Begins playing The Witcher 1

>Begins playing The Witcher 1
>Start menu tells me "it's a world without good or evil, only choices and consequences"
>Start the game
>The fortress of the good guys is attacked by an army of disposable bad guys yelling at me how invicible they are, while I slaughter them.
>Their leaders are cartoonishly evil
>Oh no ONE Witcher dies.
>I'm supposed to feel sad for our one single casualty
>The next sequence could have been a morally ambiguous choice: should we maintain the doors closed and sacrifice one person to save all the others, or open the doors to save one person and put all the others in danger
>Nope no choice

Is there a point this game finally respects what it promises in the freaking start menu? I saw a guide online and saw that we have to save the dwarf who is in W3 from racists. Amazing choices, amazing absence of evil.

>Begins playing The Witcher 1
stopped reading there. go back to Sup Forums.

>Oh no ONE Witcher dies
There are less than 50 witchers in the world.

>>>/reddit/ is that way friendo

At least complain about the combat. How act 1 final 1 boss is so hard and how act 2 is all about running in the bloody swamp if you want to talk about W1.

Daily reminder that only niggers think the new games are superior to the first.

>a game that tries to be morally ambigious can't have hired bandits, thugs and criminals

ok OP

>I'm supposed to feel sad for our one single casualty
leo was the last Witcher ever to be created

>>The next sequence could have been a morally ambiguous choice: should we maintain the doors closed and sacrifice one person to save all the others, or open the doors to save one person and put all the others in danger

Why the fuck would Geralt have control of the gates?

Shut the fuck up retard.

It's not simply hired bandits, it's hired bandits/cult members following cartoonishly evil leaders and attacking the morally good protagonists. There is no moral ambiguity, the Salamander should fail and the Witchers should win.

We could try to talk to the one who controls the gates, or seize the gates by force if he disagrees.

you clearly haven't played past Chapter 1

Am i the only one who liked W1 and couldnt get into the other 2?

>How act 1 final 1 boss is so hard
>hide between the house and the shed
>throw aards at the beast until it's knocked down
>one shot it

Salamanders aren't the actual villains, they're just hired thugs...

And the Witchers aren't the good guys, they're just monster slayers for hire, you actually confront the Witcher who cave the location of your hidden fortress away.

You're artistically screeching while playing only the tuitorial section while you haven't paid any attention at all
>why is it bad that Leo died

I was like you but I've gotten into W3 eventually.

Because everything happeend so fast
.
>or seize the gates by force if he disagrees.
Because they would fucking kill you and you would become a criminal unable to acomplish any of your goals

>let me criticize a game I haven't played

They steal shit from you and your buddies and you go and get it back.
There's no moral dilemma there, you are just taking your shit back from thieves. From your characters point of view, the thieves are bad. That's all there is to it.

Witcher 1 sucks until act 3 or 4, then it gets good. Just skip it and play 2, 1's plot is a frankensteined version of the books that was originally designed for a player created character.

this is so wrong it hurts.

>Witcher 1 sucks until act 3 or 4,

Bullshit.Chapter 1 ending was GOAT and the investigation was one of the best quests in the game.

> 1's plot is a frankensteined version of the books

Eh a bit, but it works very well as a standalone story, one of the better written games I've played

We can agree to disagree on The Swamper, but the latter half is accurate. The game wasn't design around playing as Geralt initially, hence Alvin being a weird pseudo-ciri.

>and the investigation was one of the best quests in the game

sure but you can fuck it up and it literally doesn't matter at all; the climax in Vizima is the only hype part of the game

You're retarded.

What makes you say that?

>I'm supposed to feel sad for our one single casualty
you clearly aren't even trying to suspend your disbelief here. the impact of his death is supposed to illustrate the severity of the death of a witcher considering how few of them there are. keep playing, it's a fantastic game. best of the trilogy IMO

>1's plot is a frankensteined version of the books that was originally designed for a player created character.
>Just skip it and play 2,
TW1 the closest rendition of the books we got.

Witcher games are ass. Read the books if you want the real experience. Geralt there is a little greedy drunk fuck, who kidnaps children and threatens to slaughter entire families just for coin.

2 is closer to the saga books.

I played TW2 for Vernon and more Dandelion/Zoltan desu senpai

Considering how pathetic the Wild Hunt turned out in Witcher 3 I don't know why de Aldersberg shat his pants.

They even say in the tuitorial Leo was the last known Witcher to ever be created,OP prob skipped dialogue

I'd tell you they're better in the books, but their leader died because he couldn't get his cock up.

Leo wasn't a proper Witcher, he hadn't done the trial of the grasses. The last wolf school witcher was Eskel, Lambert, or Geralt.

>artistically screeching

The books are pure shite, kurwa.
It's like a fucking a polish Harry Potter. Do you guys know how many pages those novels usually have? 320. Pathetic.

>don't know why de Aldersberg shat his pants.
Keep in mind the game pretty clearly states that the visions he had were very likely NOT real. That was also long before TW3 frankly retconed the HELL out of White Frost from TW1 and the books, so...

>cartoonishly evil leaders
Since when villains that have good points and are right in the grand scheme of things "cartoonishly evil"?

Isn't one of the worlds in 3 you visit while hopping through the portals emga fucked by the white frost?

He isn't far enough into the game and still thinks Azar Javed is the main antagonist.

>Isn't one of the worlds in 3 you visit while hopping through the portals emga fucked by the white frost?
Yeah. Why?

>Begins playing The Witcher 1
>Begins
9gag is the other way my boy

>"Hey guys I had a vision about how we'll face a new Ice Age!"
>"How would survive in such a time you ask? My plan is to turn us all into genetically engineered freaks."

>you can fuck it up and it literally doesn't matter at all
you look like an idiot at the end of the chapter

Actually the guys who are steeling your shit and attacking you are serving a higher purpose that can be considered more important than protecting the secrets they steel.
They're themselves just criminal scum, but by the end of the story you see the person they serve has his reasons.
You don't get a choice at the end, but it is gray.
The game is also full of choices that are not black or white either way outside the main plot.
You wouldn't know because you got on Sup Forums at the first sign of disappointment so you could have your negativity validated so you could go back to playing modern games.

that wasn't his plan though, the plan was for the mutants to just lead the way and be his private army because they could withstand the cold

White frost in books was a just prophetic apocalypse, never elaborated
1st game turned it into a normal Ice Age that can be weathered.
3rd game turned it into a magical space entropy that can be "beaten" by ancient elven magic and parental love.
I loved Witcher games but I personally think that last segment was a fucking asspull.

TW1 is full of grey choices:

>Do you want to fuck this witch or bring justice to the town?
>Do you want to fuck the cute redhead or the kind-of-bitchy-but-still-hot redhead?

Aldesberg isn't worried about the Wild Hunt, he's worried about the White Frost, which is the entropy of worlds. The Wild Hunt is trying to find a solution as well, their solution just happens to be "genocide new planets and move there" like interdimensional syrians.

>Witchers
>Good guys
KEK

>tfw you will never unfuck your junk so you can have family with shani

Actually, no. His plan was to eventually transform everyone. This is actually a pretty vital point, because his main motivation is his admiration for Geralt, who he saw,
as a child, as something of a "perfect human being".
The army thing was just the begining, to secure himself in case the plan to take over temeria peacefully through the Order wasn't going to work out.

>White frost in books was a just prophetic apocalypse, never elaborated
It's actually quite elaborated, just not resolved. In fact, the most "reasonable" explanation the books suggests that it IS just a naturally occuring glacial period, which the mage/scientists predict will occur in about 40k years, give or take. Though it's never confirmed, it's the strongest explanation of several the book offers.
NONE of the possible explanations the book gave describe it as semi-sentient world-consuming force travelling through portals, though. That shit is something only TW3 came up with to give a weak excuse for an epic world-fate-deciding drama.
I love TW3, but fuck me they did not handle White Forst and Wild Hunt well.

no, it's really not.

the shitty console gameplay of 2 killed any interest of mine in the entire franchise permanently. I can only really care about 1, and even then with FCR installed nowadays

Who here Murky Waters?

>Do you guys know how many pages those novels usually have? 320.
Not a huge fan of the books, but what's your point? Too short? Too long?

Is the wild hunt in the books transdimensional elfs?

It's too short.

>Reads the opening sequence about no good or evil
>Immediately assigns good and evil to the characters anyways

What a fucking retard though.

But you hate them. Wouldn't you rather they be even shorter?

Yes, though I think it's suggested that they more "project" their riders into other worlds rather than have the physical capacity to move across. But their goal is the same - to gain that capacity through Ciri, so it might have been that Caranthir wasn't on the scene yet to give them that limited power.

Yet nobody thought of living underground like in Arx Fatalis or Matrix. Those madmen thought conquering another world or turning everyone into freaks was easier than living underground.

>Elves
>Living underground rather than genociding inferiors
Come on, now. Their defining trait is that they don't change their traditional ways.

Most fan fiction usually isn't very long.

I mock them for being cheap novels everyone in Poland praises because it's literally the only thing around while the writing isn't better than fucking Dan Brown with swearwords and knife-ears.

>Is the wild hunt in the books transdimensional elfs?
Yes. That is directly taken from the books. But they were different, much less cartoony. In fact I strongly suspect even TW3 had originally plan to have them more nuanced, but they eventually went with wannabe Sauron.

The Wild Hunt, it's background, strategy, and their obsession with Ciri is more or less correctly taken from the books. Even the idea that they would kidnap Geralt and Yen to use them as bait for Ciri is something that I can see happening, though in the books, it's made pretty clear that they gave up on her at one point.

The problem is that they turn them - especially Eredin - into cartoon villains with almost no nuance and no sophistication. In the books, the whole point is that they put on a scare, disguise themselves as wraiths or demons, but really they are just arrogant, snobby metrosexuals, last remnants of a decaying empire. They also don't know how to open portals like they do in TW3 (in fact they usually send only their projections) and they definitely do not associate themselves with the White Frost in any way.

Brevity is not intrinsic to cheap entertainment. On the contrary, a large percentage of the best novels ever written can fit in 320 pages or under. I'm sick of fat fantasy clogging bookstore shelves.

Had to put this down because my laptop simply got allergic to it. Every loading screen while trying to get out of the swamp (or loading shit in general) was suddenly hard crashing the laptop no matter the version.

Speaking of which, why are the Aen Elle able to genocide humans while the Aen Seidhe are some "terrorist" pussies? Take Eredin for example, without the armor he'd look like a spaghetti-armed elf faggot yet he's able to wield massive weapons in a full plate armor.

FUCK the swamp

my man

Well for starters reading fantasy books is pretty faggy in itself.

Thanks user, I will write this down into my invisible notebook of useless commentary nobody wants to know about.

That is short as fuck for fantasy.
Though I wouldn't call shortness a flaw in most books.
Fantasy books are usually twice that length.
The issue isn't that fantasy needs to be excessively wordy for no reason, but that it relies on world building as one of it's main appeals and proper world building is wordy.
You need lots of locations and descriptions, not to mention the second big appeal - many characters and POVs and a web like epic story. Requires lots and lots of words.
The biggest fuckups with fantasy are when authors can't manage the mess of plots and characters they make.
I haven't read witcher, but it sounds like it doesn't follow those lines if it's that short.

>it's another "i am so enlightened, i have contrary views" episode.
yaaawn

You don't know the half of it.

Same reason the Nazis can genocide shit while ISIS is a bunch of terrorist bitches. Huge difference between an organized, supplied empire and some dudes hanging out in a forest in every sense.

Iorveth is a reasonable example that elves are plenty tough enough physically (play his section vs Roche in TW2), but Aen Seidhe have less civilization, less supplies, less organization, and it all shows in how all they can do is skirmish. The books also show that Aen Seidhe are reluctant to "modernize" and adopt human things like agriculture and industry, meaning they're locked in the undeveloped past, while the Aen Elle already had their superior technology preserved in their world.

Witcher 2 is the only one with BIG ambiguous choices.

>Dude I barely played the game to explore the other side but this game is definitely not good

>I haven't read witcher
Welp, what's the point then?
If you'll have a time to kill, try to read the first book, it's just the collection of stories, but gives the taste of overall style. Which, in my opinion is one of the greatest in fantasy at all. And the whole saga is well written, characters differ from the games a bit, though.
The only problem, I suppose, can be translation, since the best ones are slavic.

Wew boy, it's "that kid" again.

Fantasy books are most certainly not usually twice that length. 600+ page books (200k+ words long, that is) are few and far inbetween, usually only big name authors write them. They're pretty expensive to publish but end up costing the same (barring a paperback split). Most fantasy novels published are around that 320 page figure, actually.
I've seen authors and agents mention a bit north of 100k (around 300 pages) as the ideal length for a fantasy novel if you want to get it published, especially a debut.

Its hard user. I wanted to experience the game so I could fit in but it was not possible. At least let me keep myself in the thread:

>The fortress of the good guys
Witchers are mercenaries. And interactions with other characters show that they are generally treated with envy and as dangerous people.

>Their leaders are cartoonishly evil
Aside from the Wild Hunt I can barely remember the start of the game.

>Oh no ONE Witcher dies.
Aren't they basically extinct?

>>I'm supposed to feel sad for our one single casualty
Not really. Its just a plot device. Generic at best.

>The next sequence
Wasn't the choice to save the redhead the one that supposedly was morally ambiguous?

AND WHY ON EARTH WOULD THEY BE HIRED TO STEAL MUTAGENS
???

Yea, you mass murder the entire village for no reason (as you dont know if they deserve it)

Or you can just fuck off.

>He was memed into thinking that the Witcher 1 is a good game
TW3>TW2>Eating shit>TW1

>You need lots of locations and descriptions, not to mention the second big appeal
Not really. I don't think there is such a thing as "correct" length for any particular genre, but I think a lot of fantasy is extremely wordy and extremely inept to actually establish it's own imagery.

Fun fact, the ABSOLUTE BEST of the entire Witcher fiction are the very first two books: Last Wish and Sword of Destiny. Each consist of about ten or twelve short stories, each only about ten or fifteen pages long. They don't need much exposition they don't need extensive world building: they are mostly spoofs of famous european fairytales, in fact. And yet they are the best part of the entire Witcher franchise. Charming, funny, witty, and at times even fairly human.

As for the pentalogy (which is actually pretty long - five - six actually, but fuck season of tempests - books, the final two are well over 600 pages standard paperback fantasy fare text), it's meh, and it IS clearly mismanaged. In fact the plot is pretty retarded.
What really justifies them is great work with language, incredibly funny and well flowing dialogues in particular, a lot of self-awareness, irony, and constant jabs and jokes at the expense of fantasy genre, and central european history.
Also, some REALLY funny side characters.

Sapkowski's main problem always was that his main characters were shit: developed originally for brief short stories, and in no way ready to carry a 1000+ pages epic.
That, and the fact that he clearly got super bored half-way through the books and started to just mess around.
Sapkowski, if he wasn't such a god-damn coward, would be actually a decent post-modern author in the vein of Eco or Fowles.

I'm stuck on the First Law series, on the 3rd (and last?) book and after seeing where it was going I got demotivated.
I'd try Witcher after that, I have a policy of not reading two series at once. I start forgetting whos who.
I guess I pick fatter book. Though it could be that the form I read them in is actually several books glued together. I'm not really informed on publishing and the like.

>AND WHY ON EARTH WOULD THEY BE HIRED TO STEAL MUTAGENS
Play the game and you'll find out.
It's actually a pretty damn tragic story. Geralt himself is to blame.

>all this shit flinging

Every Witcher game is great. Fuck all y'all. I'm out.

TW3 is the only good game in the franchise

Get the Amber books. Five slim books in one omnibus, each one a classic.

TW2 is the only game in the franchise.

TW1 is the game in the franchise.

The witcher 1 is objectively bad
It somehow manages to have the worst combat in a series with remarkably terrible combat and manages to bore me to fucking death everytime I get to Wizima

The Witcher Battle Arena is undoubtedly video game.

I guess we're just thinking about different things when we say fantasy.
I think many books use a fantasy setting without using the fantasy structure, as I described it.
Not to imply one is correct, the 'big' fantasy approach is actually a pain to read a lot of the time and suffers when the author fucks up by making a character you hate reading about.
Martin did that with ASoIaF. At the start only dani was the shit character you hated. Gradually you ended up with only a 2 or 3 characters you enjoy reading about.
Small can be much better and is easier to make better. And when it's not, at least it's short, that's the real saving grace of some of Lovecrafts weaker works. They're short.

Will save a note.

As a massive Witcher fanboy, I actually can't argue with that. I think anyone even a little self-aware, who had honestly played the damn games not because Sup Forums memes but to actually enjoy them, can't really defend the combat in TW1. And it's not just the combat - despite how clunky it looks and feels, as an RPG it's pretty damn shallow. Ironically you'll see people claiming how TW3 has been casualized and how TW1 was a hard-core PC RPG... well all that is bollocks. TW3 has more complexity to it's systems than the first game has, and TW3 is a lean, simple action game with RPG elements.

The whole appeal of TW1 is in what it talks about, not how it plays. Personally, I realized I don't mind the combat or the terrible pacing at the end of chapter 1 already. It's the way all of the cliché stories and subplots come together into one pretty damn dark and cool story that hooked me into the game.

Not everyone is into that kind of thing. But for those who do care about stories in games, TW1 gets really, really damn amazing as the story goes on.