Must read before buying. (A brutally honest review)

[Ronin Ghost]

I"ll make this as Short and Sweet as possible. Or as Long and Sour....as necessary

Right off the bat any gamers who has played gems like "Shadow of Mordor" or the "Arkam Knight" series are going to recognize similar elements this game shares.
Such as "Witch Vision" which highlights items and areas of interest in the game to be investigated.

Blocking and parrying mechanics which are reminiscent of the previously named games.
However this title does not share in any way the fluid and nearly blinding polish the other games have in terms of mechanics and gameplay.
Shadow of Mordor plays like an experience. You block, parry, counterattack and perform killing blows in a manner that allows you to literally take on dozens and dozens of enemies at once. And these enemies are of varying difficulty levels, bosses included.

The Witcher III, well, not so much. Granted the games designed to simulate better games. But in practice its just not fun and fails to emulate the polished combat of other titles.

The first hour in game felt like work. Real work.
While trying to follow after one of the NPC's in the opening movement tutorial, I could not stop myself from falling off ledges, overstepping doorways, and bumping into walls.
Dozens of times I had to retrace my steps because the controls didn't allow a smooth approach to a door, or ledge.
The controls were just simply horrendous.

The same goes for combat. The combat tutorial was a chore. There is zero intuition in terms of parrying or blocking, and any enemy with a modicum of skill will have you backing up and cornered quickly.
Once out in the world and fighting actual monsters, your basically just locking on to them and swinging away with next to zero planning or technique.
Unlike games such as Dark Souls, Shadow of Mordor, Arkam Knight, where you feel like every ounce of combat is a carefully orchestrated chess match and balet combination, The Witcher III is soul less and empty combat.
Unlike games such Assassins Creed, where your movement through the world is amazing and fun, this game feels choppy, annoying and tiring.

Overall, this game is so far a big disappointment.
I've gotten over an hour into and without even mentioning how boring the cinematic scenes are, or how mediocre the Graphics actually are, I would recommend a big fat pass on this title.
Sadly, I'm not sure I can even mount the courage to continue playing past my first hour or so to see if it gets better. Because the flaws I've mentioned are not storytelling flaws, or commentary about the game not being fun due to nothing exciting.
They are issues with game mechanics, and handling which in essence are the cause for the game not being fun, or almost unplayable in my opinion.
Things like poor fighting and movement mechanics don't get better deeper into a game. And about an hour is all I needed. In comparison, Games like Shadow of Mordor, Arkam Knight, Dark Souls, etc... All had me fully entrenched and enjoying every second of combat within the first 10 minutes.

My Breakdown: 1-10 with 10 being best, and 1 worst.

Graphics: 6 (Sometimes the graphics inch up to be amazing, but mostly they're just ok)
Gameplay: 2 (Horrendous controls and combat mechanics)
Sound: 7
Cinematics cutscenes: 4 (They have you looking for the "Skip" icon every time)
Story: 4

Overall Rating: 3 (Because sound doesn't weigh as heavily as gameplay)
Unless your dead set on buying and playing this game I'd say STAY AWAY....

[yogurt break]

For me the only good Witcher game even with its bugs was the 1st one (best part the combat style). The second one was already a disappointment and I understand your feelings same as mine at the 2nd game which had the controls of Fable Lost Chapters. I only played the 2nd and will play the 3rd because it has a good story and t**s.

[Ronin Ghost]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Dalek:

Another "I'm disappointed with the game and therefore you should be too", and "if you don't agree then you obviously don't know what good games are". People form their own opinions on games, people like the OP just like to put theirs out there so everyone can validate it for him and he'll feel better about being disappointed. Guess what OP its ok to be disappointed by a game, don't know too many gamers that haven't been over the years, most just move on.

At no point in my review do I insist others opinions should fall in line with mine.
I simply share my experience and opinion so that others will have more information in order to make their own judgement before spending the $60.
Many have stated they appreciate the info but will buy the game anyway. Not once have I chastised any of these people for their decision.

[-shhfiftyfive]

morgan, your deduction skills are 3/10

[Terminus]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ronin Ghost:

I"ll make this as Short and Sweet as possible. Or as Long and Sour....as necessary

Right off the bat any gamers who has played gems like "Shadow of Mordor" or the "Arkam Knight" series are going to recognize similar elements this game shares.
Such as "Witch Vision" which highlights items and areas of interest in the game to be investigated.

Blocking and parrying mechanics which are reminiscent of the previously named games.
However this title does not share in any way the fluid and nearly blinding polish the other games have in terms of mechanics and gameplay.
Shadow of Mordor plays like an experience. You block, parry, counterattack and perform killing blows in a manner that allows you to literally take on dozens and dozens of enemies at once. And these enemies are of varying difficulty levels, bosses included.

The Witcher III, well, not so much. Granted the games designed to simulate better games. But in practice its just not fun and fails to emulate the polished combat of other titles.

The first hour in game felt like work. Real work.
While trying to follow after one of the NPC's in the opening movement tutorial, I could not stop myself from falling off ledges, overstepping doorways, and bumping into walls.
Dozens of times I had to retrace my steps because the controls didn't allow a smooth approach to a door, or ledge.
The controls were just simply horrendous.

The same goes for combat. The combat tutorial was a chore. There is zero intuition in terms of parrying or blocking, and any enemy with a modicum of skill will have you backing up and cornered quickly.
Once out in the world and fighting actual monsters, your basically just locking on to them and swinging away with next to zero planning or technique.
Unlike games such as Dark Souls, Shadow of Mordor, Arkam Knight, where you feel like every ounce of combat is a carefully orchestrated chess match and balet combination, The Witcher III is soul less and empty combat.
Unlike games such Assassins Creed, where your movement through the world is amazing and fun, this game feels choppy, annoying and tiring.

Overall, this game is so far a big disappointment.
I've gotten over an hour into and without even mentioning how boring the cinematic scenes are, or how mediocre the Graphics actually are, I would recommend a big fat pass on this title.
Sadly, I'm not sure I can even mount the courage to continue playing past my first hour or so to see if it gets better. Because the flaws I've mentioned are not storytelling flaws, or commentary about the game not being fun due to nothing exciting.
They are issues with game mechanics, and handling which in essence are the cause for the game not being fun, or almost unplayable in my opinion.
Things like poor fighting and movement mechanics don't get better deeper into a game. And about an hour is all I needed. In comparison, Games like Shadow of Mordor, Arkam Knight, Dark Souls, etc... All had me fully entrenched and enjoying every second of combat within the first 10 minutes.

My Breakdown: 1-10 with 10 being best, and 1 worst.

Graphics: 6 (Sometimes the graphics inch up to be amazing, but mostly they're just ok)
Gameplay: 2 (Horrendous controls and combat mechanics)
Sound: 7
Cinematics cutscenes: 4 (They have you looking for the "Skip" icon every time)
Story: 4

Overall Rating: 3 (Because sound doesn't weigh as heavily as gameplay)
Unless your dead set on buying and playing this game I'd say STAY AWAY....

Your opinion is your opinion and I'm not going to question that, but I'd offer a few points to counter some things you've said and offer my own opinion to contrast.

"Witcher vision" has been in the series since the first. Yeah, there's similar stuff in the Batman games, Assassin's Creed, etc. That's just a game mechanic that a bunch of devs have glommed on to for various reasons, just like parkour, button-cover, and "bullet time". If that bugs you, it bugs you, but I think it's a greater sin to shun a mechanic that adds value to the experience just to be "different".

At the risk of sounding like I'm telling you that you're just not good at the combat, I'd just say that the Witcher series is known for having particularly challenging combat. Not Dark Souls, but not nearly as easy as AC, Batman, or Shadow of Mordor. I love all of those games, but combat basically turns into button-mashing and parry QTEs. Witcher doesn't automate the combat elements that those games do, which makes it feel less fluid and more difficult. Learning each creatures "tells" and getting the timing right for parrying is difficult; it's supposed to be, because parrying and counterattacking is very powerful.

Ok, maybe I am saying you're just not very good at the combat right now. Encounters are supposed to be challenging, and you're supposed to need to use all of your tricks and skills (bombs, oils, potions, magic, etc.) to get past even basic, random encounters. I'm surprised that you make reference to Dark Souls in the same breath as Shadow of Mordor in terms of combat, because the two are completely unlike; Dark Souls is closer to Witcher than SoM.

I'll agree with you that the movement is not terribly well suited to moving around on cliffs and ledges and so forth. Again, games like AC are built around parkour and moving around obstacles smoothly and so forth. Witcher isn't and never has been. It's just not that kind of game. If that bothers you, it bothers you.

The graphics? Well, it's subjective, but I don't see how you could find the graphics mediocre in comparison to the other games you've mentioned. Especially the cinematics. If you can't get into the story, well, that's another thing, but I'd just say you should slow down and give it another shot if you're into story-driven RPGs. The series is kind of famous for the writing and storyline and so forth.

Again, you're certainly entitled to your opinion, and if it's not your cup of tea then it's not your cup of tea. I love the game (as well as the other titles to which you compared it) and think it's well worth the price.

[Ted FF]

Thank you for the laughs. :-)

[Morgan]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von -shhfiftyfive:

morgan, your deduction skills are 3/10

Are they now? Please give a supporting argument.

[Ronin Ghost]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Morgan:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ronin Ghost:

"IF" you actually read my review then you'd see exactly where I site Mechanical and game play issues as my main complaint.
And the trolls say I'm the troll....lol.
Typical.

Not trolling just pointing out that you didn’t state that was your main issue with the game. I take exception when people bluster into a thread and start telling people that they lack comprehension skills. But at the same time misuse basic English words. Also I never said you didn’t cite the issues, just that you never stated they were your main problem with the game. The problem is that you went on at length about a couple of things but then gave an overall breakdown with unsupported scores. I rather assumed that you either got bored of writing and wanted to sum up or were just trolling by saying “I’ve played this for a full hour and I’m giving it a 4/10 for story.”

I did,
"Because the flaws I've mentioned are not storytelling flaws, or commentary about the game not being fun due to nothing exciting.
They are issues with game mechanics, and handling which in essence are the cause for the game not being fun, or almost unplayable in my opinion."

You could only have missed this if you chose to ignore it or didn't read the review. In either case it brands you as someone who is here simply to argue and not discuss the game.

[Morgan]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ronin Ghost:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Morgan:

Not trolling just pointing out that you didn’t state that was your main issue with the game. I take exception when people bluster into a thread and start telling people that they lack comprehension skills. But at the same time misuse basic English words. Also I never said you didn’t cite the issues, just that you never stated they were your main problem with the game. The problem is that you went on at length about a couple of things but then gave an overall breakdown with unsupported scores. I rather assumed that you either got bored of writing and wanted to sum up or were just trolling by saying “I’ve played this for a full hour and I’m giving it a 4/10 for story.”

I did,
"Because the flaws I've mentioned are not storytelling flaws, or commentary about the game not being fun due to nothing exciting.
They are issues with game mechanics, and handling which in essence are the cause for the game not being fun, or almost unplayable in my opinion."

You could only have missed this if you chose to ignore it or didn't read the review. In either case it brands you as someone who is here simply to argue and not discuss the game.

Then explain:
“My Breakdown: 1-10 with 10 being best, and 1 worst.

Graphics: 6 (Sometimes the graphics inch up to be amazing, but mostly they're just ok)
Gameplay: 2 (Horrendous controls and combat mechanics)
Sound: 7
Cinematics cutscenes: 4 (They have you looking for the "Skip" icon every time)
Story: 4 “

You talked about one aspect of the game then rated it in five areas. I didn’t miss anything. If you only wanted to discuss one aspect why add the overall ratings and why call it a review?

[Nightfall]

I tend to agree with the OP.

This game is horribly overrated, imo. I am not sure what reviewers were smoking.

Combat is terribad.
Movement is jerky and unresponsive, not to mention completely imprecise.
Lockon hardly works properly.
Enemies staggering or not is apparently random - sometimes a crossbow bolt staggers, sometimes not even 10 of them make a bandit flinch.
Enemy AI is completely retarded. I've been baiting 5 bandits on horses into following me, after a bit they started walking back to their original position...while I made a pincushion out of them from safe range with the crossbow, and THEY DID NOT CARE. Also, I lost count of how many enemies got stuck in trees allowing me, again, to kill them from safe distance. Not fun.

Game is beautiful, I am lucky enough to be able to run it at 60fps with pretty much everything maxed - but gameplay wise it is far behind recent AAA games like Bloodborne.

[Ronin Ghost]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Terminus:

Ok, maybe I am saying you're just not very good at the combat right now. Encounters are supposed to be challenging, and you're supposed to need to use all of your tricks and skills (bombs, oils, potions, magic, etc.) to get past even basic, random encounters. I'm surprised that you make reference to Dark Souls in the same breath as Shadow of Mordor in terms of combat, because the two are completely unlike; Dark Souls is closer to Witcher than SoM.

I never said anything about difficulty.
Like so many others that simply want to argue the merits of the game regardless of its obvious flaws you willfully create sentiments I did not infer or inject.

Every game I referecned was not referenced due to difficulty, or RPG or Action elements.
Every Game I referenced was done so for one reason and one reason only and that was to compare what Polished game mechanics look like across a wide range of different genres and titles/playstyles versus one (TW3) that does not have polished movement, combat or game mechanics.
So you can say I'm not very good at a game all you want. Whether true or false my skill level does not have influence in the flawed mechanics and gameplay elements of a $60 title that was lauded as super polished and amazing.

[Ronin Ghost]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Morgan:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ronin Ghost:

I did,
"Because the flaws I've mentioned are not storytelling flaws, or commentary about the game not being fun due to nothing exciting.
They are issues with game mechanics, and handling which in essence are the cause for the game not being fun, or almost unplayable in my opinion."

You could only have missed this if you chose to ignore it or didn't read the review. In either case it brands you as someone who is here simply to argue and not discuss the game.

Then explain:
“My Breakdown: 1-10 with 10 being best, and 1 worst.

Graphics: 6 (Sometimes the graphics inch up to be amazing, but mostly they're just ok)
Gameplay: 2 (Horrendous controls and combat mechanics)
Sound: 7
Cinematics cutscenes: 4 (They have you looking for the "Skip" icon every time)
Story: 4 “

You talked about one aspect of the game then rated it in five areas. I didn’t miss anything. If you only wanted to discuss one aspect why add the overall ratings and why call it a review?

Its right in front of your face. Read the words I quoted and stop cutting and pasting the smallest parts of the review that are quickly mentioned in closing.

[Morgan]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ronin Ghost:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Morgan:

Then explain:
“My Breakdown: 1-10 with 10 being best, and 1 worst.

Graphics: 6 (Sometimes the graphics inch up to be amazing, but mostly they're just ok)
Gameplay: 2 (Horrendous controls and combat mechanics)
Sound: 7
Cinematics cutscenes: 4 (They have you looking for the "Skip" icon every time)
Story: 4 “

You talked about one aspect of the game then rated it in five areas. I didn’t miss anything. If you only wanted to discuss one aspect why add the overall ratings and why call it a review?

Its right in front of your face. Read the words I quoted and stop cutting and pasting the smallest parts of the review that are quickly mentioned in closing.

I cut and pasted the part I was referring to. The full post is still there for context. You’re now contradicting yourself. Your post was either about game mechanics with totally redundant score breakdown. Or it was a review with an unsupported score breakdown.

[Fancypants]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ronin Ghost:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Morgan:

Then explain:
“My Breakdown: 1-10 with 10 being best, and 1 worst.

Graphics: 6 (Sometimes the graphics inch up to be amazing, but mostly they're just ok)
Gameplay: 2 (Horrendous controls and combat mechanics)
Sound: 7
Cinematics cutscenes: 4 (They have you looking for the "Skip" icon every time)
Story: 4 “

You talked about one aspect of the game then rated it in five areas. I didn’t miss anything. If you only wanted to discuss one aspect why add the overall ratings and why call it a review?

Its right in front of your face. Read the words I quoted and stop cutting and pasting the smallest parts of the review that are quickly mentioned in closing.

I tried to take this "review" seriously, but I can't. This smells like an attempt to be different from everyone else, Oh look, the pro reviewers are giving this game high marks, therefore I will give it an "honest review" and tear it down. Look it's your opinion, not really a review. We understand that there is some room for improvement, especially in the area of fluid character movement. But overall the game is pretty amazing. You just have to get used to some of the game mechanics. My personal opinion, is that this game has more in common with Red Dead Redemption, than the other games you cited. And ever RDR has it's share of control issues.

[Nightfall]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Dr. Forrester:

I tried to take this "review" seriously, but I can't. This smells like an attempt to be different from everyone else, Oh look, the pro reviewers are giving this game high marks, therefore I will give it an "honest review" and tear it down. Look it's your opinion, not really a review. We understand that there is some room for improvement, especially in the area of fluid character movement. But overall the game is pretty amazing. You just have to get used to some of the game mechanics. My personal opinion, is that this game has more in common with Red Dead Redemption, than the other games you cited. And ever RDR has it's share of control issues.

Some reviewers gave this game a perfect score.

It is a good game, but it is FAR from perfect. There are glaring gameplay issues easily noticeable in the first 5 minutes of the game, literally. The Witcher became an incredibly popular franchise - such issues should have been addressed.
Seems to me that the stellar reviews are more due to the hype train rather than objective assessments of pro and cons.

[bc10000]

you moron, u want an easy to play game?

this is suppose to be hard.