's not very good but I still had a lot more fun with combat in the first than the second. Though that's playing with FCR on hard and I can't quite remember if vanilla was fun or not.
I just can't get into the witcher 1. It feels clunky and dated. I'm wandering around the village, killing drowners and fucking that girl after saving her from bandits and it's just... Ahh, I don't know, just not captivating, but I don't want to play TW2 without playing TW1. Maybe mods will help.
>ME / FO4 style vague dialog choices, that result unpredictable answers
You mean that one joke in the tutorial?
Except, you know, they got it right in the first game and then changed it in the sequel with blatant console-friendly design.
What technology did it have, fucking hairworks?
It's not a bad engine, but it ain't FrostByte.
>Seriously, even the developers openly admitted that.
They never did that, you're lying
>The combat in the first game is absolutely awful.
It's not
>it's an afterthought.
It most definately isn't,out of all three the first game comes closest to being lore friendly
Witcher games are shit in all aspects.
I mean if gray is your favorite color enjoy that opinion but something is abnormal
No. The entire game.
The combat in the first game was never fun. There was virtually no actual impact the player had on it outside of clicking in rythm.
The combat in TW2 alternated between being actually very fun, and being incredibly frustrating. On higher difficulties, without abusing roll and quen, when you actually thought about what you are doing ahead, the combat really came together. The problem was that quen and roll COULD be abused for much less effort than doing what the developers really intended you to do, and that some encounters could not be planned ahead.
There was a lot to love in TW2. It just did not come together in the way it was supposed to. I only discovered how good TW2 combat can be on my second playthrough.
TW1 in comparison was never frustrating - never fighting against you the way TW2's could at it's worse. But it was never fun either. It was a completely mindless excercise in clicking.
>It most definately isn't,out of all three the first game comes closest to being lore friendly
This whole post is a joke, I pressume, and the final line being a punchline.
It gets better. Keep grinding through those first hours pal.
First act is kinda just for showing the world for the player. Salamandra, fat greedy jews, fucking sluts and racism.
Second act is shit, setting up characters.
Third act its p good, shit starts to happen.
Fourth act is GOAT. Deep storylines and great character.
Fifth act and epilogue is great.
People who told you Witcher 1 was shit are children whose first console was the xbox and they haven't played more than 15 minutes of it because "lel graphix".
Witcher 2 is good too but it's my least favorite of the three, because I get a claustrophobic feeling when playing it.
This.
I had to stop playing when I was in control of a soldier who had to run cover to cover while been shot at by arrows. I didn't want that. Thank god CDPR ditched all their gimmicks with The Witcher 3, at least until DLC anyways
>why does Sup Forums hates games again?
Fixed that for you
That's wrong. Feel free to provide any evidence at all.
You should rename it to "thanks consoles"
>>the fact that
>>the fact
>>fact
It isn't even a fact. It's just a thing that occurred.
What a retard.
Play the game.
If it is a real life happening, it is a fact.
When I first played the game I quit on chapter one but after several months I wanted to replay it and I enjoyed all of the chapters
I think what made it really enjoyable with FCR for me is that it become alot more about stats and items than about clicking which is much better for an rpg. A lot of things like parries and dodges were massively reworked for skill builds and potions. Both Geralt and enemies do massive damage so fights never drag into rythmic clicking tedium and preparation is a must as depending on the monster you can do little so sometimes even no damage if you have not applied the correct oil.
>This whole post is a joke, I pressume, and the final line being a punchline.
No, the first game is the closest thing to being a Witcher in the books.
And you still didn't post a source on your lies that the developers trashed the combat in the first game.
Nah, it was on purpose. The first trailer is based on "investor-quality models" and pre-rendered graphics.
If you compare both, you can see that the "release models" literally lost in geometry and normals.
>Play the game.
You literally have no argument. Not being able to see the full dialogue line doesn't mean responses aren't predictable. That's why literally the only thing anyone can point to is that time in the tutorial when Geralt says, "Fuck you," which is a joke.
It's true! The same happened with Oblivion to some extent
>Play the game.
We did. You're getting p desperate, ayy
>No, the first game is the closest thing to being a Witcher in the books.
I'm not sure how rythm-based clicking actually relates to anything that Geralt does in the fucking books, you god damn retard.
Last time I've read the developers making fun of the combat in their first game was in one of the many hype-related interviews in the leadup towards TW2's release. I'm not going to look for articles five years old for you. You are an idiot, not worth the effort.
>ast time I've read the developers making fun of the combat in their first game was in one of the many hype-related interviews in the leadup towards TW2's release
So you have no source. Only lies.
>Sup Forums told me
Why do you listen to these retards?
Always do the opposite of what Sup Forums tells you to do. If you see Sup Forums shitposting about a game, that is how you know it is actually good.
I wonder what type of gaming device can't handle complex details in a large scale environment like that and needs toning down?
I can't seem to put my finger on it though. PC maybe? Because consoles definitely can. right fag?
>Sup Forums hates witcher 1 and 2
What the fuck? Almost every Bitcher thread I've been in lauds each one for different reasons
1 has atmosphere and charming writing
2 has Broche
3 has god-tier DLC
Witcher 1 is weird coz I fucking hated the voice acting and thought the combat was garbage for ages but every time Id close the game I'd instantly feel compelled to launch it again and play ahead and then by the end I fucking loved it
I really got sick of the swamps partway through act 3 and really hated the second half (Murkywaters and the fields) of act 4 though
I fucking hate Witcher 2 with a passion though, something about it just feels so terrible and I can't honestly explain what
wither 1? Youre talking about the game where the big plan is to make generic superhuman monsters? That game has a good story?
The game where one of the final bosses is a GIANT ENEMY CRAB? THAT GAME?
>So you have no source. Only lies.
No. I don't catalogize every single article about games I've read. Unsurprisingly.
I like how you avoided my other point, though. Explain to me please again how the MECHANICS OF THE INTERACTION in TW1's combat are faithful to the books.
Because somebody around here is such a god damn fucking retard that he does not understand the difference between gameplay mechanic and visual representation. In fact - I'd love hear which parts of the books describe Geralt standing STATICALLY ON ONE PLACE JUST WAVING HIS SWORD TOWARDS THE ENEMY UNTILL THE ENEMY DIES.
Jesus Christ it's exhausting to see how many people around here just bark shit without a single actual thought.
>try to play The Witcher
>it's a rhythm game
no amount of story and atmosphere can save it
>thinking that one of the many on-going plot points = the entire story
>I like how you avoided my other point, though.
Just like you did a while ago and got caught on one point. You are exactly what you pretend to hate, a goddamn hypocrite
>just bark shit without a single actual thought.
Like you?
>MECHANICS OF THE INTERACTION in TW1's combat are faithful to the books.
How can mechanics be faithful to a book? Do you have brain damage? Have you seen me mentioning mechanics anywhere In a post?
>What the fuck?
It comes at waves. The only time when Sup Forums hated TW1 by OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of the vocal posters was back in the leadup towards TW2 release. Most people nowdays don't remember this, but we used to have daily "I HATE TW1 IT'S THE WORST GAME EVER" threads with hundreds of unique posters pilling up to shit on it threads here.
Predictably, "TW1 is such a cool game, TW2 is the WORST THING EVER, CONSOLES REEEEEEE" started when TW2 was released.
"ALL TW GAMES ARE GARBAGE" became the name of the game again after TW3 became such a hit.
Because this place is laughably stupid when it comes to popular opinions.
Witcher 1 is good and witcher 2 and 3 are great. I dont know what contrarian threads you must've browsed to come to the idea that it is collectivly disliked on Sup Forums, the only negatives i've seen was the pre-3 downgrade shitposting, but still overwhelmingly positive.
Really SUBTLE post here, hides your asspain well.
>Just like you did a while ago and got caught on one point.
Actually, which point have I avoided? I had not provided a source for you because frankly, unlike you I don't really care if you believe me on the CDPR mocking their own combat. I have no reason to lie, and I have no motivation to prove you I'm not lying either. Perhaps I have not made this clear enough, but you are an obvious retard not worth the effort.
>Like you?
Ok, let's take a look at this again:
>How can mechanics be faithful to a book?
That is a question you MIGHT HAVE ASKED YOUR SELF WHEN YOU ARGUED THAT THE COMBAT IS GOOD AND NOT AN AFTERTHOUGHT (A STATEMENT CLEARLY ABOUT MECHANICS OF THE COMBAT) BECAUSE IT'S TRUE TO THE BOOKS.
YOU are the absolute retard who actually tried to push this as an argument.
Also, you dodged again the argument that not even purely visual it's true to the books, because in the books Geralt's footwork and constant dancing between the enemies being key aspect, as well as careful use of parries. Which actually makes TW3's combat most faithful to the books, as it allows for both parrying AND dodging without rolling.
So yeah. Back to:
>Like you?
No. Not like me. You are the idiot here.
Literally state that this place is full of idiots, and you think that is subtle? Wow, you picked up on WHAT I LITERALLY STATED in the post. Yes: the sheer amount of stupidity here does annoy me. I would be actually mad if I did not find it annoying.
People being idiots is a bad thing, and something nobody should find agreeable.
Which Sup Forums told you that?
Everyone loved TW1 on release.
Same with TW2.
>I don't really care if you believe me on the CDPR mocking their own combat
Studios will never say that their games are terrible. Without a source you are lying
>I have no reason to lie
Yes you do, you have obvious asspain that someone likes a game you don't like and you are obviously mad and writing all in caps.
>BECAUSE IT'S TRUE TO THE BOOKS.
It is true to the books. Witcher 2 is not true to the books. You are slower than normal humans in that game.
Witcher 1 was the best in the series, witcher 2 is the worst.
>witchers don't get involved in politics
>but geralt can take a stand on something if it seems important enough
turned into
>DO YOU WANNA JOIN THIS HORRIBLE RACIST DUDE WHOSE OBVIOUSLY HORRIBLE OR JOIN THE ELF DUDE WHO, SURE IS A TERRORIST AND HAS KILLED PEOPLE, BUT HES REALLY JUST MISUNDERSTOOD AND ITS REALLY YOUR FAULT HE KILLED BECAUSE OF HIS PEOPLE'S OPPRESSION
also
>in witcher 1, using every element of the witcher's abilities were needed in hard mode.
>in witcher 2, LOL DODGE AND SWING LOL DODGE AND SWING
>quen spam if you cant dodge well
>huh I can make potions? what am I an rpg fag?
also see inventory comparison above.
Its hard to discuss anything on an anonymous forum because the most contrarian edgy comments get most attention and replies.
Saying something uncontroversial, middle of the ground opinion thats something most people agrees with wont get any attention because it doesnt arouse any negative or positive emotions in people. Anons just think "yeah I sort of agree with that, zero need to correct him" and they move on or it gets 1 reply no one gives a fuck about.
>You are slower than normal humans in that game.
Wait a moment hold the phone right there, the exact criticism can pretty much be applied to Witcher 1. Geralt literally moves at snail's pace when he isn't in combat Group Stance and even then he's still slow.
Why do you think Sup Forums is one person?
2/10 made me reply
The console version came out nearly a year later with the enhanced edition. They did not factor in consoles originally.
He is not slow.
He can deliver multiple hits per second, just like a super mutant can.
In TW2 you are slower than human enemies with your hits, let alone elves who are way faster.
Don't know how can you say combat in W1 was an afterthought when it was lore friendly to the books and had way more depth than TW2. Layers are layers more depth