• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Witcher 3 combat gets 100 times better once you unlock Whirl attack (gifs ahoy)

D

DemWalls

Member
Sanctuary said:
Except you don't actually know which is which on your first playthrough. So that doesn't matter. Unless all you do is skip everything but the main quest, you're invariably going to be going through tons of boring ass filler content in the name of being able to claim that your game is open world, and that you'll get 100+ hours out of it. Plus, a lot of people actually want to try to complete as much of a game as they can.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I get what you're saying here. The question marks (I assume that's the fluff/filler we're talking about) don't hide anything important 99% of the times. Just loot, which as you rightly said is mostly useless, money, a bit of XP. The only exceptions are the Places of Power and maybe some potion recipes among said loot, but the former are hardly essential, and the latter usually can also be found elsewhere.

If one disables the question marks, they won't miss any 'relevant' content, so to speak. That's what I did, and what I always advise. Certainly makes exploration less of a checklist.
 
C

CecilRousso

Member
drakkykun said:
Holding down a button to automatically kill all sorrounding enemies improves the combat? What?
OP tell me you're joking.
And FYI, I don't consider the combat bad. I had my fun with it, but never used that bullshit move.
Click to expand...

It doesn't kill all surrounding enemies automatically.
 
R

Rathorial

Member
Sanctuary said:
It's 2016 already. The "RPG" excuse isn't viable anymore when you consider Dragon's Dogma. A game that was released in 2012. Which ironically was close to Devil May Cry meets Skyrim. Then there's all of the Souls games that supposedly "influenced" The Witcher series according to CDPR.

They:
Spent tons of time on graphics.
Spent tons of time on the narrative and voice acting.
Spent tons of time populating the world.

They didn't:
Implement good gameplay.
Implement a smart loot system.
Implement interesting points of interest.
Click to expand...

Eh? Dragon's Dogma wasn't remotely close to Devil May Cry meets Skyrim. It has barely any of the bits of Skyrim people actually like. The quests are more generic, less frequent and barely any points of interest exist on its sparse map. It doesn't have any of the weird world sim stuff like nearly everything not nailed down is a physics object/thing you can loot, catching literal fish jumping out of a stream, adopting kids or making a house.

Even just the world design of Dragon's Dogma is more sectioned/zoned with plenty of areas not meant for you until you level up and get better gear. Skyrim is way more free-form, go whichever direction you want, at the pace you want, and with plenty of random events you'll run into. I adore the combat and boss fights in Dragon's Dogma, and they're so utterly better than anything Bethesda has done in those areas...but none of the things I like about Bethesda games are in Dragon's Dogma.

The open-world "RPG" excuse is still valid, because nothing exists that does great at action-y combat, world design/exploration, quest design and narrative all at once. They're always mediocre to crap in a few of those areas, and Witcher 3 is strong in the areas Dragon's Dogma is garbage at (vice versa as well).

At best I get Dark Souls having some interesting lore and level design with its fun melee combat, Deus Ex: HR with good quest and level design on top of decent gunplay/stealth, or Divinity: Original Sin with fun quest design but the great combat is turn-based .

I've yet to get the Jesus Action/RPG that gives me amazing combat AND narrative...but I'm always ready for it.
 
Ivory Samoan

Ivory Samoan

Gold Member
I love the flow and feel and fun of TW3's combat.

I'm extremely glad to be in the minority that do...having said that, it's only super fun on DM difficulty and NG+ with all the abilities helps a lot to spice things up.

Boss fights are great also, it's an amazing game in and outside of combat IMO.
 
D

dlauv

Member
Sanctuary said:
If you play games primarily for gameplay, it is. Also, hyperbole FTW@ Deux Ex. They don't even play similarly. A smarter comparison would be Deus Ex and Mass Effect 2 or 3.
Click to expand...

Yes, hyperbole. It was meant to be obvious exaggeration and an indication of preference.

Gameplay is interaction with the game. You can do that by exploring, interacting with the environment, customizing, c&c in dialogue, managing inventory, strategizing, etc. It's not all just combat.

I don't care if one set of games plays marginally more similarly; they're still Role-Playing Games with Real-Time Action combat. Also, you can explore, melee, stealth, and interact with the environment in Deus Ex in ways you simply cannot in Mass Effect. I don't think Mass Effect is much more apt, or "smarter,"of a comparison. Modern Fallouts, particularly New Vegas, are far "smarter" comparisons.

The point was to say that some people care about the role-playing much more-so than the combat. If I wanted to play a game for gameplay, which in your very narrow view means combat seemingly exclusively, I'd play something more more mechanically involved than Dragon's Dogma with far less role-playing tedium. Why do people like ARPGs? They enjoy the agency and role-playing customization/progression that comes along with the action. Some people are satisfied with it being present at all, which is what Dragon's Dogma does at the bare minimum.

Sanctuary said:
Yeah actually, it really was. What you're comparing is the scope of either aspect, which is an entirely different argument.
Click to expand...

DD is kind of braindead compared to DMC, and requires far less skill and performance from the player. Also its camera has that open world ARPG jank in a way that DMC doesn't suffer from. DD has a stinger, I guess, if you're actually focusing solely on the word "remotely." But the design sensibilities overall are so very different.
 
S

SomTervo

Member
Sanctuary said:
It's 2016 already. The "RPG" excuse isn't viable anymore when you consider Dragon's Dogma. A game that was released in 2012. Which ironically was close to Devil May Cry meets Skyrim. Then there's all of the Souls games that supposedly "influenced" The Witcher series according to CDPR.

They:
Spent tons of time on graphics.
Spent tons of time on the narrative and voice acting.
Spent tons of time populating the world.

They didn't:
Implement good gameplay.
Implement a smart loot system.
Implement interesting points of interest.



This is the first time I've actually seen anyone other than myself post that. I really couldn't believe that the combat was actually a step backwards.
Click to expand...

Dragon's Dogma is the outlier though? Among countless other fantasy RPG games. Chances are TW3 was well into development by the time it came out. And I don't think DD's system is even relevant to what TW3 is trying to achieve.

This isn't an argument at all.

But yes I fully agree they should have spent a lot more time finessing and testing the combat.

I think the points of interest and rest of gameplay is fine.
 
Sanctuary

Sanctuary

Member
dlauv said:
DD is kind of braindead compared to DMC, and requires far less skill and performance from the player. Also its camera has that open world ARPG jank in a way that DMC doesn't suffer from. DD has a stinger, I guess.
Click to expand...

You clearly didn't play the first few Devil May Cry games then. This whole argument is stupid anyway. Not only was it created by the Devil May Cry team, it offers a very similar, fast paced combat style in such a way that a character action game that is transposed into another genre would be expected to behave. No one ever said "Oh, it's identical to Devil May Cry, Skyrim, Dark Souls, Monster Hunter and Shadow of the Colossus!".

SomTervo said:
Dragon's Dogma is the outlier though? Among countless other fantasy RPG games. Chances are TW3 was well into development by the time it came out. And I don't think DD's system is even relevant to what TW3 is trying to achieve..
Click to expand...

Yes, it is an outlier. So? It took a company who's forte wasn't RPGs to show how combat in an RPG could be. The problem with TW3 is that it actually backslid in many areas over what TW2 did with the combat, while also making it way easier. So it being a more ambitious game is irrelevant.
 
D

dlauv

Member
Sanctuary said:
You clearly didn't play the first few Devil May Cry games then. This whole argument is stupid anyway. Not only was it created by the Devil May Cry team, it offers a very similar, fast paced combat style in such a way that a character action game that is transposed into another genre would be expected to behave. No one ever said "Oh, it's identical to Devil May Cry, Skyrim, Dark Souls, Monster Hunter and Shadow of the Colossus!"..
Click to expand...

I've played them all. DMC was made by Kamiya. DMC 2, 3, and 4 were directed by Itsuno. DD was directed by Itsuno. That doesn't automagically mean it plays like DMC. Seems like a fairytale DD fans wish was true.

The combat in Dragon's Dogma is nothing like Devil May Cry. It's not even close to the same speed or flow, nor does it have the same combat sensibilities. Enemies don't act remotely similarly to those in DMC, nor does the player control remotely similarly. You can combo, I guess.

Edit: I suppose there are some more similarities. Big mobs have "phases" of behavior, which was something that some enemies and bosses in DMC had.
 
V

veloxStrix

Banned
I actually loved the combat. Not that I don't see the obvious and annoying aspects of the system, but I ran through the whole game on a 100% alchemy build and everything I hated was solved. I became a bomb throwing monster, rampaging through the lands bringing death and justice doled out in equal measure. My character consumed enough potions to be put in therapy. At some point I just solved every problem with superior fire power. It was excellent.
 
S

SomTervo

Member
Sanctuary said:
Yes, it is an outlier. So? It took a company who's forte wasn't RPGs to show how combat in an RPG could be. The problem with TW3 is that it actually backslid in many areas over what TW2 did with the combat, while also making it way easier. So it being a more ambitious game is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

You seem to have ignored the rest of my post. The "outler" thing was just an opener. I think the fact DD showed how it should be done is important, but CDPR were probably 1-2 years into developing TW3 when it came out. You can't entirely redesign a mechanic at that stage.

And I never cited ambition on TW3's part. Ambition is irrelevant.

TW2's combat was fine but it was also very flawed. I'm glad they tried to do something different even if it was still flawed.

I'm sure it's something they'll focus on more in their later games.
 
Sanctuary

Sanctuary

Member
SomTervo said:
You seem to have ignored the rest of my post. The "outler" thing was just an opener. I think the fact DD showed how it should be done is important, but CDPR were probably 1-2 years into developing TW3 when it came out. You can't entirely redesign a mechanic at that stage.
Click to expand...

Weird how not only did I not say that because Dragon's Dogma released that every other company should have learned from them (while in midproduction no less), I actually said why the combat in the TW3 is bad on its own merits. There wasn't any reason to directly reply to your comment about that, because I wasn't even talking about that in the first place. The point is that it's been possible for a long while now to do this kind of combat. No one seemed to think it matters though "Because combat doesn't matter in an RPG!" And you claim that I didn't read your post?

SomTervo said:
And I never cited ambition on TW3's part. Ambition is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

If you say so.

SomTervo said:
And I don't think DD's system is even relevant to what TW3 is trying to achieve.
Click to expand...

Surely you weren't claiming that they were trying to achieve poor combat. Because the style of the combat doesn't matter to this argument either.
 
R

Rathorial

Member
Sanctuary said:
Yeah actually, it really was. What you're comparing is the scope of either aspect, which is an entirely different argument.
Click to expand...

No...it really isn't.

The Devil May Cry half justifies a comparison, as it shares obvious DNA to the core design and traits people associate most with that game. There is a point to say it's like this other game called Dragon's Dogma.

I'm just not agreeing to another X title is like Skyrim because it's in an open-world with a fantasy aesthetic. It's as dumb as saying Y title is like XCOM because it's has turn-based combat that is actually challenging. So many other games could just be substituted in if you go that vague, and if the traits that make Skyrim stand out don't exist in X title than why would that help explain anything?

The things people go to Skyrim for, either don't exist or are poorly implemented in Dragon's Dogma. If people want the title that combines those two games, they'll still be waiting.
 
T

Tenacious-D

Member
Artdayne said:
TW3 has much better combat. It has two forms of dodging attacks, the parry doesn't require you to talent into it to use it, blocking is ridiculously underpowered in the early game of TW2. I'd say the only thing that TW2 does a bit better is that you can do more burst magic damage due to how the vigor system works.
Click to expand...

There's a pirouette mod for TW2 that's quite interesting. Unfortunately like a lot of TW2 mods, it was never fully completed.

With some small changes. TW2's system could have been the best in the series. Then again, they did literally run out of money and had to release something or go bankrupt. The potion toxicity screen is one of those things were you can see that they kind of left it half finished. I still wish we could have gotten Chapter 4, which would have been set in Dol Blathanna.

They scrapped a lot of ideas that were in the previous two games that just needed more polish, in favour of something that is a lot more streamlined for TW3. TW3's combat isn't bad, but I still personally prefer TW2's. Playing the game on Dark Mode is a lot of fun. I found Death March in TW3 to have serious balancing issues. At around level 12 it becomes way too easy.

TW2's sword animations look cooler. :p Dat doubled handled walking animation. Replaying the game reminded me that TW2's armours look fantastic. They're over-designed, sure, but they're way better looking than most of the sets we got in TW3. I'm not going to lie, I have a soft spot for TW2. I replay it every year. Hearts of Stone and B&W were what I wanted from a story perspective, coming from TW2, but I felt that the base game had so many issues, especially if you've read the books and played the previous two games. Man, so many unanswered plotlines. Also, fuck Quen. You really don't need to use it a lot.

Gif time:
https://gfycat.com/ThornyThunderousBlacklab
https://gfycat.com/BruisedWhiteEagle
https://gfycat.com/ExhaustedChillyGnat

Timeaisis said:
I agree. TW2 felt a lot less restrictive.
Click to expand...
Sanctuary said:
This is the first time I've actually seen anyone other than myself post that. I really couldn't believe that the combat was actually a step backwards.
Click to expand...

My people!

JqYTmjn.gif
 
R

Rotch Crot

Banned
I don't even use block or parry. Dodge and strike. Occasionally roll if I just cannot avoid the hit any other way.

Also, the enemies leave themselves open during their attacks. So I'll be doing a combo on one guy, then quickly strike another dude to interrupt him, then go back to the first dude.
 
B

Budi

Member
Just like others have pointed out, whirl feels too overpowered. Only specced it on Blood & Wine and have it on NG+ now. While it feels great to mow down large hordes of enemies with it, having it makes the combat way too simple and is straight up broken against many enemies. Also my problems with combat don't come from the abilities and tool set of Geralt himself but because of the enemy AI and their mechanics. Enemy mechanics were greatly improved in expansions imo.

As someone who has played all of the Witcher games, I think the third does the combat best and it blows my mind when people call W3 combat trash tier. But I guess it's always by a Souls fan so it's not surprising. Second is actually my least favorite in regards of combat. I understand why people prefer the more action game like combat, but the tempo based combat in the first was more fun for me. Though playing W2 with awful under 30 fps had a huge impact to my enjoyment.
 
D

Dragon Puncher

Member
The combat is bad, doesn't matter what you use, or how high level you are, nothing ever makes it good. It's serviceable, but at its core it's not very exiting and very exploitable.
 
Exentryk

Exentryk

Member
The problem with Witcher's combat is the lack of variety in swordplay, and the lack of fixed animations for sword strikes. Geralt only learns two moves in the whole game that spice up the swordplay (Whirl and Rend).

Magic is great, but the nerfs haven't helped the situation. Magic use sucks on consoles though because of the radial menu (but is great on PC coz insta-casting). The dodging is good, because it is fast and responsive. Having two different buttons for dodge and roll is also a positive.

Anyway, some gifs:

PcrbMCF.gif


giphy.gif


giphy.gif
 
K

Kilrogg

paid requisite penance
KyanMehwulfe said:
I enjoy Aard more than Whirl for area-effect haha

https://youtu.be/p6UrUuGRhQU?t=23

That said, I actually don't think either really makes them overall game more fun... I found they get generic fast.... you're just spamming the same thing over and over.

For me, the best 'Witcher' gameplay is still a Toxicity build, tinkering with weapon oils and concoctions for every encounter, matching your tools for the situation and adapting to their strengths and weaknesses.
Click to expand...

This makes the combat look like Diablo 3 (albeit less smooth). I mean that as a compliment.

I'm currently playing through Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen; The combat is already so much better, though to my misfortune I'm going for a Sorcerer, and according to the FAQs out there it's one of the hardest builds to play. It's certainly a bit tedious right now since my spells feel a bit weak and I have a lot of downtime... And yet it's still more satisfying than TW3 :p.
 
Sanctuary

Sanctuary

Member
Exentryk said:
Magic is great, but the nerfs haven't helped the situation. Magic use sucks on consoles though because of the radial menu (but is great on PC coz insta-casting). The dodging is good, because it is fast and responsive. Having two different buttons for dodge and roll is also a positive.
Click to expand...

It really doesn't change much of anything, considering you get time dilation when in the radial menu. The dodging is actually crappy for anything other than bosses compared to dodging in the previous game. The backstep is more useful, but you end up constantly retreating to avoid attacks, instead of simply going around them.

Kilrogg said:
I'm currently playing through Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen; The combat is already so much better, though to my misfortune I'm going for a Sorcerer, and according to the FAQs out there it's one of the hardest builds to play. It's certainly a bit tedious right now since my spells feel a bit weak and I have a lot of downtime... And yet it's still more satisfying than TW3 :p.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. It starts out more of a slog until you get Greater Miasma, and it's annoying when you have to interrupt your spells to dodge (to avoid getting hit), but once you get something like Bolide or Maelstrom, it all makes up for the shortcomings. Even then, your primary offense would typically end up being charged shots from your staff or Ingle. The other thing is that Sorcerers are pretty much "the" class for the outside or vanilla section of the game. Once you hit Bitterblack Isle however, Magic Archer > everything by a huge margin. Fortunately for you, you'll have decent magic attack from your Sorcer levels should you decide to swap.
 
Exentryk

Exentryk

Member
Sanctuary said:
It really doesn't change much of anything, considering you get time dilation when in the radial menu. The dodging is actually crappy for anything other than bosses compared to dodging in the previous game. The backstep is more useful, but you end up constantly retreating to avoid attacks, instead of simply going around them.
Click to expand...

Radial menu is an issue because it breaks the flow of the combat, regardless of the time dilation effect. You have to play the game with insta-casting to see how fluid the combat can be. If nothing else, see this vid which shows using various Signs intermixed with swordplay, without ever using the Radial menu - https://youtu.be/lOhTJsQqDuk?t=1m1s

And no, dodging is not crappy for anything other than bosses. You do not constantly retreat always, in fact, it is better not to do so. Sidestep and counter - that's the way to go.

giphy.gif
 
K

Kilrogg

paid requisite penance
Sanctuary said:
Yes and no. It starts out more of a slog until you get Greater Miasma, and it's annoying when you have to interrupt your spells to dodge (to avoid getting hit), but once you get something like Bolide or Maelstrom, it all makes up for the shortcomings. Even then, your primary offense would typically end up being charged shots from your staff or Ingle. The other thing is that Sorcerers are pretty much "the" class for the outside or vanilla section of the game. Once you hit Bitterblack Isle however, Magic Archer > everything by a huge margin. Fortunately for you, you'll have decent magic attack from your Sorcer levels should you decide to swap.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Thanks for the tips.
Yeah, one guide mentioned that if you want to be a Magick Archer, the most optimal way to level is to be a sorcerer all the time up to lvl 200, because that's how you get the highest amount of Magick.
 
Sanctuary

Sanctuary

Member
Exentryk said:
Radial menu is an issue because it breaks the flow of the combat, regardless of the time dilation effect. You have to play the game with insta-casting to see how fluid the combat can be.
Click to expand...

This is a joke right? It must be. For the record, I played the game on PC. Having played TW2 with mouse/keyboard, I initially did the same with TW3, until deciding to see how it felt with a controller. The spellcasting did take a brief moment to adjust to, but the period was very small, and it by no means interrupted the flow of the combat, considering how much the damn backpedalling already does that for you. Your gif actually demonstrates what I'm talking about too, and that's just on a single enemy. Against crowds of nekkers, it's even worse.

https://youtu.be/-89RZj23qIs?t=453

Kilrogg said:
Interesting. Thanks for the tips.
Yeah, one guide mentioned that if you want to be a Magick Archer, the most optimal way to level is to be a sorcerer all the time up to lvl 200, because that's how you get the highest amount of Magick.
Click to expand...

Don't bother with that. It would become extremely tedious, and also force you to basically play the entire game as a Sorcerer before switching and then playing NG+. The main reason that is stated is because it will give you the highest possible magic attack for fighting online Ur-Dragon (which I'm not sure most people actually care about ). The game is setup in such a way that you can't really fail too terribly hard based on your stats, because most vocations have abilities that either benefit from higher physical attack, magic attack or a split between the two. The best thing to do is to have a relatively decent balance in all stats (health, stamina, magic defense), but with a higher slant towards whatever stat affects whatever you want your primary source of damage to be. After level 100, stat growths significantly drop.

https://stackoverflow.github.io/dragons-dogma-stat-planner/
http://dragonsdogma.wikia.com/wiki/Dragon's_Dogma_Wiki < use that over GameFAQs.
 
Exentryk

Exentryk

Member
Sanctuary said:
This is a joke right? It must be. For the record, I played the game on PC. Having played TW2 with mouse/keyboard, I initially did the same with TW3, until deciding to see how it felt with a controller. The spellcasting did take a brief moment to adjust to, but the period was very small, and it by no means interrupted the flow of the combat, considering how much the damn backpedalling already does that for you.
Click to expand...

This isn't up for debate, lol. Here are the two scenarios:

Casting a Sign with Radial Menu:
1. Open Radial Menu
2. Use Left Stick to select the Sign you want
3. Close Radial Menu
4. Press R2 to cast said Sign

Casting a Sign with insta-casting:
1. Press button/s to cast required Sign.

As you can see, the radial menu is a slower mechanism. Also realise that these steps have to be repeated for every single Sign cast. It definitely does interrupt the flow of combat. Insta-casting is objectively a better solution that makes combat more fluid.
 
C

Count of Monte Sawed-Off

un33dab@dpu$$y
score01 said:
I don't want to be 'that' guy but changing the difficulty to easy made the combat much better as well. Great game but the combat just didn't click for me at all.
Click to expand...

I could definitely see this. I just played through the game on the highest difficulty and it didn't really make the combat more challenging or rewarding, just tedious.
 
K

Kilrogg

paid requisite penance
Sanctuary said:
Don't bother with that. It would become extremely tedious, and also force you to basically play the entire game as a Sorcerer before switching and then playing NG+. The main reason that is stated is because it will give you the highest possible magic attack for fighting online Ur-Dragon (which I'm not sure most people actually care about ). The game is setup in such a way that you can't really fail too terribly hard based on your stats, because most vocations have abilities that either benefit from higher physical attack, magic attack or a split between the two. The best thing to do is to have a relatively decent balance in all stats (health, stamina, magic defense), but with a higher slant towards whatever stat affects whatever you want your primary source of damage to be. After level 100, stat growths significantly drop.

https://stackoverflow.github.io/dragons-dogma-stat-planner/
http://dragonsdogma.wikia.com/wiki/Dragon's_Dogma_Wiki < use that over GameFAQs.
Click to expand...

Gotcha.
I'm still interested in doing a wizard-type character, but I don't know what I should do to make it less tedious later on without losing too much on stats.
 
Exentryk

Exentryk

Member
Sanctuary said:
Your gif actually demonstrates what I'm talking about too, and that's just on a single enemy. Against crowds of nekkers, it's even worse.
Click to expand...

Dodging is fine against groups of enemies too. But there are better ways to deal with groups, like Aard, or Whirl, or Igni. You can keep using dodge and sword strikes against groups, but it is a nooby less efficient way of playing.

giphy.gif
 
N

Nuno Pinto

Member
Nah, the combat is still poor. And to me the best crowd control ability in the game is the aard spell (in Blood and Wine you can upgrade it with mutations so it can freezes opponents and sometimes kill them instantly).

My biggest issue with the combat is the (lack of) responsiveness of your inputs.

Looking at everything this game did right, it should've had much better combat.
 
R

Raimond

Member
I don't know how people enjoy fumbling through menus pre or mid combat to apply oils and potion buffs. I like the action in the Witcher 3. Anything that is similar to Zelda works for me!

Love this game. Going to check out the whirl though. Never unlocked it.
 
V

vaderise

Member
I think combat in Witcher 3 is decent enough. With signs and upgrades you have quite a lot of different options and it's fast paced so it never becomes boring.On the plus side with B&W expansion they added a lot more magic attacks so it's much more interesting than vanilla combat now.
 
Exentryk

Exentryk

Member
Nuno Pinto said:
My biggest issue with the combat is the (lack of) responsiveness of your inputs.
Click to expand...

May be an issue on consoles or your TV/controller, but responsiveness is not an issue on PC (60 fps). In fact, the dodging and countering feel really responsive and satisfying.

Raimond said:
I don't know how people enjoy fumbling through menus pre or mid combat to apply oils and potion buffs.
Click to expand...

On PC, there is a mod called auto-apply oils which means the player never has to worry about fumbling in the menus for that. I don't recommend using it until you've seen all of the enemies though, since it does take away from the spirit of preparation. But once you've seen it all, it saves a lot of tediousness.

Regarding potions, you can have up to 4 on shortcut buttons.
 
LordOfChaos

LordOfChaos

Member
Noted. The combat is why I haven't gotten more than an hour into it. That and an inordinate backlog that a game that can go into the hundreds of hours would only set back.
 
N

Nuno Pinto

Member
Exentryk said:
May be an issue on consoles or your TV/controller, but responsiveness is not an issue on PC (60 fps). In fact, the dodging and countering feel really responsive and satisfying.
Click to expand...

Being on console makes it worse compared to PC for sure, but to me that doesn't excuse the lack of responsiveness of the combat because there are other games at 30fps without this kind of problems. I'm sure what I'm talking about here is related to the animations (Rockstar games suffer from the same for example).
 
depths20XX

depths20XX

Member
The bad combat is the reason I'll never buy this game regardless of how good everything else is. It's a deal breaker for me.
 
T

Tovarisc

Member
depths20XX said:
The bad combat is the reason I'll never buy this game regardless of how good everything else is. It's a deal breaker for me.
Click to expand...

Skyrim has bad combat. Witcher 3 has very serviceable combat that isn't great nor bad. Really something that one has to try for themselves and see how it feels. For me TW3's combat is far from garbage levels that some GAF threads/posts paint it as.
 
Exentryk

Exentryk

Member
Nuno Pinto said:
Being on console makes it worse compared to PC for sure, but to me that doesn't excuse the lack of responsiveness of the combat because there are other games at 30fps without this kind of problems. I'm sure what I'm talking about here is related to the animations (Rockstar games suffer from the same for example).
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, I'm just saying that the responsiveness is likely an issue due to hardware, and not the game itself. But there is no excuse for it being so, and the devs should address the issue on consoles if it is indeed dropping inputs.

If the issue is with long winded animations like pirouettes, then yeah, I agree. This is a problem with a variety of games, where the devs are more focussed in making their game look pretty than ensuring it plays well. These gameplay devs just don't GET it. CDPR gameplay devs fall in to this category.

Here is a comment from an animator that gets it (Platinum Games):
Here’s a common situation: You’re patting yourself on the back for making an animation that looks super-cool and flows really nicely. Then, you put your perfect animation into the game engine and try controlling it, and it dawns on you that it’s too slow, too clunky. With tears in your eyes, you go back and cut away huge parts of your magnificent creation until it finally feels good.

As an animator first and foremost, there’s a lot you can’t help but want to leave in. But you’re not making a movie here – you’re making a game, and it has to be tight and responsive. The truest sign of a skilled game animator is their ability to make something great with the number of frames they’re given.
Click to expand...
 
N

Nuno Pinto

Member
Exentryk said:
Oh yeah, I'm just saying that the responsiveness is likely an issue due to hardware, and not the game itself. But there is no excuse for it being so, and the devs should address the issue on consoles if it is indeed dropping inputs.

If the issue is with long winded animations like pirouettes, then yeah, I agree. This is a problem with a variety of games, where the devs are more focussed in making their game look pretty than ensuring it plays well. These gameplay devs just don't GET it. CDPR gameplay devs fall in to this category.

Here is a comment from an animator that gets it (Platinum Games):
Click to expand...

Exactly this :)

"Tight and responsive" is what you want from the combat.
 
C

Cubas

Member
I'll never understand why people shit so much on the combat of The Witcher 3. I really liked and for me it was a big step up from TW2.


Then again, I think The Witcher 1 is better than The Witcher 2 and vastly prefer the combat of the first game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Baldur's Gate 3 Patch 6.0 is now live
News
24
2K
Hero of Spielberg replied
[PS5 Games] How Atlas Fallen elevates sand play with superpowered combat and exploration
News Game Dev Hype
13
1K
Sw0pDiller replied
LTTP Risk of Rain 2: I SEE YOU. I'M COMING FOR YOU. HAHAHAHA!!! (length warning)
LTTP Review
3
1K
Evil Smurf King replied
[Washington Post] - 5 reasons ‘Elden Ring’ is the easiest Souls game to get into
Opinion
21
3K
Certinty replied
How is Dragon Age: Inquisition combat better than in Witcher 3: Wild Hunt?
2 3 4 5
217
25K
Shai-Tan replied
Top Bottom