Support NeoGAF

[Tovarisc]

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.

People complained back in TW2 days about how Geralt style of fighting didn't reflect style he has in books. It was more responsive and tighter system than in TW3, more in in players control. Now TW3's style reflects a lot Geralt's style from books and people still don't like it, but granted for different reasons. Is there good middle ground between the two?

Interesting to see how they will handle combat for CP2077. Brings its own challenges for studio.

 

[Exentryk]

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.

TW3's combat is pretty serviceable. It can even be fun with a Sign build playing on PC. But I don't mind the dislike it gets, because it can only help CDPR improve.

TW3 is my favourite RPG of all time, and imagining another sword-based RPG from CDPR with better combat would be an absolute dream. I don't think any other RPG gets close, because even if their combat is better than TW3, they lack in a lot of other aspects (writing, voice work, quest design, world building, etc.).

People complained back in TW2 days about how Geralt style of fighting didn't reflect style he has in books. It was more responsive and tighter system than in TW3, more in in players control. Now TW3's style reflects a lot Geralt's style from books and people still don't like it, but granted for different reasons. Is there good middle ground between the two?

Interesting to see how they will handle combat for CP2077. Brings its own challenges for studio.

I only played TW2 up till Flotsam, and honestly, I found the combat really poor there. The animation priority was way higher (worse) in TW2 than in TW3, couldn't find an insta-casting mod there, and it was overall just too clunky.
I find TW3 to be a lot better in terms of responsiveness and feel. If the devs build off of TW3, and add fixed animations for sword strikes, and also add a bunch of active abilities for swords, it would be a lot more fun. People in TW3 just get bored of doing the same thing again and again (Quen - Slash - Dodge). Game needs more variety, is all.

There would be lots of ways to be friendly to the books, while still having a tighter responsive combat system, like having long winded pirouettes for finishers only, etc.

 

[cleveridea]

Witcher 3 is one of the best games ever made

But personally, I felt like signs got way more interesting upgrades than swords.

With swords, there were only 2 moves unlocked for whirl and rend. All the other upgrades were just damage upgrades of various types - no new gameplay mechanics beyond more damage

Signs OTOH very rapidly let you unlock alternate sign modes that completely changed gameplay, and were extremely powerful. To add insult to injury, the sign alternate modes also unlocked at a tier below the new combat moves (whirl, rend)

In aggregate, as someone that loves using signs, the combat is quite fun for me. But I can totally understand how someone only wanting to use swords would find the game underwhelming

 

[IvorB]

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.

Sorcerer is great in Bitterblack Isle. There are so many nooks and crannies you can hide in to get off your powerful spells and they absolutely wreck anything in that place. Seriously, the damage sorcerer spells do at high level is crazy.

 

[endlessflood]

Whirl is trash. You just flip out like a dumbass in one spot while enemies hold guard in safe distance.

Whirl, provided you have the right build, becomes easy mode against most enemies. It can make the combat incredibly dull, but on the other hand it's also cool to watch all of the various dismemberment, decapitation, and finisher animations once you're very late in the game and have already conquered everything.

Here's an end game build using whirl (and rend) to brutal effect, you can see pretty clearly how effective it is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a80zlFyeG-c

This is more something to play around with when you've finished the game though.

The combat in Witcher 3 is okay. Just like the gun play in GTAV. It support the other perfect parts of the game.

I've never understood the criticism those two games get. I really enjoy the combat in both of them, and I'm pretty fussy about that stuff. The Nioh beta (for example) I had to stop playing because of how damn clunky the controls were. I love what they were going for with that game, but the molasses-like controls just didn't support it. Mass Effect is another game where I found the combat system to be so clunky that it ruined the game for me.

Dragon's Dogma is my favorite anything ever, but I don't hate the combat in TW3.

Agreed. I absolutely love the combat in Dragon's Dogma (and the game in general), and the Witcher 3 combat isn't quite as good. But I still really enjoy the combat in the Witcher 3. In the Witcher 3 I start fights just for the hell of it, because I enjoy the combat system and love the large number of options and approaches you have available to you.

 

[LowEndTorque]

The combat in TW3 is miles better than the atrocious intolerable garbage gameplay mechanics of Bethesda RPG's. But as someone already pointed out, Dragon's Dogma and Soulsborne negate the "it's an RPG" excuse.

 

[endlessflood]

The combat in TW3 is miles better than the atrocious intolerable garbage gameplay mechanics of Bethesda RPG's. But as someone already pointed out, Dragon's Dogma and Soulsborne negate the "it's an RPG" excuse.

To be fair, Dragon's Dogma was made by the Devil May Cry team, and Soulsborne games don't have anywhere near the narrative and breadth that TW3 has. They're both heavily action focused, whereas TW3 is more story focused.

 

[Projectjustice]

You are so late to the party OP. You need to add the sword extension rune to your sword. Check out the video. lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaeWGnvCFNA

I never understood the hate Witcher 3 gets for its combat system. Its like if its not Dark Souls then it sucks! lol
The combat is good with issues but to say its bad just isnt true.

 

[Sanctuary]

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.

As I can see, you're theorycrafting what isn't applicable to real world gameplay. Are spells instantly launched when you want them to be launched with a keyboard? Yes. Does it matter? Not one bit. With all of the dodging you have to do, you could at any point open up the menu during the doge animation, or even swing animation and launch a spell before the animations even end. Also, it's not as though the combat is so demanding that 0.5s is going to change some kind of life or death outcome. You're trying to say that having instant spells is like some kind of world of difference, when it's actually not. It's not as though you have infinite stamina and can mash spells anyway for the majority of the game. Honestly though, the biggest problem I have with the combat is that sword vs sign is nowhere even close to being balanced. Once you get a few levels into the sign tree, the game becomes trivial (Igni sparkler). Enemies typically get mowed down by signs, where it becomes so tedious with the swordplay. The game is very easy with either playstyle (especially if you dabbled even minorly into the alchemy tree), it's just one is boring because of how it trivializes everything, and the other because it's super clunky, has unsatisfying feedback and takes forever in comparison.

You are so late to the party OP. You need to add the sword extension rune to your sword. Check out the video. lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaeWGnvCFNAI never understood the hate Witcher 3 gets for its combat system. Its like if its not Dark Souls then it sucks! lol
The combat is good with issues but to say its bad just isnt true.

Saying it's "good" just isn't true either. It's serviceable at best. Which gets really boring long before the halfway point.

Sorcerer is great in Bitterblack Isle. There are so many nooks and crannies you can hide in to get off your powerful spells and they absolutely wreck anything in that place. Seriously, the damage sorcerer spells do at high level is crazy.

I know. It's just that what a Magick Archer can do there is even better. Richochet Hunter demolishes the majority of enemies there due to the layout of the hallways or rooms, as well as some of them simply being very weak to electricity. It's also easier to avoid damage, using Cutting Wind (worst name ever) as a pseudo dodge.

Couple that with Explosive Rivet or Immolation, and your bases are covered thanks to Sixfold (Ninefold with the ring) being ice.

 

[grandwizard]

It doesn't really help, it just gives you something to spam attacks so you can avoid engaging with the combat engine which isn't very good. TW3's combat is definitely it's weakest point. We should have higher standards for action RPG combat when games like Dragon's Dogma, the Souls series, and Ni-oh do it so well.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Could be worse. Could be like jrpg combat.

Ys series' combat shits all over any Western ARPG ever made

Spoiler

and that's if we don't count Soulsborne/Dragon's Dogma

. Try again

 

[JimmyRustler]

I just started playing the game and don't think the combat is that bad. It's clearly the best combat in the series and one of the better ones among the truly Open World RPGs.

It doesn't really help, it just gives you something to spam attacks so you can avoid engaging with the combat engine which isn't very good. TW3's combat is definitely it's weakest point. We should have higher standards for action RPG combat when games like Dragon's Dogma, the Souls series, and Ni-oh do it so well.

Those are not Open World, which means it's a lot easier to create good combat (lack of different terrain).

 

[Jezan]

YYYEAAHHHH. this was my strategy after i unlocked whirl
http://giant.gfycat.com/NeighboringSeparateAntelopegroundsquirrel.webm

Looks like the Star Wars kid.

 

[dr_rus]

Each of these threads people are mentioning Dark Souls as some sort of universal reference for a combat completely forgetting two things:
A. Souls series combat isn't for everyone, a lot of people simply don't like it.
B. Souls series don't have anything but the combat and this is something which would make a Witcher game simply awful.

I thought that if it is seen inside the context of the series, TW3's combat is ok. Miles better than TW2, different to TW1 (hard to say if it's better or not because TW1's combat is completely different). Definitely not awful by any means. No idea why people are so keen on comparing TW3 to Souls games as they are very different games with different players.

 

[Kaleinc]

So the 'game of the year' has garbage gameplay, did I get this right?

 

[endlessflood]

So the 'game of the year' has garbage gameplay, did I get this right?

It's actually the most awarded game of all time.

 

[Jangowuzhere]

Each of these threads people are mentioning Dark Souls as some sort of universal reference for a combat completely forgetting two things:
A. Souls series combat isn't for everyone, a lot of people simply don't like it.
B. Souls series don't have anything but the combat and this is something which would make a Witcher game simply awful.

I thought that if it is seen inside the context of the series, TW3's combat is ok. Miles better than TW2, different to TW1 (hard to say if it's better or not because TW1's combat is completely different). Definitely not awful by any means. No idea why people are so keen on comparing TW3 to Souls games as they are very different games with different players.

Yeah, I don't get those comparisons either.

The Witcher 3's combat is more comparable to the Arkham games if anything.

 

[Hypron]

So the 'game of the year' has garbage gameplay, did I get this right?

gameplay != combat only, and the combat is not garbage. That's ridiculous hyperbole.

I love action games and Dark Souls and stuff... And I also really enjoyed playing The Witcher. The combat isn't perfect, nor is it the most polished combat system... But it's still fun. I like fighting things using the variety of options at my disposal.

 

[Linkstrikesback]

So the 'game of the year' has garbage gameplay, did I get this right?

Gaf hyperbole from a minority of the player base says it has. It's not going to be in awards for the strength of its combat system, but calling it garbage is also hilariously incorrect, like people haven't played a actual bad game before.

 

[Bioshocker]

The combat is the only thing about this game I don't like. The only time I put the game down for a few days or longer is when I encounter a monster I have to defeat. It's simply no fun at all.

 

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

Is there a "Souls" mod for this game that makes the combat more like Bloodborne/DarkSouls? If so, where can I find it? If not, why not?!

 

[Pinko Marx]

People complained back in TW2 days about how Geralt style of fighting didn't reflect style he has in books. It was more responsive and tighter system than in TW3, more in in players control. Now TW3's style reflects a lot Geralt's style from books and people still don't like it, but granted for different reasons. Is there good middle ground between the two?

Interesting to see how they will handle combat for CP2077. Brings its own challenges for studio.

I don't know what patch of W2 you played but 2 has absolutely the most unresponsive controls in the series.

 

[BravesCountry]

As someone who has played DMC and Souls series, am I that crazy to find the W3 combat fun? I get that it isn't as good as those but it doesn't need to be.

Played on death march and while the game still was too easy by the end of it I had a ton of fun using different potions, decoctions, bombs, signs etc. and it felt plenty fluid and responsive and was beautiful when you properly pulled off crowd controlling a group of enemies.

Honestly even if the combat was complete garbage I would still have this as goty, everything else about the game is literally that good. The fact that it still has good combat for me makes it one of the best games I have ever played. It gave me a feeling I hadn't gotten from videogames in a very long time.

Edit: Also referring to W2, I hated the combat in that game and Quen literally broke it. It always just felt like something was off with the combat. My least favorite of the witcher games, it felt like a game that didn't quite know what it wanted to be.

 

[Ratrat]

Each of these threads people are mentioning Dark Souls as some sort of universal reference for a combat completely forgetting two things:
A. Souls series combat isn't for everyone, a lot of people simply don't like it.
B. Souls series don't have anything but the combat and this is something which would make a Witcher game simply awful.

I thought that if it is seen inside the context of the series, TW3's combat is ok. Miles better than TW2, different to TW1 (hard to say if it's better or not because TW1's combat is completely different). Definitely not awful by any means. No idea why people are so keen on comparing TW3 to Souls games as they are very different games with different players.

Lol
The hell are you saying?

And the Witchers combat would be awful, without dragging Fromsoft into this. Hell, ignore the combat and focus on the basic controls and animations. Those need fixing.

 

[Chinner]

heh, everybody knows that Witcher 3 has the worst combat ever in videogames. firstly it's not dark souls, which means it's in the next tier of game play, which is ass. secondly, it doesn't play like my next favourite video game, <insert videogame >. witcher 3 truly is the worst game.

heh.

heh.


heh.

please validate me

 

[Kin5290]

Complaints about The Witcher 3's combat are utter nonsense to me.

The game requires you to 1) learn how to dodge, 2) pay attention to your surroundings, and 3) pace yourself when fighting groups. All of these are good things.

Also, The Witcher 2 is a pile of dogshit, and anyone saying that it's combat is somehow better than The Witcher 3's is just showing off their lack of credibility. There's nothing quite like a worse targeting system and unresponsive controls to make your badass monster hunter die over and over again to random mooks.

 

[dlauv]

As someone who has played DMC and Souls series, am I that crazy to find the W3 combat fun? I get that it isn't as good as those but it doesn't need to be.

Nah. For ARPG combat, The Witcher 3 is better than most of the non-shooters, but less good than Monster Hunter, Ys, Soulsborne, and Dogma (the Japanese heavy hitters). Maybe better than Kingdom Hearts although that's contentious: to some, KH2 Proud Mode lvl 1 is the best "character action game" ever made. Diablo has its die-hards as well. If counting shooters, I'd still put it lower than Fallout 4 and Mass Effect 2 and 3.

I think it's a fine and completely acceptable departure from hardcore combat engines like DMC (my favorite), even if it is janky. Obviously it could stand improvement, but the genre as a whole could. Not that it's a priority (unfortunately?), because Skyrim/Fallout/Witcher sell a ton more than the others.

Is this the part where Dragon's Dogma, Souls and Monster Hunter don't count because reasons?

This is a strange point all around. WRPGs made their impact on the original Xbox with KotOR and the like, which were turn-based or real-time with pause; before consoles, WRPGs were known commonly as CRPGs, or Computer RPGs. The RPG genre as a whole turned more towards action-based combat engines, which meant Western Role-Playing Games suddenly had a genre shift and soon became (incorrectly, imo) associated with real-time, action-based combat while Japanese Role-Playing Games were commonly known as the turn-based affair commonly found on everything from the NES to the PS360 (a gameplay style used for nearly 20 years). I'm sure he meant Final Fantasy/SMT/Costume Quest likes.

The entire reason action-based combat became popular was because the market responded better to it than turn-based combat.

WRPGs saw KotOR, Jade Empire, and Morrowind (a hybrid), and then Oblivion, Fallout 3, Mass Effect and Dragon Age (a hybrid on consoles) soon after. Western ARPGs weren't called WRPGs before KotOR: Champions of Norrath and Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance and etc; before that, Western RPGs released on consoles were (correctly, imo) called ARPGs, or Diablo-likes. The point here is that WRPG was originally coined to distinguish the western-styled turn-based gameplay (in KotOR and commonly found in CRPGs, and even still in games like Divinity: Original Sin) from the Japanese-styled turn-based gameplay (found in Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Breath of Fire, Persona, etc; and, even in western games like Costume Quest, Child of Light, and Anachronax).

The way discourse has evolved has everything muddled. You've got people comparing turn-based to action and action to turn-based: "Divinity shits all over Soulsborne!" "Soulsbourne shits all over Witcher!" "Witcher shits all over Persona!" "FFTactics and Disgaea shit over them all!" "I like Mass Effect!"

IMO, the splits should be: JRPG, WRPG/CRPG, SRPG, and ARPG.

ARPG of course includes everything from Ys to Soulsborne, Dogma to Witcher, Skyrim to Mass Effect, and Deus Ex to Kingdom Hearts.

Apologies for waxing rhetoric over your fair rebuttal. The convo just annoys me because there's no consistency between arguing parties.

 

[Aureon]

Could be worse. Could be like jrpg combat.

Is this the part where Dragon's Dogma, Souls and Monster Hunter don't count because reasons?

 

[SomTervo]

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.

That was your direct implication though:

The "RPG" excuse isn't viable anymore when you consider Dragon's Dogma. A game that was released in 2012.

Sure, you don't directly mention TW3, but this is a thread about TW3's combat.

Fair enough if you weren't referring to it. Anyway:

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.

The idea was that they were trying to achieve Geralt's combat. Not 'general fantasy combat' like in Dragon's Dogma. I adore DD, but the point of DD's combat system is that you can customise almost every move and placement among 10-12 different 'classes'. TW3 tried to capture the way Geralt would move as an individual, his idiosyncratic magic style, his idiosyncratic sword style, all the preparation that a Witcher would have to do for a fight, and over far larger battlefields. TW2 aimed to capture this too, but the key difference is the last point. TW3's combat segued with the game world in a far more large-scale and complex way. And the systems aren't that different.

Fair enough if you think it's bad or it failed. I can't deny there are probably 3-5 fights in the game that are terribly designed and that the combat in general is quite janky - janker than TW2's for sure. But it's far better than many games that have attempted it and I still think it's a decent system that supports the game's other mechanics, features and content.

 

[brawly]

Each of these threads people are mentioning Dark Souls as some sort of universal reference for a combat completely forgetting two things:
A. Souls series combat isn't for everyone, a lot of people simply don't like it.
B. Souls series don't have anything but the combat and this is something which would make a Witcher game simply awful.

I thought that if it is seen inside the context of the series, TW3's combat is ok. Miles better than TW2, different to TW1 (hard to say if it's better or not because TW1's combat is completely different). Definitely not awful by any means. No idea why people are so keen on comparing TW3 to Souls games as they are very different games with different players.

I agree that Souls combat wouldn't work. Ni-Oh would though and how.

 

[zoukka]

modern WRPG's never get the combat right it feels.

 

[endlessflood]

Ni-Oh would though and how.

I found the controls in the Ni-oh beta on PS4 to be clunky and unresponsive. TW3 is leagues better in my opinion.

 

[Flipyap]

Complaints about The Witcher 3's combat are utter nonsense to me.

The game requires you to 1) learn how to dodge Quen, 2) pay attention to your surroundings Quen recharge bar, and 3) pace yourself Quen when fighting groups. All of these are good Quen things.

Solid list, but I had to make some corrections.

 

[Hypron]

Solid list, but I had to make some corrections.

Quen is definitely not necessary. Sure you can rely on it heavily but I found myself using it less and less as I levelled up and improved my alchemy/bombs. By the point I had cluster bombs I sometimes wouldn't even bother at all. It's just one way of playing the game.

 

[Flipyap]

Quen is definitely not necessary. Sure you can rely on it heavily but I found myself using it less and less as I levelled up and improved my alchemy/bombs. By the point I had cluster bombs I sometimes wouldn't even bother at all. It's just one way of playing the game.

I wasn't entirely serious, but Quen's existence does mean that the game never requires you to learn how to dodge, etc. (well, except during those awful fist fighting segments on higher difficulties). You can play the game differently, it just so happens that spamming Quen is the most effective "strategy" in most situations.

 

[danthefan]

I haven't really used whirl, from looking at it I guess it only really works against groups of human enemies rather than monsters?

 

[dlauv]

I thought Quen was more viable in The Witcher 2, especially with the chain lightning perk and fire alteration.

Quen just seems to eat up stamina in most encounters when it could be better applied hard counter spells. It breaks pretty easily too. Quen Alt is pretty good though if you have a high magic intensity.

On Death March you can pop the potion that heals based on stamina usage and spam Quen outside of battle to quickly heal tho.

 

[DMONKUMA]

The combat in the Witcher 3 was something that definitely held it back in terms of quality, though I don't expect Japanese action/arpg combat but something more fluid and actually fun would have made the game a treat to PLAY.

I hope since Cyberpunk 2020 had a big focus on weapons,augmentations and CDPR is making a sequel game adaption of it that they focus on making some good maybe great combat for the game itself.

 

[forms]

I can't honestly see what would be fun about that. The lack of precision based fighting is still there.

 

[Hypron]

I wasn't entirely serious, but Quen's existence does mean that the game never requires you to learn how to dodge, etc. (well, except during those awful fist fighting segments on higher difficulties). You can play the game differently, it just so happens that spamming Quen is the most effective "strategy" in most situations.

Yeah, I'll go with what this guy says:

I thought Quen was more viable in The Witcher 2, especially with the chain lightning perk and fire alteration.

Quen just seems to eat up stamina in most encounters when it could be better applied hard counter spells. It breaks pretty easily too. Quen Alt is pretty good though if you have a high magic intensity.

On Death March you can pop the potion that heals based on stamina usage and spam Quen outside of battle to quickly heal tho.

I just don't really feel it's actually that great to begin with. I'm not saying it's bad but (at least for my build) it wasn't the best option a lot of the time. Using my stamina for other things was better.

 

[BriareosGAF]

Unfortunately devs and execs consumers are more worried about pushing pixel quality rather than implementing this brilliant idea.

The market reacts exceedingly favorably to rendering advances, including bullshots and in-engine cinematic rendering, when it comes to marketing interest and pre-orders. It's frustrating but it is what it is. Even scene resolution itself was the primary kickball for a long time with only a side conversation about lighting quality, IQ, etc. It's convenient shorthand.

Quen just seems to eat up stamina in most encounters when it could be better applied hard counter spells. It breaks pretty easily too. Quen Alt is pretty good though if you have a high magic intensity.

You can augment with the damage on break, and also for consumption, the adrenaline points -> sign usage. So it's pretty easy to get in a situation where you are perma-Quen.

 

[Kilrogg]

The market reacts exceedingly favorably to rendering advances, including bullshots and in-engine cinematic rendering, when it comes to marketing interest and pre-orders. It's frustrating but it is what it is. Even scene resolution itself was the primary kickball for a long time with only a side conversation about lighting quality, IQ, etc. It's convenient shorthand.

To be fair, graphics (and sound design) are the most obvious sign that a significant amount of work was put in the game. Gameplay is much harder to sell because you have to play the game to understand it, and story/world is much harder to sell too because it requires you immerse yourself in the game and/or experience a significant chunk of it to understand it. Plus it's easy to imagine people painstakingly modeling or texturing a game. However, it's hard to imagine all the trial-and-error and coding that goes into implementing one good gameplay mechanic. If it just works, you become tempted to think it was quick and easy to implement.

Of course it's all a fallacy of sorts, as good graphics only mean that work was put into the graphics, not the rest.

 

[Alastor3]

I didn't play The Witcher 3 yet, but I still really like the combat system in Witcher 1.

 

[silva1991]

Is this the part where Dragon's Dogma, Souls and Monster Hunter don't count because reasons?

And KH2/BBS, Ys, tales, SO etc.

Honestly high level Sora in KH2 Final Mix is pretty much GOAT action RPG. I replay it at least once a month to fight data bosses because it's just too much fun especially with max forms.

 

[TwilightPrincess]

I stay with Ice-Aard.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

modern WRPG's never get the combat right it feels.

Judging by the Deus Ex 1 thread it's just WRPGs in general.

It's always a battle of forgiveness like, yes the combat is janky and I don't like the way he controls BUT the storytelling and the fetch quest design! GOAT game tbh

 

[Artdayne]

I thought Quen was more viable in The Witcher 2, especially with the chain lightning perk and fire alteration.

Quen just seems to eat up stamina in most encounters when it could be better applied hard counter spells. It breaks pretty easily too. Quen Alt is pretty good though if you have a high magic intensity.

On Death March you can pop the potion that heals based on stamina usage and spam Quen outside of battle to quickly heal tho.

Absolutely, Quen is much better in Witcher 2 because you don't have to spend a lot of points in the magic tier in order to unlock the better versions of it and it's very OP late game. I found it's far more efficient to use my stamina on things that do more damage like Igni.

 

[BriareosGAF]

Gameplay is much harder to sell because you have to play the game to understand it, and story/world is much harder to sell too because it requires you immerse yourself in the game and/or experience a significant chunk of it to understand it.

Sure, I'm not saying it's not understandable, just that it's unreasonable for pundits/forum posts to put all the blame on "devs and execs" for creating the situation. The counter-argument to the "blame the market" view I put forward is that genres such as survival and building/exploration (e.g. Minecraft) have been rewarded in the marketplace, with little emphasis on rendering. For whatever reason that hasn't intersected heavily with AAA though.

 

[Dark_castle]

I honestly thought Witcher 3's combat system wasn't as bad as some thought. Sure it's no Dragon's Dogma or Bloodborne, but it's decent enough to allow me to deal with the mediocrity of its battle system with the game excelling in literally everything else.

 

[endlessflood]

I haven't really used whirl, from looking at it I guess it only really works against groups of human enemies rather than monsters?

It works well against nearly everything, even making short work of Slyzards. The only things it doesn't work well against are enemies that block heavily, since you can burn through all of your stamina without getting any decent hits in. Shaelmars, alps/bruxae, rock trolls: those are the sorts of enemies where Whirl doesn't really help you at all.