The Witcher 3: The Wild Hunt

Alchemy will have "albedo/nigredo/rubedo"

YESSSSSS! I missed that feature sorely in the second game, alchemy in the second game was way way too simplified.
 
I have the first one, enhanced edition. The main issues I had with it are the controls/combat system and the overly complicated menus/UI/skills. If I stop playing the game for a week or two I almost have to completely relearn how to use alchemy because the menus are so confusing. Then the combat is all goofy combos, doesn't really make sense. I'm fine with striking ala skyrim style vs auto attacks, but the combos didn't do it for me and the stances are confusing too. You only really know to switch stances if you're missing a lot or fighting groups. And the camera angles are goofy although I can live with them.

Still I'm glad to see 3 is coming, I'll probably skip 2 altogether at this point. Just glad more companies are making quality rpgs.
 
I have the first one, enhanced edition. The main issues I had with it are the controls/combat system and the overly complicated menus/UI/skills. If I stop playing the game for a week or two I almost have to completely relearn how to use alchemy because the menus are so confusing. Then the combat is all goofy combos, doesn't really make sense. I'm fine with striking ala skyrim style vs auto attacks, but the combos didn't do it for me and the stances are confusing too. You only really know to switch stances if you're missing a lot or fighting groups. And the camera angles are goofy although I can live with them.

Still I'm glad to see 3 is coming, I'll probably skip 2 altogether at this point. Just glad more companies are making quality rpgs.

Definitely check out 2. It's very simple compared to the first. The first you can use the default ingredients for your potions. I never mess around with sorting through the different types of reagents. Way too much micromanagement. There's only a few ingredients you have to be careful not to throw out, but those are mostly used for the contract quests, and for Won't Hurt a Bit (the quest where you collect teeth) quest. I usually do the contract quests early, and get them out of the way so I don't worry about consuming quest ingredients when mixing potions. As for combat, it's real easy once you get the hang of it, and I like the fact that you have to "time" you attacks. Only drawback to that game is camera angles sometimes, and lots of running around (with no auto run button).
 
I play the first game with a mod that make the game a lot harder, micromanaging your alchemy is almost required in that mod since you need the bonuses it can give you. In the vanilla game it's admittedly pretty skipable.
 
Those graphics look quite amazing. Still only ~10 hours into 1 and I got 2 on sale but haven't loaded it yet. Not sure if I should give 1 another go or just skip it. I like to play series in order but couldn't stand mass effect 1, jumped right to 2 so it wouldn't be the first time.
 
I enjoyed Witcher 2 more. It's one of the best games the last decade imo ..it's better to have played that than neither game...

I think that comparison to ME is pretty accurate. I'm a couple of hours into ME1 after having played through ME2 a few years ago. I'm not sure I'll play it much more, though. Also, I'd rate Witcher 2 above ME2...
 
Obviously completely different genres but I made the comparison because everything that turns me off about witcher 1 is similar to what turns me off about ME1. Both have poor combat mechanics and needlessly complicated features like alchemy, talent trees and gear. Complexity is fine if it adds depth and value to a game but in both cases it feels like they added complexity just to make it more rpg-ish when they should've gone for streamlined action game with rpg elements (which is precisely the improvements ME2 made).
 
Obviously completely different genres but I made the comparison because everything that turns me off about witcher 1 is similar to what turns me off about ME1. Both have poor combat mechanics and needlessly complicated features like alchemy, talent trees and gear. Complexity is fine if it adds depth and value to a game but in both cases it feels like they added complexity just to make it more rpg-ish when they should've gone for streamlined action game with rpg elements (which is precisely the improvements ME2 made).
Which is why I recommend you trying Witcher 2 instead. It's streamlined in those areas you mentioned. I liked it better that way. It's not overly complicated and easier to enjoy. I used alchemy in Witcher 1, but it's not for me. It's too time consuming and not rewarding enough. I'm not sure the alchemy branch in Witcher 2 was worth it either. You're pretty screwed in one of the battles if you don't have any other skills. If they not have changed it since I played.
 
You don't need to use alchemy if you are on the easy difficulty at least.

I wasn't on easy, but I only used alchemy at the beginning when the game was actually a bit hard. Some of the early fights were a little annoying so I decided to use alchemy. Not that it mattered because in the end I won those fights with cheesy running around and using Aard or Igni for 5 minutes, not because of whatever potion I'd decided to use. It was more cheesy and annoying than great. Then the game becomes suddenly super easy and I never used alchemy again. Not that surprising since you basically fight the same 2-3 enemy types from beginning to end, except for harpies that show up in act 2 and gargoyles in act 3.
 
At that price I might buy The Witcher for a second time just for the convenience of having it on Steam.
 
The enhanced edition doesn't do a cd check though. Not sure if this was patched in or what but I can play it without cd so no point to get on steam.
 
Sure it can be played without the disc but I still have to dig the damn thing out to install it. Installing on Steam is way easier.

Not that I have time to play it anyway between my current games of Fallout: New Vegas, Record of Agarest War, and the impending release of both Shadowrun Returns and Brave New World.
 
Why on earth would I do that, I already bought it directly from CDPR the day it was released :p. The whole point of buying it again is that Steam is convenient and for three and a half bucks the convenience seems worth it.
 
Do you truly own a game with Steam though? If steam were to go out of business, you'd lose access to your game, right?

I'm not a steam hater mind you, you can look at my Steam hours played (in that thread) to see I have played several Steam games such as Fallout: New Vegas, Skyrim, Civ5, and X-com. I did buy the original X-com on Steam. Now that is convenient. Because my original X-com was on floppies (I copied), and the original paper where I copied the security codes is god knows where. It was such a great game I should have bought at the time, rather than make a copy. But I didn't know much about games back then. Another reason the Steam version is superior than my old copy is because it plays at an appropriate speed. Iirc, the last time I tried to play my copy, the mouse pointer moved around the screen too fast because my processor was too fast.
 
Top Bottom