*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3142
  • cock-a-doodle-doo, darlin'
    • View Profile
Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #60 on: June 20, 2015, 09:36:49 PM »
Yeah, the real cut back happened for the second game where you also only have a few options. Such a shame, getting laid was like its own mini game and then they took it away. :(

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7064
    • View Profile
Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #61 on: June 20, 2015, 11:27:38 PM »
getting laid was like its own mini game

Just like real life.

Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #62 on: June 20, 2015, 11:49:38 PM »
I like how you can just walk around and rob everyone blind in their own houses.

Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #63 on: June 23, 2015, 06:22:05 AM »
Triss is a horrible person taking advantage of Geralt's amnesia. I hate her by the end of the second game.

Why do you hate Triss? I didn't do completionist playthroughs of 1 and 2 but I'm still ambivalent towards her. I think it was Sila or Phillipa that said she's not telling me everything, but I never figured out what that meant.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3142
  • cock-a-doodle-doo, darlin'
    • View Profile
Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #64 on: June 23, 2015, 11:54:56 AM »
She tells you that you loved a sorceress but won't tell you anything else about it. So she basically takes advantage of Geralt's amnesia to be with him. Then she tells him the rose of remberence will help his memory but it's the same thing Phillipa uses to control Saskia which seems awfully suspicious of Triss.

But aside from that, I just don't think she's Geralt's style. She's young and political. Geralt is sullen and a loner. Yen seems a lot more his style.

Saddam Hussein

Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #65 on: June 27, 2015, 04:17:26 AM »
I have now beaten The Witcher!  It's definitely got a lot of flaws, like the bizarre combat, wonky animations, re-use of distinctive character models, some shitty voice acting, and an extremely hostile camera, but under it all, I found a solid, well-written, and addictive RPG.  Like I said earlier, the lore is introduced into the game at just the right pace, giving you enough new information to keep you interested without being overwhelming, and to the end of keeping true to the source material while also being accessible to new fans, giving Geralt amnesia was a great idea (I never thought I'd say that about a trope that's widely regarded as one of the laziest gimmicks in all of fiction).  And as far as the quality of the lore goes, well, there were a lot of tired fantasy clichés that I think the game would have been stronger without, but it wasn't entirely a Tolkien rehash.  For example, I liked the weird fish-people race and the sub-plot in which some of them worship a giant sea monster.  That's a pretty blatant ripoff of Lovecraft, of course, but we don't see that in video games nearly as much as we do the same-old elves and dwarves, so it didn't feel as obvious and predictable to me.

My biggest criticism of the game would have to be the level design.  Most of the levels in this game feel like they were designed to be frustrating and confusing to navigate.  The swamps are the worst of all.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2015, 03:33:50 AM by Saddam Hussein »

Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #66 on: June 27, 2015, 07:52:34 AM »
George Weidman just put up his first video of the Witcher re-play review. I feel he describes the first game pretty well, despite his love for it.



Also, took you a while Saddam ;) I got 1 and 2 done over a weekend. Granted, I rushed.

Saddam Hussein

Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #67 on: June 27, 2015, 04:18:20 PM »
I did a big completionist playthrough, largely because of the whole "now or never" attitude the game has towards its optional sidequests.  That was annoying at first, but as the game went on, I appreciated how they were all woven together into one big narrative, where the choices that you made had consequences on the story going forward.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2015, 03:34:26 AM by Saddam Hussein »

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3142
  • cock-a-doodle-doo, darlin'
    • View Profile
Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #68 on: June 27, 2015, 09:17:05 PM »
That reviewer hit the nail on the head. The game looks terrible and runs awkwardly, but it's just so great. The flavor of the game just wasn't there in 2 as they seemed to be going for more generic AAA RPG. I think 3 does a better job, plus the game is just masterful. But, Witcher 1 still has the best flavor. Geralt is hideous, you collect sex cards, the dialogue is weird, the endless fetch quests are mind-numbing, but the themes are so good. And yes, the music is objectively perfect.

Witcher 1 is just great.

Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #69 on: June 28, 2015, 01:08:28 AM »
Witcher 3 is just great. 22 hours in and still not out of Velen. There's so much stuff to do, and while some of it is similar, it's varied enough with contracts and side quests to never get old.

Saddam Hussein

Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #70 on: June 30, 2015, 04:47:19 AM »
Witcher 2 is more fun this time around, partly because I now know the backstory and who the returning characters are, and partly because it feels much smoother and more playable coming from the first title.  Also, I'm now playing it on the One True Platform, PC, which has made for a marked improvement.  That being said, and while I'm going to keep a more detailed critique for when I've beaten it, I have to complain that the game has included not one, but two (so far) examples of this bullshit.  That just pisses me off.  It feels almost disrespectful in a way; the player uses their skill to win a boss battle, and then the game just handwaves it away and says "nah man you lose anyway."  If a game wants to put the player in a boss fight that they lose, then they shouldn't present it as a regular boss fight that the player has to win to advance the story.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2015, 02:14:51 PM by Saddam Hussein »

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3142
  • cock-a-doodle-doo, darlin'
    • View Profile
Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #71 on: June 30, 2015, 10:45:15 AM »
Remind me which fights used that trope?

Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #72 on: July 03, 2015, 06:53:59 AM »
I don't remember any fights like that.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7064
    • View Profile
Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #73 on: July 03, 2015, 04:58:23 PM »
He might be talking about the fight with the other Kingslayer witcher, where mid-game you have to win a fight against him but you don't actually win. From what I remember though, you don't lose, he just runs away.

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3142
  • cock-a-doodle-doo, darlin'
    • View Profile
Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #74 on: July 03, 2015, 07:03:02 PM »
And also maybe the fight where you choose between Roche and Iorveth. But you don't lose that one either.

Saddam Hussein

Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #75 on: July 03, 2015, 11:45:06 PM »
He might be talking about the fight with the other Kingslayer witcher, where mid-game you have to win a fight against him but you don't actually win. From what I remember though, you don't lose, he just runs away.

That was one of them, but the cutscene shows him stunning Geralt and making a point to spare his life.  Still, at least that's only with his health partly reduced.  There's also a fight with Dethmold near the end of the second chapter (if you sided with Iorveth) that ends with a cutscene of him stunning you with a spell, but in that case, it didn't bug me because I had been focusing on his men, so his hitting me unaware didn't clash too badly with my gameplay.  The fight that really annoyed me, though, was the one where you play as Stennis meeting with Henselt (again, if you sided with Iorveth).  In a curb-stomp battle in my favor, I reduced his health to zero, and all of a sudden, boom, there's a cutscene that shows him kicking my ass.  What?  Why?  It's not like it was even important to the story to have Stennis lose that fight, because then that priest interrupts and the story goes on, etc.  There was literally no need to throw in that extra little touch of undermining the player.

Anyway, now I've beaten it.  Solid game overall, but I have some issues with it, beyond what I just talked about.  The story is a convoluted mess that basically comes down to a bunch of assholes yelling, "I double-crossed you!" "No, I double-crossed you!" "Well, I triple-crossed you!" "I triple-crossed you back!" "I quadruple-crossed all of you!"  And as I said earlier, it feels pretty generic at times, like it was trying to be more of a "typical" fantasy game that just fit in with the crowd rather than its own unique thing, and the quality suffers for it.  For example, I appreciated that while there was an ongoing war in the last game, it largely stayed in the background, simply forming the setting for the central conflict between Geralt and Salamandra.  But here, you're forced to take part and be an active player in all these political shenanigans - why?  Geralt is a witcher, a monster-slayer.  His job is literally to protect people from monsters, no matter who those people are or what they believe.  Isn't that good enough as a basis for a game?  Did we really need another fantasy franchise revolving around epic battles, stirring speeches, and overthrowing tyrannies?
« Last Edit: December 17, 2015, 05:11:23 AM by Saddam Hussein »

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3142
  • cock-a-doodle-doo, darlin'
    • View Profile
Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #76 on: July 04, 2015, 01:38:57 AM »
I told you, it's the worst game of the trilogy.

Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #77 on: July 06, 2015, 08:48:22 AM »
Rooster, how does the lore regarding the Wild Hunt work? Are they just a bunch of alien elves that teleport around the place? Do they bear any relation to the elves in the Witcher? None of their backstory is really explained well.

Saddam Hussein

Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #78 on: July 06, 2015, 04:50:01 PM »
She tells you that you loved a sorceress but won't tell you anything else about it. So she basically takes advantage of Geralt's amnesia to be with him.

No, she doesn't.  In the quest from the first game where Geralt is trying to establish his identity, he notes in his journal that he has vague memories of once loving a sorceress, and wonders if Triss was that sorceress.  Obviously, he's wrong, but Triss certainly doesn't try to trick him into thinking they were ever involved.  And she tells him about his relationship with Yennefer early in the second game.

Rooster, how does the lore regarding the Wild Hunt work? Are they just a bunch of alien elves that teleport around the place? Do they bear any relation to the elves in the Witcher? None of their backstory is really explained well.

Perhaps they're similar to their mythological inspiration:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Hunt
« Last Edit: February 08, 2016, 05:07:10 AM by Saddam Hussein »

*

Offline rooster

  • *
  • Posts: 3142
  • cock-a-doodle-doo, darlin'
    • View Profile
Re: The Witcher Series
« Reply #79 on: July 06, 2015, 05:00:18 PM »
Rooster, how does the lore regarding the Wild Hunt work? Are they just a bunch of alien elves that teleport around the place? Do they bear any relation to the elves in the Witcher? None of their backstory is really explained well.
Not really aliens. There are different spheres/realms. It was during the Conjunction of Spheres that magic, monsters, and humans arrived in the Witcher realm.
Ciri and her elven friend have teleported from a different realm.

So the Hunt is apparently from a different realm and their ability to phase in and out isn't the greatest. Which is why I assume they want Ciri's power.

Here's the game lore on it:
Quote
According to tradition and eye witness accounts, the Wild Hunt abducts people, forcing them to join its mad gallopade on the sky. It's harvest is especially rich just before or during a great war, like a few years ago in Novigrad, when over twenty people went missing without a trace after the Wild Hunt passed. Some of the abductees managed to escape the cavalcade back into the world of the living, but the stories they told were so extraordinary that they were always considered insane.

Stories of the Wild Hunt do not appear in the dwarven and elven cultures. It is quite interesting, for the Elder Races must have faced the Hunt long before humans did. As it seems, the dwarves ignore everything on mutual terms, while the elves are mysteriously silent on that subject.

Sorceress Yennefer of Vengerberg was abducted by the Wild Hunt, just like witcher Geralt of Rivia. Her fate remains unknown, though she certainly did not join the host of wraith horsemen, unlike her lover who was one of the Hunt's riders for some time. The motivation of the gallopades leader, the King of the Hunt, remains, as always, unknown.

According to the Nordlings, the Wild Hunt is a procession, or rather a cavalcade of skeletal horsemen. They rush across the sky on the bony remains of steeds. Clad in rusty remnants of armor, they wear jagged swords at their waists. Like comets, the Wild Hunt is an omen of war, which has been confirmed beyond all doubt. The spectral cavalcade ventures out in search of victims every several years, but its harvest was never as rich as just before the last war with Nilfgaard, when over twenty souls went missing in Novigrad alone after the Hunt passed through. Curiously, elven and dwarven legends make not the slightest mention of the Wild Hunt.

One of the insane asylum's patients claimed to have been abducted by the Wild Hunt and taken to a world where unicorns saunter about lush elven gardens. When he finally succeeded in escaping the Hunt's grasp, he returned to this world only to find that his children had aged and died, so many years had passed...

According to the notes of a sorcerer, who spent his entire life studying the phenomenon of the Hunt, there is a mysterious power behind the wraith host's incursions into the world.

Philippa Eilhart also has a theory about the origin, motivation and essence of the Wild Hunt. It is a surprisingly shallow theory for such a learned woman and not worthy of mention next to such illustrious deductions as the ones above.

Síle de Tansarville showed absolutely no interest in the spectral riders of the Hunt. This was puzzling to say the least given her reputation as a very learned sorceress.

There are more opinions about the Wild Hunt than there are stars in the sky. Some claim the Hunt is a retinue of the specters of knights who perished in various worlds. Others think the phantoms were created by a powerful force that sends them out into different worlds in search of slaves.

Astronomical observation can be used to calculate the frequency of the Wild Hunt's appearances. This seems to confirm the hypothesis that the spectral riders come from another world.

Mages remained silent about the Hunt, as if beset by a hoard of tongue-hungry cats. This silence from so many learned minds was as telling as words, but you'll not learn any more on this subject from me within this tale.

The poem "The Song of the Hunt" is a book as rare as hen's teeth, and a pile of rubbish about the Hunt at the same time. Experts on the subject are willing to kill for that item, but fortunately there are not many of them. The multilayered narration sends the reader into the world of the author's rich imagination where each verse equals another interpretation. Truth mingles with fantasy in that work, but there's nothing of interest there for one researching the Hunt.

No poem can remain vague when interpreted by a consummate poet. Master Dandelion thinks that "The Song of the Hunt" symbolically describes how the cavalcade enters our reality from another one. It means that the wraiths of the Hunt are the inhabitants of another world, not necessarily the world of shades, who use the primordial magic of chaos and entropy. The poem, however, fails to explains the reasons they might have for such journeys.

Aramil, an elf from a parallel world, was pursued by the spectral riders

No, she doesn't.  In the quest from the first game where Geralt is trying to establish his identity, he notes in his journal that he has vague memories of once loving a sorceress, and wonders if Triss was that sorceress.  Obviously, he's wrong, but Triss certainly doesn't try to trick him into thinking they were ever involved.  And she tells him about his relationship with Yennefer early in the second game.
But wasn't Triss the one who told him he was in love with a sorceress? Even if she wasn't, he at least says as much to her but she doesn't confirm who it was. She absolutely takes advantage of the situation - I never said tricked, but she is misleading. Also, she tells you the rose of remembrance will bring back memories, but it's what Philippa uses to enslave Saskia's mind.. sooo..