• 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 has won over 240 GOTY Awards so far.

DAI salt on GAF is always my favorite. Delicious.

Yeah. I was surprised how when it launched people seemed to love DA:I and I couldn't really stomach it. I had put 25 hours or so into it before I quit and have yet to pick it back up. Then it won a few GOTY awards and surprised me even more. I cared so little about it, I didn't even care enough to complain online about it at the time. Glad some enjoyed it though even if I didn't.
 

Fredrik

Member
I was always under the impression that Eurogamer and Edge were two of the toughest (and most trusted) video game news publications--at least tat was somewhat the attitude of the GameTrailers forum back when it was still active.
Not sure if they have new people on board or what but Edge used to be the very best but for several years now I think they've been kind of random with the scoring, not terrible, just random, good or bad you can never guess what score they'll give a game. Eurogamer is still great though, usually spot on even though some scores might be bit click-bait. But the best reviewer imo was Greg Kasavin at GameSpot, I could trust him 100%, he was always spot with the scores and very level-headed, never seemed to go too far at either direction if he loved or hated a game.
 

Lothars

Member
You don't think that's even a slight exaggeration? My counter has been that people don't know what "terrible" combat is. What's the worst combat you can think of? If TW3 is in the top five then you haven't played enough games. You're simply using descriptors which aren't accurate when laid bare.

I could believe "terrible" if they were talking about TW1 or Morrowind or Gothic or Risen or somewhat less awful RTwP systems, maybe clickers like Torchlight. None of those are particularly great. What's more is they haven't improved much over the years. That's not the case with TW3.
Yeah It's an exaggeration but it's still has bad combat and it really hurts a very good game. The worst combat I can think of is probably the Two World's but if anyone likes the combat in Witcher than that's fair, It just wasn't for me which is surprising because I love games like the witcher.
 

Jumeira

Banned
Now that CDPR have won 2015 overall, they have the audacity to release GOTY 2016 with Blood & Wine, these guys are something else.
 

pablito

Member
Now that CDPR have won 2015 overall, they have the audacity to claim 2016 with Blod & Wine, these guys are something else.

I don't really follow gaming journalism or w/e. Do expansions get thrown into the GOTY race? I'd love to see more Witcher-caused meltdowns.
 

Razzorn34

Member
I really don't understand the whole "combat is terrible" argument. Is it the best or most innovative combat system ever created? No, but it's fun and calling it "terrible" is straight up hyperbole.

No, it isn't the worst thing ever created by any means. But it is nothing better than serviceable. It is the fact that so much time and detail was put into the world, quests, story, and characters, that the subpar combat is instantly glaring. If Witcher 3 was a game where fighting was a complete sideshow to everything else, you wouldn't see anyone complaining. Of course, it turns out that you do a ton of fighting in the Witcher 3, which means you have to wrestle with the subpar combat more often than not. It's just a giant stain on something that could have been close to perfect.
 

OKK

Member
Which is why it's hilarious that some are trying to make it seem like beating a GTA is some insurmountable task and Fallout 4 is somehow less competition. MGS4 received only 1 less award than GTA4 and we have MGSV this year. The Souls series is no longer niche. The downplay is real.

Honest question.

Did GTA5 had any major issues (technical or design wise) it's release year?

I'm asking this, because it's clear that both Fallout 4 and MGSV caused a lot of uproar. Fallout 4 was a hot mess and MGSV had it's own issues with the game design and story. For me (and I don't think I'm alone saying that) both games competed being the biggest disappointment for 2015.
 

Ralemont

not me
Evaluating a game is not completely subjective in my eyes. That's where we and I'm sure I compared to many others here would not agree. I don't feel the combat in TW3 is particularly good either, only that it's not "terrible". People really come out swinging with their adjectives.

Eurogamer was stupid enough to give DA:I an 8. Their credibility is completely shot. We know how many GOTYs that piece of shit won.

I'm convinced. Truly your critical evaluation abilities are on another level.
 

GSG Flash

Nobody ruins my family vacation but me...and maybe the boy!
No, it isn't the worst thing ever created by any means. But it is nothing better than serviceable. It is the fact that so much time and detail was put into the world, quests, story, and characters, that the subpar combat is instantly glaring. If Witcher 3 was a game where fighting was a complete sideshow to everything else, you wouldn't see anyone complaining. Of course, it turns out that you do a ton of fighting in the Witcher 3, which means you have to wrestle with the subpar combat more often than not. It's just a giant stain on something that could have been close to perfect.

Well I would have to disagree, I find it much better than serviceable.

Admittedly, I had a hard time getting into the combat in the first couple of hours in the game(the first wraith you meet in White Orchard just destroyed me), but once I got used to the combat, it just clicked for me and I had a lot of fun with it. Depending on the situation, I would either be very aggressive with the enemy or keep my distance, use certain signs but not others, use certain oils to boost my sword, use quick dodges for slower enemies and rolls for faster ones, use the crossbow on distant or flying enemies. Also have to watch the toxicity so that I don't overload myself with swallow or thunderbolt potions. There's a lot of variation to the combat depending on the enemy you're fighting, this is a game where you can button mash against weaker enemies when you're strong enough, but doing so against stronger enemies will almost always get you killed. It's a much deeper combat system than people give it credit for.
 

tuxfool

Banned
I really don't understand the whole "combat is terrible" argument. Is it the best or most innovative combat system ever created? No, but it's fun and calling it "terrible" is straight up hyperbole.

Honestly I just think some people should learn better adjectives. Or they're gripped by the tyranny of absolutism.
 

tuxfool

Banned
Ya would really like to know people's exact reasons for thinking this.

There have been a few, and the reasons are quite valid.

Unfortunately the absolutists seldom expound on their problems with the combat. Given that they resort to unsubstantial adjectives, I'm not entirely certain those people would be able to express what they didn't like outside of preferential aspects.
 
Yeah It's an exaggeration but it's still has bad combat and it really hurts a very good game. The worst combat I can think of is probably the Two World's but if anyone likes the combat in Witcher than that's fair, It just wasn't for me which is surprising because I love games like the witcher.

What games are "like the witcher"?
 

tuxfool

Banned
Honest question.

Did GTA5 had any major issues (technical or design wise) it's release year?

I'm asking this, because it's clear that both Fallout 4 and MGSV caused a lot of uproar. Fallout 4 was a hot mess and MGSV had it's own issues with the game design and story. For me (and I don't think I'm alone saying that) both games competed being the biggest disappointment for 2015.

It ran badly, and understandably so, because it ran on crappy hardware. However it should be noted that the majority of outlets gave little importance to the design and story issues of MGSV (some even praised these aspects), nor to the performance problems or general jankiness of Fallout 4.
 

Hypron

Member
Can I get breakdown on why Witcher 3's combat is terrible?

It's not the greatest but it's far from terrible. Some of the things that must frustrate people is that enemies' openings are fairly small and invincibility frames have a few quirks (you don't get them if you dodge right after attacking for example), which means it's easy to get hit at the beginning and feel like you shouldn't have. Some enemies are also very annoying to deal with if you don't use all your arsenal.

It took me a bit of time to really get the hang of it (especially since I'm playing on Death March) but now I'm having tons of fun, especially by using bombs (northern wind is awesome) and signs to help myself.
 

patapuf

Member
It's not the greatest but it's not terrible. One of the things that must frustrate people is that enemies' openings are fairly small and invincibility frames have a few quirks (you don't get them if you dodge right after attacking for example), which means it's easy to get hit at the beginning and feel like you shouldn't have. Some enemies are also very annoying to deal with if you don't use all your arsenal.

It took me a bit of time to really get the hang of it (especially since I'm playing on Death March) but now I'm having tons of fun, especially by using bombs (northern wind is awesome) and signs to help myself.

The invisibility frame thing is mostly jarring if you play a lot of Japanese action games. People without that frame of reference won't even have the expectation to get them after they got hit a few times.

The witchers biggest weakness in combat, imo, is that especially the big monsters aren't interesting enough to fight. It may be a lot to ask of a game with as much content as it has, but big monsters definitely could have benefited from more varied attacks and more attack types.

What is there works fine, but there's definitely room to improve.
 

pablito

Member
Can I get breakdown on why Witcher 3's combat is terrible?

Overall I like the combat, but here are my gripes.

Changing controls in and out of combat. When you're out of combat, you have a jump. When you are engaged, you gain a long dodge roll and short hop in place of the jump. There have been some frustrating situations where I'd be running around and then get engaged, but find myself in some uneven ground or just behind some kind of landscaping that I can't get out of until the enemies are gone.

With dodge rolls being tied to mana/stamina regain, I found myself hopping around way too much while it regenerated. It kind of makes sense to have long dodges decrease the amount of stamina you get back. But in reality I found myself short hopping all over the damn place when I waited for the regain. Maybe it was my playstyle or something (I could parry more, for example).

Ballerina sword animations. Affects how the game looks, not plays. But still. I could do without some of those twirls. They look silly.

As a melee kind of player I would have liked more sword "moves," even though the sword dance thing was kind of useless. But I dunno if I would say the lack of moves makes the combat bad, just something I would include in The Witcher 4.

But again, overall I enjoyed the combat of The Witcher 3.
 

OKK

Member
It ran badly, and understandably so, because it ran on crappy hardware. However it should be noted that the majority of outlets gave little importance to the design and story issues of MGSV (some even praised these aspects), nor to the performance problems or general jankiness of Fallout 4.

I agree with you. But this whole GOTY discussion also covers the reader's picks. Even though the majority of the outlets didn't saw MGSV & F4 shortcomings problematic, many gamers did. For example all the Game of the Year awards that the MGSV had came from outlets (The Critics' Picks - 26, The Readers' Picks - 0).

Also, I still think that the competition were stronger in 2013 than 2015. Besides The Last of Us, in 2013 we also got two amazing multiplatform games, namely GTA5 and Bioshock Infinite. Both of those games were more highly reviewed than F4 & MGSV and (at least I'm my recollection) there weren't any major negative buzz after the release - unlike F4 with save corruption issues etc. and Konami's questionable updates for MGSV.

Sorry for OT.
 

tuxfool

Banned
I agree with you. But this whole GOTY discussion also covers the reader's picks. Even though the majority of the outlets didn't saw MGSV & F4 shortcomings problematic, many gamers did. For example all the Game of the Year awards that the MGSV had came from outlets (The Critics' Picks - 26, The Readers' Picks - 0).

Also, I still think that the competition were stronger in 2013 than 2015. Besides The Last of Us, in 2013 we also got two amazing multiplatform games, namely GTA5 and Bioshock Infinite. Both of those games were more highly reviewed than F4 & MGSV and (at least I'm my recollection) there weren't any major negative buzz after the release - unlike F4 with save corruption issues etc. and Konami's questionable updates for MGSV.

Sorry for OT.

I wouldn't say this stuff is Off Topic. Ultimately review scores under 10 points of difference (by extension metacritic) aren't that reliable an indicator of what is chosen for GOTY. For starters because reviews are generally written by one person, whereas GOTYs are often determined by committee.
 

OKK

Member
I wouldn't say this stuff is Off Topic. Ultimately review scores under 10 points of difference (by extension metacritic) aren't that reliable an indicator of what is chosen for GOTY. For starters because reviews are generally written by one person, whereas GOTYs are often determined by committee.

Heh, okey. In some way I hoped this would be OT, since I don't have a deep passion for this subject :A End of the day the discussion is beyond silly, because the debate focuses on how one highly regarded game is or isn't more successful than another highly regarded game.

Having said that, I guess another metric for competition could be sales.

In 2013 the combined sales of GTA5 and Bioschock Infinite was over 36 million copies by the end of the year.
In 2015 the combined sales of F4 and MGSV was at least over 17 million copies by the end of the year.

Of course this is only very crude/rough comparison. Nonetheless the numbers are once again in favor for 2013 when discussion which year had tougher competition.
 
I still can't get past the first boss. :(

play it similarly to dark souls man and overuse quen unless you have the luxury to use another spell.

Use quen, wait for perfect moment, then attack. When the enemy hits and removes your quen, dodge and roll away until you have it again. It's all about timing.
 
play it similarly to dark souls man and overuse quen unless you have the luxury to use another spell.

Use quen, wait for perfect moment, then attack. When the enemy hits and removes your quen, dodge and roll away until you have it again. It's all about timing.

Don't roll away. Rolling consumes stamina unlike backstep/sidestep, which is also spammable.
 

BeauRoger

Unconfirmed Member
There have been a few, and the reasons are quite valid.

Unfortunately the absolutists seldom expound on their problems with the combat. Given that they resort to unsubstantial adjectives, I'm not entirely certain those people would be able to express what they didn't like outside of preferential aspects.

Hyperbole like that is often a fairly shallow attempt to look sophisticated and imply that you have "high standards". I suspect that you are right, if pressed, many of the people who do this would at most be able to climb about one level in their criticism, arriving at terms such as "janky" and "unresponsive".
 

hydruxo

Member
The invisibility frame thing is mostly jarring if you play a lot of Japanese action games. People without that frame of reference won't even have the expectation to get them after they got hit a few times.

The witchers biggest weakness in combat, imo, is that especially the big monsters aren't interesting enough to fight. It may be a lot to ask of a game with as much content as it has, but big monsters definitely could have benefited from more varied attacks and more attack types.

What is there works fine, but there's definitely room to improve.

This is mostly true, and I think CDPR has even realized this and did a good job of making the first boss in Hearts of Stone more interesting mechanically.
Toad Prince
has a ton of defensive/offensive moves.
 

ColdPizza

Banned
Man, every time I fail a side quest my OCD kicks in hard. That being said, holy fuck this game is massive. I'm enjoying it so much.
 
Its not. With the patches it is actually good imo

Not souls good of course, but better than most rpg

This, right here.
Besides Dragon's Dogma, can people who describe Witcher 3 as terrible give any example of open world rpgs with better combat than Witcher 3?
 

Tom Penny

Member
Replaying this game recently on PC. No RPG is come close from a technical standpoint. Fallout 4 looked and ran like total shit compared to this game.
 

poodaddy

Member
I found the combat boring and too easy. Witcher 3 is way more engaging with lots of options.

Yeah I've gotta agree with this. I dug Amalurs combat at first just because it had specials and a combo system that mixed different weapons together, but there weren't really any encounters that actually forced you to learn interesting mechanics and utilize them properly as the game was painfully easy even on the highest difficulty. Probably why I didn't finish it, but I do think the games better than its reputation implies. It's kind of a cross between Fable 2 and Oblivion, but in my opinion it plays better than either of them despite suffering from an extremely generic story ridden with overused fantasy tropes and cliches. I really wanted that game to succeed just because of the people behind it, but it just didn't come together as well as it could have, or arguably should have.
 
Amalur's combat was very fun, the issue was that you became extremely OP fairly fast. I made a rogue and once I got these daggers with poison damage and got some health regenerating gems in my armor, I was whooping every ass.
 
I found the combat boring and too easy. Witcher 3 is way more engaging with lots of options.

Yeah I've gotta agree with this. I dug Amalurs combat at first just because it had specials and a combo system that mixed different weapons together, but there weren't really any encounters that actually forced you to learn interesting mechanics and utilize them properly as the game was painfully easy even on the highest difficulty. Probably why I didn't finish it, but I do think the games better than its reputation implies. It's kind of a cross between Fable 2 and Oblivion, but in my opinion it plays better than either of them despite suffering from an extremely generic story ridden with overused fantasy tropes and cliches. I really wanted that game to succeed just because of the people behind it, but it just didn't come together as well as it could have, or arguably should have.

I agree with you that it was too easy, but so is the Witcher. The arsenal is there but there's rarely an enemy that would demand you to use it properly even on the highest difficulty nor the inventory/keybindings to not make it cumbersome to even bother with.

Leaving difficulty aside KoA was more responsive and more importantly intricate.
 
Ballerina sword animations. Affects how the game looks, not plays. But still. I could do without some of those twirls. They look silly.
Just to touch on this small point, but that's done on purpose. In the lore, Witchers' sword fighting techniques and skills are described as 'graceful' and almost ballerina like. They're master sword fighters.
 

Memento

Member
Jesus Christ. The Last of Us is the game with most GOTYs ever then according to this compilation. And in the same year of fucking GTA V. Damn.
 

poodaddy

Member
Just to touch on this small point, but that's done on purpose. In the lore, Witchers' sword fighting techniques and skills are described as 'graceful' and almost ballerina like. They're master sword fighters.

Thank god someone knows this. I understand that the animations aren't to everyone's liking, but they're faithful and critical to a long established Canon so it seems a bit nonsensical to complain about it. It's akin to complaining about laser guns in Star Wars; not everyone likes the pew pew, but it'd be pointless and a bit odd to complain about it.
 

Exentryk

Member
Thank god someone knows this. I understand that the animations aren't to everyone's liking, but they're faithful and critical to a long established Canon so it seems a bit nonsensical to complain about it. It's akin to complaining about laser guns in Star Wars; not everyone likes the pew pew, but it'd be pointless and a bit odd to complain about it.

Ballerina dance is fine for Strong attacks. Just don't have them for fast attacks. There are various ways to tackle it while keeping with the lore, and still making combat good. If your argument is that the combat is crap because of the lore, then the gameplay designers have failed.
 

poodaddy

Member
Ballerina dance is fine for Strong attacks. Just don't have them for fast attacks. There are various ways to tackle it while keeping with the lore, and still making combat good. If your argument is that the combat is crap because of the lore, then the gameplay designers have failed.

I was referring to the animations, not the combat mechanics. If your point of contention is that you believe unappealing animations = crap combat mechanics then I think we may be on very different pages here. The question was posed by numerous others earlier on in the thread; can any detractors of The Witcher 3 combat objectively clarify why they believe the combat is garbage beyond reducing their arguments to any of the following: it's not soulsborne, it's janky, it's unresponsive. Instead of calling the designers of the most heralded game of the year failures for creating story faithful animations that you don't care for, can you instead perhaps break down why it is that you think the combats so terrible? Some specificity could certainly aid this discussion as these generalizations are stifling the discussion rather than progressing it.
 
Top Bottom