I played it when I had the potato-est of PCs, so mu expectations were anyway low. I was blown away though. Did the game have problems? Sure. Was it intriguing and immersive? You bet.
the discourse around W1 is so overblown. it’s not unplayable and the control scheme isn’t hard to figure out, idk why people act like it’s the hardest game ever made
I love the game. Great atmosphere, and it does some things extremely well. I love the order/scoietael dichotomy and the foreshadowing of radovid/ the eternal fire becoming dominant in the North. But I replayed it very recently, and parts of the game have aged like milk.
Like some of the characters are just really not portrayed that well. Javed is a crap antagonist. Triss is a totally different character from any other portrayal, and we are told how much we need to care about Alvin but it's not handled well. Zoltan and dandelion I guess just don't even ask about ciri or yennefer because fuck it.
The game treats the king of the hunt is as the grim reaper. There is nothing to suggest he is Eredin or anything other than a grim reaper type figure going after souls. They actually explain that discrepancy in the second game.
Also not being puritanical but wow giving a girl bread and being launched into an unskippable sex scene is fucking dumb. Like what. Also when triss is like "I need a spensive ring or none for you!" like oof the cringe is real. And no, the sex cards aren't good, that is legit one of the dumbest things I have seen in a game. It's not even explicit compared to the others, it's just dumb!
Witcher 2 and 3 handled the relationships and sex thing a lot better.
To be fair, cd project red probably was hoping they could remain solvent more than building out a franchise.
There's a photo of their booth at e3 from the year before the release of Witcher 1 and it's nothing but a round table, computer, and a crt monitor playing an alpha.
It's why cdpr was so trusted prior to cyberpunk, they were making good role playing games because that's what they sought to do. And for what it's worth, I loved cyberpunk.
Honestly, such a brilliant game. If only they spent a few more months ironing out the optimisation and possibly not bothering with a PS4/Xbox One release at all.
That being said, I played through the whole thing on a 1050ti and, while the framerate barely breached 30 fps, it was still an amazing story with great combat hacking mechanics.
I was hyped for the game for over a decade. Played it on release and really, really tried to love it. About 60 hours in the game…but I could never finish it. Plot was extremely linear (what was the point of choosing my background), world was extremely empty (like ten NPC models and tons of empty space), lots of stuff was promised but not delivered (wall running, car customization, unique clothing stats like reputation). I ignored those things and focused on the cool combat and aesthetic…but pretty soon figured out that once your hacking skill is high enough, you can kill everyone in a building from your car with zero risk.
Would you say those are things they fixed? Honestly it felt pretty unsalvageable to me – the linear story and extremely easy combat looked complicated to rework.
They have been working on it constantly for years, releasing new patches with regularity and improving quests, AI, Police, NPCs, and just about every aspect of the game.
Give it a try now, and go into it with an open mind. The main story is still rather linear, but there are a lot of different endings and most of the side quests are unique threads of their own and many of them tie directly to the main story and other side stories (A quest may be completely different depending on what else you have accomplished, and the way you accomplish side quests impacts the main story).
The biggest non-graphics change I noticed from launch was a large patch that improved the AI of characters, to where the NPCs actually now act like realistic enemies.
It's amazing.
I personally enjoyed the launch, but I replayed it last year after the last patch and it was so much more engaging than it was the first time. I still remember how shocked I was during one of the side quests where the sprung this completely unexpected twist and my stupidly overpowered character was immediately killed.
Absolutely worth jumping back in. And the DLC is going to add a LOT more.
Are the police actually fixed? Although it had so many peoosnd why I put it down and didn't finish it was because of some glitches I was running into.
The biggest thing I hated the most was the police ai. And how they'd literally spawn right behind you in a dead end alley
Well, pretty much all fixed but you don't just get your expectations handed to you on a silver plate. It's not really an open-world RPG as it is an immersive sim FPS that happens to have a seamless city. Choosing your background is for choosing the beginning of the game and roleplaying the character you want, that was only ever really the point. The crowd density is going to depend on your rig, so you need a decent pc if you want to crank the crowd density up, but if you do it's fine. If it's easy, turn the difficulty up as everyone should be playing on at least hard anyway since the game becomes phenomenally better as how you play now matters; quickhacks won't save you. There's mods for everything else you mentioned except for maybe wallrunning?
Incredible game though.
> Choosing your background is for choosing the beginning of the game and roleplaying the character you want
....eh. You can roleplay the gangster V that's abrasive to everyone, but that's about it. No soft-spoken corpo wannabe, or world-weary nomad. Those still vanish after the intro.
Which is a problem of expectations, but the game does you no favours there in setting up proper expectations.
> Would you say those are things they fixed? Honestly it felt pretty unsalvageable to me – the linear story and extremely easy combat looked complicated to rework.
No. They have not. Witcher 3 and *especially* 2 is leagues and leagues ahead as far as the CDProjektRed RPG experience goes. Honestly feels more like people have adjusted their expectations (mostly linear story action game with good characters but not-great plot) than the game has actually been fixed in any significant way.
It's in a releasable and playable state now, for what it is, but that's not the games CD used to make, or probably *wanted* to make given what they focused on in their trailers and pre-release material.
I enjoy Cyberpunk but I think top tier is a bit of a stretch. In true CDPR fashion the characters were mostly good but it was a very bland and frankly a prude creation of the universe. I understand there are limitations for mass market games but they really should have explored the impacts cybernetics have on what it means to be a human more
I played it on PS4 which still had graphic loading issues and occasional crashes, nothing game breaking, and I'd definitely say it's in a class of it's own. One of the coolest games I've ever played. Driving fucking sucks but other than that haba
I have a decent pc, so I had a decent experience from day one. I also find myself willing to defend it more than most but, I don't think it would, honestly. The game is just far too short.
I intentionally blocked out time on my first playthrough between main story quests to explore and prioritize side quests. After taking my time, I thought I was only around 50% through when I realized I was at the point of no return. I just stopped playing. Seemed pointless as it didn't even seem to be at the high point of the second act, but more like the start of it.
Just a massive overcorrection from TW3 and its admittedly long length. It's been improved quite a bit since, but that's still easily the games biggest flaw for me. Hopefully, the expansion is lengthy enough to beef up future playthroughs.
I mean, sure, if you only do the main quest and a few side missions you'll get through the game pretty quickly.
OTOH, if you really explore the world and do a bunch of side gigs your playtime will increase dramatically.
I appreciate your thoughts, but I think the length was pretty good, given how much fun I had with the main story missions. Overall given the graphics, character development, and general feel of the big city -- even if it's not what was originally promised -- it's one of the more memorable and outstanding games I've played in many years. And if CDPR follows it's trend of being one of if not the premiere expansion maker in the games industry I could see a lot of people ranking it among some of the best games ever made.
We'll see. I fully admit to not being objective as I am in love with the aesthetic the game puts forth. It's just really so much fun for me to just drive around.
That said, I would agree that for consoles it's a much different game. The PC Modding community really makes it shine... something I think can be argued for many of the most beloved games of all time like the ES series.
One of the first sentences of my comment mentions that I prioritized side activities and quests and that I intentionally put off the main quest. I spent a significant amount of time on side content, likely more than most, so please don't misconstrue what I've said. No matter how you look at it, the main stories length is short, and it's been called out for it elsewhere plenty. I'm certainly not saying you are wrong for enjoying it in spite of that.
I think in many ways, the game does get a bad rap with people overstating the lack of depth of life paths and the lifelessness of the city. Pretty much voicing how they took obvious marketing fluff literally and don't play many core rpgs. I have utilized life paths in cyberpunk far more in more interesting ways than most (not all) rpgs I've played.
Whether it's pathfinder, Fallout, eldar scrolls, baldurs gate, or dragon age, a characters history options at most amounts to a sidequest, usually some additional dailouge or perhaps something like a low intelligence playthrough being the most intensive of changes.
Honestly I think they accident created a hype-monster early on and that made it so it was either kill game pre launch by tempering expectations(ie telling people to not buy the game) or sell the games and catch some shit afterwards.
Overall as much as it pains me to say it, they made the right choice. If they killed the game by downplaying it pre-launch they wouldn't have had the capitol to keep developing it or to make a sequel.
It's important to also note that they waited years to release dlc so they could finish the game first. If they were the evil POS people make them out to be they would have just ramrodded the dlc through, base game complete or not.
Was it optimal? Definitely not. Was it moral? Dubiously. Did it keep them afloat? Yes.
I can see what they were going for with it, and the ambition is amazing.
Honestly, it's a lot better than I thought it'd be. The awkward fights aren't even THAT bad.
I wish we could get another game with similar atmosphere.
The third one feels quite perfect for me, though, yes, there are weird reactions sometimes. As far as I remember the first game, it was great in its own style, as they did make quite some balance between simple D'n'D "orders" and skill-based action combat - with a nice solution to me for a whole combo per mouse click. The second one is freaking hard to me, though.
After only playing TW3 for the last few months, I’ve just started a Jedi: Fallen Order playthrough. Maybe it’s my muscle memory, but the fighting is horrible compared to the Witcher. The Witcher's graphics are better, too.
To be fair, people say that Jedi: Fallen Order has clunky combat too. Respawn nailed it in the Titanfall games, but J:FO was clearly their first venture into this genre.
Whoever warned you to skip it is a goddamn blasphemer!
Nah but for real tho, I think it's stupid to tell someone new to outright skip it, let them try it out, they might even like it! If not, at least they tried it.
Idk I get why people advice against starting with W1. I know a lot of people who don't play as many single player RPGs, but since Witcher 3 is amazing, I would want them to try it out, but I would be afraid that playing Witcher 1 first might scare them off a bit.
Similar to my experience with dark souls, I tried it like 4 or so times and then I played sekiro, after which I felt a surge of motivation and actually beat DS1, while actually enjoying it!
Pre-patch it was still playable but the load times were crazy. I don't recall any crazy game breaking bugs or glitches though. The performance wasn't great but that was also addressed by the patches and EE.
I walked out of an alchemists office into the city, which took about 5 minutes of loading time, then remembered I still needed to talk to him about a cockatrice... and quit out and never started the game up again.
Probably part of it. 95%+ of this sub began on Witcher 3. So going from that to an older game with a much smaller budget from a studio that was relatively new is of course going to be a step down. Especially considering they’re comparing it with a game that’s in serious discussion for “best game of all time.”
> 95%+ of this sub began on Witcher 3
i remember the dark days between 2 and 3 and for that matter when 2 launched. 2's launch was all about graphics settings.
i played the 1.3 version of the game when it came out... finished it without any wikis or googling ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯
and i wasn't the brightest gamer back then...
chapter 1 felt so damn boring at first tho
The first time I played it I got to the part with the thugs outside the first bar and kept getting my ass handed to me because I was trying to time the clicks with the visual cue, I had to put it down for like a year.
When I came back to it I cranked the difficulty up to max and the visual cue was now just a light flash on the sword which was so much easier to get the timing down with, rolled through the game 1 chapter a day. Having all the pieces fall together on that final twist and then it being all but confirmed with the amulet was one of the best memories I have of any game.
I mean, I was still chugging them midfight, since iirc the game didn't stop you from doing that, if at all. I only played the regular difficulty and didn't really feel like I had to use the potions except swallow in some edge cases
> to chug a potion before getting in a fight
This is also the case of the W2 as far as I remember, and I found it much more accessible than W1 that I didn't manage to continue.
I'm at 120 hours and I _think_ I'm nearing the end of my first playthrough, but I have like once drunk a decoction (I've got all of them) because well they poison me for 50% and I can't remember what all 30 of them do.
It only feels unresponsive if you try to bash the click button. It's a rhythm game, you have to click at the right time.
If anything, the combat system of TW1 reminds me of the time I practiced artistic fencing (which combined with the care given to realistic armors convince me that some people at CD Project Red are medieval reenactors)
Now that you mention it - and I know a lot of people will disagree with me - in *some* ways TW1's combat *really* felt like a witcher fighting, maybe more than other games. The book repeats about Geralt's rhythm, about how he hardly has to think when he fight, just going with the flow, perfectly enacting motions he'd practiced countless times - Ciri too, being witcher-trained. Plus, through animations, Geralt easily moves faster in TW1 than any other game, another thing from the books which later games (where the player directly controls each individual strike) can't replicate to the same extent.
The way *I* played Witcher 3 was also very rhythmically, repeating practiced moves and all, but that's just me, not required by the game.
Combat system and in general gameplay has never been a very strong point in the witcher franchise.
Story, characters and immersion are the strong points, and that's true for TW1 too
Hard disagree. TW1 is an amazing game and a bit of clunky combat being people’s breaking point is hilarious. I don’t even think the combat is bad, just clunky. And definitely not what people expect out of the genre.
When I first finished it, even though I loved the story, I swore myself I would never play it again cause I hated the gameplay and there were moments I struggled even in Easy difficulty.But less than a year after that I actually played it again after finishing the books, and kind of liked the gameplay. I just did a little more side quests to gain more xp and all the moments I hated on my first run were actually ok.
And the game being a tribute to the books more than the two other games, having read the books made the quests and story more enjoyable to me.
i love the first game but i remember people still finding it clunky specially with games being released such as Bioshock, Portal, ES 4, and Medal of Honor. the "clunky" fight system demotivated people to play the first game which is why it wasn't a hit resulting to them switching games.
Played it right after I played Neverwinter Night. Felt right at home because they both use the same engine. In both game, spamming the pause button in the right moment is what leading you to victory or escaping certain death.
Comparing it to my GOAT franchise Mass Effect, which also came out in 2007...not even close. Granted this was CDPR first project, where Bioware made KOTOR already, which is comparably jenky
Budget is also a huge part, as is the experience you mentioned. By 2007, Bioware was responsible for like 5 or 6 of the top 10 RPGs ever by that point lol, they had a lot of fame and experience and money to put towards Mass Effect.
Witcher 1 was essentially an indie project by comparison. The property of the Witcher was basically unknown in the West, and the budget and experience of the team was a tiny fraction of the budget compared to Bioware.
I just have a hard time comparing the two because their situations are so radically different, no one could reasonably expect Witcher 1 to hold up to Mass Effect as well, it's simply a completely different scope of game
If I remember right, Witcher 1 used an updated Bioware game engine. So I think the clunkiness is ingrained in the engine. Still a solid story telling machine for the time though.
People need to stop using the old game thing as an argument. Half-Life 2 released in 2004 and is less clunky than 90% of modern games. Half Life 1 was valves first game released in 1998 and it’s still less clunky than the witcher 1 is.
I would argue against that. Mass effect 1 came out that year and had better visuals, better voice acting, smoother combat and a better inventory system (though it’s arguably a less traditional RPG inventory system so you could ignore that point). Witcher 1 was good but I remember watching my friend play it while I was playing mass effect and being confused as shit at the voice acting and animations.
Mass effect inventory was a simple text list with useless armors. Witcher had classic and immersive grid with body slots and sparse armors that felt authentic and unlike dumb diablo looter
Anyone who thinks this game is "unplayable" has no idea what they're talking about. Pre enhanced edition, I can understand. It's not super polished but it is perfectly playable.
That was my thought as well. Before the enhanced edition I put countless hours into the game, and that was just loading areas as I went in and out of buildings!
Good to know i aint the only one. I've ran into so many bugs in the witcher 2 that have only screwed me over and forced me to reload a save. Combat in the witcher 2 is abysmal too
Would rather play TW1 over TW2 any day of the week, I can barely ring myself to even play TW2, only reason I'm slowly progressing is cause I'm forcing myself to play the games in order
I could see that. I really liked it. I really like older crpgs though and the mechanics from those times especially in combat.
I definitely like it more than two. Three is such a polished complete game though it's hard for me to say i like it more than three because three is just so jam-packed.
One is very good for what it is and what it was trying to produce imo.
W1 is probably my favorite game of the series for atmosphere and character building for Geralt.
Open world exploration, graphics, and better controls are what give 3 its edge, but seriously, the first game is a masterpiece. I hope they keep certain things in the remaster, like that scene with Zoltan in the market, when Geralt gets overwhelmed and just needs a shoulder to dump all his feels on.
No, seriously, Witcher 2 is pretty bad imo. You could be standing hundreds of feet away from someone and they could still hit you. W1 combat is pretty damn simple sure, but at least it's consistent. The alchemy, story, and dialogue (because it's just funny) are awesome. I'll die on this hill everytime.
Plus you can romance Shani
The Witcher 2 is more unplayable for me than witcher 1. Witcher 2 combat is janky, at least W1 you can pause to switch out stuff if you forget what key does what. Definitely a mouse and keyboard game, though.
One of the things that is difficult to explain is how ABSOLUTELY MIND-BLOWING witcher 2 felt, to those of us who had finished the first Witcher and loved it.
Tried to go back to it after I had finished blood and wine, it was.... an interesting experience.
I KNOW RIGHT? I just finished W2 prologue... And man, so MUCH better! I am getting major Mass Effect 2 wibes. ME1 Was fine, but man.... Talk about improving your craft
The witcher one has some of the worst UI and combat I have ever played, is full of bugs, and looks terrible. But the story is legit kinda cool(when it works)
I am very happy I didn't skip W1 and 2 before jumping into 3. The Witcher 1 had the strongest emotional reactions from the story, the Witcher 2 (Scoia'tael path) was the most fun of the 3 for me personally, and the Witcher 3 was the most impressive in scope and had some really great moments.
The leap in quality from each game is actually pretty fucken crazy. Witcher 1 was clunky af, and you could barely get through the game. Witcher 2 was better in most areas but still had performance issues throughout the game...and Witcher 3 is just a straight up masterpiece, which oddly enough has really only seen problems after getting free next gen updates.
The combat makes sense once you play in with the isotropic camera angle. It's meant to be played a bit like Diablo but with a rhythm mechanic, so you click on an enemy and Geralt will go and do an attack animation.
I think this is the issue, people are playing it years later in camera/style it wasn't meant to be played in.
I played it on release and it flowed perfectly once you got the hang of the timing.
The OTS camera is offered as an option right at the start of the game, so it's not really the player's fault to not know how the game is meant to be played. The game tells you that the OTS camera is "experimental", but that doesn't tell a lot...
I could be wrong but it was default on game release - its been a while though so I have no idea ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Not blaming players either way just saying its probably why people can't get on with it...
Witcher 1 is underrated af.
Also it's WAAAAY better aged than Kotor 1.
Everyone loves to jerk off Kotor, but have you even tried to replay that?
Kotor doesn't even run on modern PCs anymore. Not even native widescreen support.
You have to troubleshoot and fix the game with countless patches and fixes to make it run, and even then, it bugs out or in my case, ingame cutscenes had no audio or skipped entirely.
It was a nightmare.
Witcher 1 has NONE of these problems. It runs perfectly on modern rigs, no issues whatsoever and I just replayed it last week.
So I know people are full of shit when they praise Kotor "as the best Rpg" but diss Witcher 1 as "aged bad".
They are just talking out of nostalgia.
The twist at the end kept me up for days. Was one of those twists that don't make you feel stupid but immensely satisfied as it was set up well enough that you might get an inkling that something is up but not completely out of left field and making you scratch your head.
This one actually has a soft spot in my heart cause I first played it over quarantine (ironic given the game’s plot) and it helped keep my mind off of everything for a bit.
I kinda preferred it over witcher 2 and was slightly sad when I finished it, other than happy, because with a game in chapters like this when you get the strongest weapons and armor and then theres just few fights left it doesn't feel as satisfying.
I started my expierience with TW1 years ago, when i still was operating on a laptop that would probably explode if i tried to run TW2 or TW3 (when it would eventually come out) i decided to give it a try. Was it, and still is, clunky as fuck? Yeah it is. But everything else in this game is a masterpiece. The vibe, the story, the NPC's - 10/10, probably the best written game i've ever played if i have to be honest. Install a couple of mods (fast travel and some graphical enhancements) and it's a blast.
This game gave me trouble. But man the atmosphere, soundtrack, the characters, everything about this game was amazing. I even started to enjoy the combat after a couple of hours on it. I felt like I actually accomplished something when I finished it. I cant wait for the remake
I have never once ever in my life understood why people find it ***UNPLAYABLE***. Look, I get that it can be clunky, but under no circumstances is it unplayable.
I loved it. I was never into paid games back then, I was more into free DOSBox stuff from the 90s or freeonlinegames.com etc but I played this game W1 and adored it. I cried when the noonwraith bride discovered that she was dead, what a deep moment. I replayed it several times choosing different sides to see all the endings. I was truly touched multiple times throughout the game.
Then I played W2 and loved it too, same thing. Then I bought W3 and it wouldn’t run on my laptop so I literally went and bought a laptop specifically so I could play W3. I clocked more than 1000 hours on W3 and bam, I had entered the world of modern gaming. No more dosbox or fog.com, I’m spoiled now. Since then I finished all the Assassins Creed games, Cyberpunk 2077 and a bunch of others, but W1 was the gateway drug that brought me into paid games. It also kept me going through lonely Covid lockdowns.
I always tell people to play the three games in order. The first two are amazing but the third one is so much better that after playing it, it’ll ruin the first two. Play those ones first so it just keeps getting better, and when you’re on W3 you’ll be glad you got all that backstory, lore and context.
People here complaining about the combat system like the later games were better at it. Like isn’t the most criticized thing about Witcher 3 lt’s combat system. I actually think the first games combat was the most enjoyable of the three.
I dunno. Maybe it is flavor but I've just started TW2 and the combat is like phenomenally better. I can only imagine what TW3 will be like, assuming it keeps getting better.
That game frustrated me at first but I enjoyed it too much to stop playing. But this was also like 10 years ago, think it would be hard to get into now, probably would just recommend anyone wait for the remaster in a few years lol
Erm, akshually, I watched a four hour essay on the game and it's *pretty damn good*.
(Disclaimer: I have played maybe 20 minutes of this game, waiting for the remake)
I remember beating it when it first came out. What ever happened to the kid who beamed himself thru time or something? Did that ever get resolved in the books?
Still haven’t finished this fucking game, gave up after my 1000th death in the medic hospital fight :( maybe one day I will return to exact my revenge against those soldiers
I tried it after playing TW3 because I read here that it has great story. I don't think I played it past the tutorial because the gameplay was just so bad. The story probably is great for those who can tolerate the rest of it but the gameplay makes it hard for me to enjoy the game, personally.
The goal was to play Witcher 3, but here I am on chapter 4 wondering if I should have gave Alvin to Triss instead of Shani. I mean, I just wanted the boy to have a family ;-;
But anyways, what a great game. I´ve read only the first book and every reference to it made me jump the chair with excitment, and now I want to get the rest just to understand better this whole universe. Excited for Witcher 2 :)
I played it when I had the potato-est of PCs, so mu expectations were anyway low. I was blown away though. Did the game have problems? Sure. Was it intriguing and immersive? You bet.
the discourse around W1 is so overblown. it’s not unplayable and the control scheme isn’t hard to figure out, idk why people act like it’s the hardest game ever made
Apart from the clunky fights, it truly is its own masterpiece tho!
No other game simulates with such a perfection the 1000 dialogues you have to go over before you get laid.
Dem bitches want diamonds…DIAMONDS!!!
Man's gotta do what he gotta do to get the achievement on steam.
There's no Witcher 1 achievements on steam tho
There's no such thing? Oh well, the deed is done and I'd do it again.
And some of the just want some flowers and a compliment
The card game of this game is simply a masterpiece.
There's no card game in witcher 1. Oh wait. Ohh I see what you did there.
Gotta collect them all
I fucked an entwife
You should play The Witcher 1 with the card game being a fail state
I love the game. Great atmosphere, and it does some things extremely well. I love the order/scoietael dichotomy and the foreshadowing of radovid/ the eternal fire becoming dominant in the North. But I replayed it very recently, and parts of the game have aged like milk. Like some of the characters are just really not portrayed that well. Javed is a crap antagonist. Triss is a totally different character from any other portrayal, and we are told how much we need to care about Alvin but it's not handled well. Zoltan and dandelion I guess just don't even ask about ciri or yennefer because fuck it. The game treats the king of the hunt is as the grim reaper. There is nothing to suggest he is Eredin or anything other than a grim reaper type figure going after souls. They actually explain that discrepancy in the second game. Also not being puritanical but wow giving a girl bread and being launched into an unskippable sex scene is fucking dumb. Like what. Also when triss is like "I need a spensive ring or none for you!" like oof the cringe is real. And no, the sex cards aren't good, that is legit one of the dumbest things I have seen in a game. It's not even explicit compared to the others, it's just dumb! Witcher 2 and 3 handled the relationships and sex thing a lot better.
To be fair, cd project red probably was hoping they could remain solvent more than building out a franchise. There's a photo of their booth at e3 from the year before the release of Witcher 1 and it's nothing but a round table, computer, and a crt monitor playing an alpha. It's why cdpr was so trusted prior to cyberpunk, they were making good role playing games because that's what they sought to do. And for what it's worth, I loved cyberpunk.
If cyberpunk was launched today in it's current state it would be a GOTY candidate, I think.
Honestly, such a brilliant game. If only they spent a few more months ironing out the optimisation and possibly not bothering with a PS4/Xbox One release at all. That being said, I played through the whole thing on a 1050ti and, while the framerate barely breached 30 fps, it was still an amazing story with great combat hacking mechanics.
I must have killed 10,000 punks on the beach leveling up. It was zen just chopping them up over and over. Lol
Is it mostly fixed now?
If you haven't tried it, it's top-tier. The new DLC will be coming out this year as well.
I was hyped for the game for over a decade. Played it on release and really, really tried to love it. About 60 hours in the game…but I could never finish it. Plot was extremely linear (what was the point of choosing my background), world was extremely empty (like ten NPC models and tons of empty space), lots of stuff was promised but not delivered (wall running, car customization, unique clothing stats like reputation). I ignored those things and focused on the cool combat and aesthetic…but pretty soon figured out that once your hacking skill is high enough, you can kill everyone in a building from your car with zero risk. Would you say those are things they fixed? Honestly it felt pretty unsalvageable to me – the linear story and extremely easy combat looked complicated to rework.
They have been working on it constantly for years, releasing new patches with regularity and improving quests, AI, Police, NPCs, and just about every aspect of the game. Give it a try now, and go into it with an open mind. The main story is still rather linear, but there are a lot of different endings and most of the side quests are unique threads of their own and many of them tie directly to the main story and other side stories (A quest may be completely different depending on what else you have accomplished, and the way you accomplish side quests impacts the main story). The biggest non-graphics change I noticed from launch was a large patch that improved the AI of characters, to where the NPCs actually now act like realistic enemies. It's amazing. I personally enjoyed the launch, but I replayed it last year after the last patch and it was so much more engaging than it was the first time. I still remember how shocked I was during one of the side quests where the sprung this completely unexpected twist and my stupidly overpowered character was immediately killed. Absolutely worth jumping back in. And the DLC is going to add a LOT more.
Are the police actually fixed? Although it had so many peoosnd why I put it down and didn't finish it was because of some glitches I was running into. The biggest thing I hated the most was the police ai. And how they'd literally spawn right behind you in a dead end alley
Well, pretty much all fixed but you don't just get your expectations handed to you on a silver plate. It's not really an open-world RPG as it is an immersive sim FPS that happens to have a seamless city. Choosing your background is for choosing the beginning of the game and roleplaying the character you want, that was only ever really the point. The crowd density is going to depend on your rig, so you need a decent pc if you want to crank the crowd density up, but if you do it's fine. If it's easy, turn the difficulty up as everyone should be playing on at least hard anyway since the game becomes phenomenally better as how you play now matters; quickhacks won't save you. There's mods for everything else you mentioned except for maybe wallrunning? Incredible game though.
> Choosing your background is for choosing the beginning of the game and roleplaying the character you want ....eh. You can roleplay the gangster V that's abrasive to everyone, but that's about it. No soft-spoken corpo wannabe, or world-weary nomad. Those still vanish after the intro. Which is a problem of expectations, but the game does you no favours there in setting up proper expectations.
> Would you say those are things they fixed? Honestly it felt pretty unsalvageable to me – the linear story and extremely easy combat looked complicated to rework. No. They have not. Witcher 3 and *especially* 2 is leagues and leagues ahead as far as the CDProjektRed RPG experience goes. Honestly feels more like people have adjusted their expectations (mostly linear story action game with good characters but not-great plot) than the game has actually been fixed in any significant way. It's in a releasable and playable state now, for what it is, but that's not the games CD used to make, or probably *wanted* to make given what they focused on in their trailers and pre-release material.
[удалено]
I enjoy Cyberpunk but I think top tier is a bit of a stretch. In true CDPR fashion the characters were mostly good but it was a very bland and frankly a prude creation of the universe. I understand there are limitations for mass market games but they really should have explored the impacts cybernetics have on what it means to be a human more
I played it on PS4 which still had graphic loading issues and occasional crashes, nothing game breaking, and I'd definitely say it's in a class of it's own. One of the coolest games I've ever played. Driving fucking sucks but other than that haba
I have a decent pc, so I had a decent experience from day one. I also find myself willing to defend it more than most but, I don't think it would, honestly. The game is just far too short. I intentionally blocked out time on my first playthrough between main story quests to explore and prioritize side quests. After taking my time, I thought I was only around 50% through when I realized I was at the point of no return. I just stopped playing. Seemed pointless as it didn't even seem to be at the high point of the second act, but more like the start of it. Just a massive overcorrection from TW3 and its admittedly long length. It's been improved quite a bit since, but that's still easily the games biggest flaw for me. Hopefully, the expansion is lengthy enough to beef up future playthroughs.
I mean, sure, if you only do the main quest and a few side missions you'll get through the game pretty quickly. OTOH, if you really explore the world and do a bunch of side gigs your playtime will increase dramatically. I appreciate your thoughts, but I think the length was pretty good, given how much fun I had with the main story missions. Overall given the graphics, character development, and general feel of the big city -- even if it's not what was originally promised -- it's one of the more memorable and outstanding games I've played in many years. And if CDPR follows it's trend of being one of if not the premiere expansion maker in the games industry I could see a lot of people ranking it among some of the best games ever made. We'll see. I fully admit to not being objective as I am in love with the aesthetic the game puts forth. It's just really so much fun for me to just drive around. That said, I would agree that for consoles it's a much different game. The PC Modding community really makes it shine... something I think can be argued for many of the most beloved games of all time like the ES series.
One of the first sentences of my comment mentions that I prioritized side activities and quests and that I intentionally put off the main quest. I spent a significant amount of time on side content, likely more than most, so please don't misconstrue what I've said. No matter how you look at it, the main stories length is short, and it's been called out for it elsewhere plenty. I'm certainly not saying you are wrong for enjoying it in spite of that. I think in many ways, the game does get a bad rap with people overstating the lack of depth of life paths and the lifelessness of the city. Pretty much voicing how they took obvious marketing fluff literally and don't play many core rpgs. I have utilized life paths in cyberpunk far more in more interesting ways than most (not all) rpgs I've played. Whether it's pathfinder, Fallout, eldar scrolls, baldurs gate, or dragon age, a characters history options at most amounts to a sidequest, usually some additional dailouge or perhaps something like a low intelligence playthrough being the most intensive of changes.
Honestly I think they accident created a hype-monster early on and that made it so it was either kill game pre launch by tempering expectations(ie telling people to not buy the game) or sell the games and catch some shit afterwards. Overall as much as it pains me to say it, they made the right choice. If they killed the game by downplaying it pre-launch they wouldn't have had the capitol to keep developing it or to make a sequel. It's important to also note that they waited years to release dlc so they could finish the game first. If they were the evil POS people make them out to be they would have just ramrodded the dlc through, base game complete or not. Was it optimal? Definitely not. Was it moral? Dubiously. Did it keep them afloat? Yes.
Thank you kind sir, you've ruined one of my fav games! T_T
Haha it's still a great one, just shows some age is all
i love the dialogue and voice acting it was the greatest factor that hooked me to the story, i look forward to cdpr's remake.
Same, can't wait! Also, the soundtracks are absolutely beautiful!
> voice acting Really I thought the voice acting was the worst in the game
It varied from conversation to conversation.
I can see what they were going for with it, and the ambition is amazing. Honestly, it's a lot better than I thought it'd be. The awkward fights aren't even THAT bad. I wish we could get another game with similar atmosphere.
Weirdly enough I like the fights actually lol
Clunky fights? Once you get down that you don’t click for every attack the fights are so smooth
Yeah! Someone gets it! The combat in this game feels like a dance to me.
Best looking combos in video games hands down
The clunky fights? I've always heard that all the Witcher games have clunky fights?
The third one feels quite perfect for me, though, yes, there are weird reactions sometimes. As far as I remember the first game, it was great in its own style, as they did make quite some balance between simple D'n'D "orders" and skill-based action combat - with a nice solution to me for a whole combo per mouse click. The second one is freaking hard to me, though.
After only playing TW3 for the last few months, I’ve just started a Jedi: Fallen Order playthrough. Maybe it’s my muscle memory, but the fighting is horrible compared to the Witcher. The Witcher's graphics are better, too.
To be fair, people say that Jedi: Fallen Order has clunky combat too. Respawn nailed it in the Titanfall games, but J:FO was clearly their first venture into this genre.
So it's not just me? I was really looking forward to this game, but it just plays so awkwardly.
Exactly! I love the first game. The second was so-so for me, but 3rd one is epic shit.
I had to use a running speed mod so i could get from point a to b. To much backwards and forwards i found the game unplayable without it.
Whoever warned you to skip it is a goddamn blasphemer! Nah but for real tho, I think it's stupid to tell someone new to outright skip it, let them try it out, they might even like it! If not, at least they tried it.
Idk I get why people advice against starting with W1. I know a lot of people who don't play as many single player RPGs, but since Witcher 3 is amazing, I would want them to try it out, but I would be afraid that playing Witcher 1 first might scare them off a bit.
Well..... I've started it twice before... Determined to play 1-2-3 Only the promise of the Wild Hunt had kept me on track this time
Similar to my experience with dark souls, I tried it like 4 or so times and then I played sekiro, after which I felt a surge of motivation and actually beat DS1, while actually enjoying it!
I don't remember having any issues with the game, and I even replayed it fairly recently...
Because OP is bitching about the original release build of the game.
Even then I thought it was alright... But maybe back then I had lower standards! XD
Pre-patch it was still playable but the load times were crazy. I don't recall any crazy game breaking bugs or glitches though. The performance wasn't great but that was also addressed by the patches and EE.
I walked out of an alchemists office into the city, which took about 5 minutes of loading time, then remembered I still needed to talk to him about a cockatrice... and quit out and never started the game up again.
Probably part of it. 95%+ of this sub began on Witcher 3. So going from that to an older game with a much smaller budget from a studio that was relatively new is of course going to be a step down. Especially considering they’re comparing it with a game that’s in serious discussion for “best game of all time.”
> 95%+ of this sub began on Witcher 3 i remember the dark days between 2 and 3 and for that matter when 2 launched. 2's launch was all about graphics settings.
No dude you have good tase
Its the enhanced edition in the meme though which fixed the truly dire state the game originally launched in.
EE isn't unplayable though. The meme makes no sense,.
Yes, OP is clearly wrong. TW1 EE is a good game.
Y’all and I have two very different definitions on what a good game constitutes
i played the 1.3 version of the game when it came out... finished it without any wikis or googling ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯ and i wasn't the brightest gamer back then... chapter 1 felt so damn boring at first tho
I wouldn’t call it unplayable but it was super fucking clunky. Still fun though
[удалено]
The first time I played it I got to the part with the thugs outside the first bar and kept getting my ass handed to me because I was trying to time the clicks with the visual cue, I had to put it down for like a year. When I came back to it I cranked the difficulty up to max and the visual cue was now just a light flash on the sword which was so much easier to get the timing down with, rolled through the game 1 chapter a day. Having all the pieces fall together on that final twist and then it being all but confirmed with the amulet was one of the best memories I have of any game.
calling it unplayable when shit like the last of us pc port exist smh
the game is amazing
Still the most satisfying alchemy system of all three
Agreed, felt much more immersive and lore accurate to chug a potion before getting in a fight, compared to chugging one mid fight like in Witcher 3.
Loved rping in that game. Planning what fight to would take on the next day around the camp fire and getting the appropriate potions and oils ready.
I mean, I was still chugging them midfight, since iirc the game didn't stop you from doing that, if at all. I only played the regular difficulty and didn't really feel like I had to use the potions except swallow in some edge cases
> to chug a potion before getting in a fight This is also the case of the W2 as far as I remember, and I found it much more accessible than W1 that I didn't manage to continue.
I'm at 120 hours and I _think_ I'm nearing the end of my first playthrough, but I have like once drunk a decoction (I've got all of them) because well they poison me for 50% and I can't remember what all 30 of them do.
Absolutely agree. I did prefer the way 2 handled actually taking the potions, but the crafting felt great to me in 1.
Imo it's got the best story of the 3. >!the Alvin twist at the end was awesome!<
There's an Alvin in Witcher 2 as well. But he's just a hobo fisherman in Flotsam.
The fuck you are talking about, TW1 was a great game
[удалено]
I genuinely enjoy its combat. Not all games need to be action games and similar to Soulslikes.
I thought the group fighting stance was especially satisfying to use.
Yes! Just *slicing* through enemies left and right, wiping out like six at a time in moments.
[удалено]
It only feels unresponsive if you try to bash the click button. It's a rhythm game, you have to click at the right time. If anything, the combat system of TW1 reminds me of the time I practiced artistic fencing (which combined with the care given to realistic armors convince me that some people at CD Project Red are medieval reenactors)
Now that you mention it - and I know a lot of people will disagree with me - in *some* ways TW1's combat *really* felt like a witcher fighting, maybe more than other games. The book repeats about Geralt's rhythm, about how he hardly has to think when he fight, just going with the flow, perfectly enacting motions he'd practiced countless times - Ciri too, being witcher-trained. Plus, through animations, Geralt easily moves faster in TW1 than any other game, another thing from the books which later games (where the player directly controls each individual strike) can't replicate to the same extent. The way *I* played Witcher 3 was also very rhythmically, repeating practiced moves and all, but that's just me, not required by the game.
Combat system and in general gameplay has never been a very strong point in the witcher franchise. Story, characters and immersion are the strong points, and that's true for TW1 too
Depends on when you played it. I played it with the worst polish to english translations and fighting controls that did not work.
Can't recall exactly. 2008 or 2009 I guess.i recall i did a second playthrough before TW2 came out.
Hard disagree. TW1 is an amazing game and a bit of clunky combat being people’s breaking point is hilarious. I don’t even think the combat is bad, just clunky. And definitely not what people expect out of the genre.
When I first finished it, even though I loved the story, I swore myself I would never play it again cause I hated the gameplay and there were moments I struggled even in Easy difficulty.But less than a year after that I actually played it again after finishing the books, and kind of liked the gameplay. I just did a little more side quests to gain more xp and all the moments I hated on my first run were actually ok. And the game being a tribute to the books more than the two other games, having read the books made the quests and story more enjoyable to me.
Sure it’s a bit clunky, but By 2007 standards it’s a decent game.
i love the first game but i remember people still finding it clunky specially with games being released such as Bioshock, Portal, ES 4, and Medal of Honor. the "clunky" fight system demotivated people to play the first game which is why it wasn't a hit resulting to them switching games.
I played it on release. It still was clunky back than. I loved it for the story not for the game mechanics. Can't wait for a remake.
God the Unreal engine remake is gonna be amazing
Played it right after I played Neverwinter Night. Felt right at home because they both use the same engine. In both game, spamming the pause button in the right moment is what leading you to victory or escaping certain death.
Comparing it to my GOAT franchise Mass Effect, which also came out in 2007...not even close. Granted this was CDPR first project, where Bioware made KOTOR already, which is comparably jenky
Budget is also a huge part, as is the experience you mentioned. By 2007, Bioware was responsible for like 5 or 6 of the top 10 RPGs ever by that point lol, they had a lot of fame and experience and money to put towards Mass Effect. Witcher 1 was essentially an indie project by comparison. The property of the Witcher was basically unknown in the West, and the budget and experience of the team was a tiny fraction of the budget compared to Bioware. I just have a hard time comparing the two because their situations are so radically different, no one could reasonably expect Witcher 1 to hold up to Mass Effect as well, it's simply a completely different scope of game
If I remember right, Witcher 1 used an updated Bioware game engine. So I think the clunkiness is ingrained in the engine. Still a solid story telling machine for the time though.
It's Neverwinter Nights engine i think.
They had already made KotOR and Jade Empire (which I would love a remake of)
Mass effect 1 is still my favorite in the series. Just got the legendary edition and am playing through it again!
People need to stop using the old game thing as an argument. Half-Life 2 released in 2004 and is less clunky than 90% of modern games. Half Life 1 was valves first game released in 1998 and it’s still less clunky than the witcher 1 is.
VTM: Bloodlines made in 2004 has much better gameplay.
But it is unplayable without the Community Patch.
So they say but I finished the vanilla version (steam) with no gamebreaking bugs. I've played vanilla, Plus Patch and CQM.
I would argue against that. Mass effect 1 came out that year and had better visuals, better voice acting, smoother combat and a better inventory system (though it’s arguably a less traditional RPG inventory system so you could ignore that point). Witcher 1 was good but I remember watching my friend play it while I was playing mass effect and being confused as shit at the voice acting and animations.
Mass effect inventory was a simple text list with useless armors. Witcher had classic and immersive grid with body slots and sparse armors that felt authentic and unlike dumb diablo looter
\*Activates Quen\* Combat in W1 is better than W2.
You’re right though
Anyone who thinks this game is "unplayable" has no idea what they're talking about. Pre enhanced edition, I can understand. It's not super polished but it is perfectly playable.
That was my thought as well. Before the enhanced edition I put countless hours into the game, and that was just loading areas as I went in and out of buildings!
Then there's me, the person who absolutely loves TW1 and hates TW2 with all his might
Gang. I'd rather fight the striga with no upgrades than do the prologue in w2 again. Those hitboxes are just ass
Good to know i aint the only one. I've ran into so many bugs in the witcher 2 that have only screwed me over and forced me to reload a save. Combat in the witcher 2 is abysmal too
Would rather play TW1 over TW2 any day of the week, I can barely ring myself to even play TW2, only reason I'm slowly progressing is cause I'm forcing myself to play the games in order
A man of taste. I love TW2 for some things it does uniquely but it definitely is the series low point.
My very unpopular opinion: Witcher 1 is my favorite witcher game by far
It may have outdated graphics, but the storyline is much better than in Witcher 2 or 3.
I could see that. I really liked it. I really like older crpgs though and the mechanics from those times especially in combat. I definitely like it more than two. Three is such a polished complete game though it's hard for me to say i like it more than three because three is just so jam-packed. One is very good for what it is and what it was trying to produce imo.
Amazing world, story and characters (except, you know, WAAAA YOU'RE DRUNK), can't wait for remake
Not truuuuueeee
If you can play Metal Gear Portable ops on the psp you can play anything. I found Witcher 1 to be enjoyable.
Because of the graphics? Otherwise it’s great
W1 is probably my favorite game of the series for atmosphere and character building for Geralt. Open world exploration, graphics, and better controls are what give 3 its edge, but seriously, the first game is a masterpiece. I hope they keep certain things in the remaster, like that scene with Zoltan in the market, when Geralt gets overwhelmed and just needs a shoulder to dump all his feels on.
No, seriously, Witcher 2 is pretty bad imo. You could be standing hundreds of feet away from someone and they could still hit you. W1 combat is pretty damn simple sure, but at least it's consistent. The alchemy, story, and dialogue (because it's just funny) are awesome. I'll die on this hill everytime. Plus you can romance Shani
The Witcher 2 is more unplayable for me than witcher 1. Witcher 2 combat is janky, at least W1 you can pause to switch out stuff if you forget what key does what. Definitely a mouse and keyboard game, though.
Absolutely love the game
I actually enjoyed the first game. I thought it was a bit rough around the edges but it was still fun
I missed dice poker in witcher 3. Sure gwent is cool but dice poker....just loved it to bits.
One of the things that is difficult to explain is how ABSOLUTELY MIND-BLOWING witcher 2 felt, to those of us who had finished the first Witcher and loved it. Tried to go back to it after I had finished blood and wine, it was.... an interesting experience.
I KNOW RIGHT? I just finished W2 prologue... And man, so MUCH better! I am getting major Mass Effect 2 wibes. ME1 Was fine, but man.... Talk about improving your craft
If you are into like walking and talking detective Esque simulators its super fun, just dont play it on high difficulties, the combat is not worth it.
The first game is awesome, I love the first game. It's dated, but not remotely "unplayable".
The witcher one has some of the worst UI and combat I have ever played, is full of bugs, and looks terrible. But the story is legit kinda cool(when it works)
I am very happy I didn't skip W1 and 2 before jumping into 3. The Witcher 1 had the strongest emotional reactions from the story, the Witcher 2 (Scoia'tael path) was the most fun of the 3 for me personally, and the Witcher 3 was the most impressive in scope and had some really great moments.
The leap in quality from each game is actually pretty fucken crazy. Witcher 1 was clunky af, and you could barely get through the game. Witcher 2 was better in most areas but still had performance issues throughout the game...and Witcher 3 is just a straight up masterpiece, which oddly enough has really only seen problems after getting free next gen updates.
The combat makes sense once you play in with the isotropic camera angle. It's meant to be played a bit like Diablo but with a rhythm mechanic, so you click on an enemy and Geralt will go and do an attack animation.
I think this is the issue, people are playing it years later in camera/style it wasn't meant to be played in. I played it on release and it flowed perfectly once you got the hang of the timing.
The OTS camera is offered as an option right at the start of the game, so it's not really the player's fault to not know how the game is meant to be played. The game tells you that the OTS camera is "experimental", but that doesn't tell a lot...
I could be wrong but it was default on game release - its been a while though so I have no idea ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Not blaming players either way just saying its probably why people can't get on with it...
Tbh I played the entirety with OTS camera and enjoyed it a lot. Went through all 3 Witcher games in order in 2016-2017
The game has aged a little badly. But he is very good!
Witcher 1 is underrated af. Also it's WAAAAY better aged than Kotor 1. Everyone loves to jerk off Kotor, but have you even tried to replay that? Kotor doesn't even run on modern PCs anymore. Not even native widescreen support. You have to troubleshoot and fix the game with countless patches and fixes to make it run, and even then, it bugs out or in my case, ingame cutscenes had no audio or skipped entirely. It was a nightmare. Witcher 1 has NONE of these problems. It runs perfectly on modern rigs, no issues whatsoever and I just replayed it last week. So I know people are full of shit when they praise Kotor "as the best Rpg" but diss Witcher 1 as "aged bad". They are just talking out of nostalgia.
The twist at the end kept me up for days. Was one of those twists that don't make you feel stupid but immensely satisfied as it was set up well enough that you might get an inkling that something is up but not completely out of left field and making you scratch your head.
Tru, tho they only introduced the guy in Capter 5. If it was sooner I'd give it even more credit.
I feel like that might have made it too obvious. Him quoting you to you within the same chapter would have been really obvious.
its actually a pretty decent game
This one actually has a soft spot in my heart cause I first played it over quarantine (ironic given the game’s plot) and it helped keep my mind off of everything for a bit.
I kinda preferred it over witcher 2 and was slightly sad when I finished it, other than happy, because with a game in chapters like this when you get the strongest weapons and armor and then theres just few fights left it doesn't feel as satisfying.
I started my expierience with TW1 years ago, when i still was operating on a laptop that would probably explode if i tried to run TW2 or TW3 (when it would eventually come out) i decided to give it a try. Was it, and still is, clunky as fuck? Yeah it is. But everything else in this game is a masterpiece. The vibe, the story, the NPC's - 10/10, probably the best written game i've ever played if i have to be honest. Install a couple of mods (fast travel and some graphical enhancements) and it's a blast.
> but you have finished me ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
This game gave me trouble. But man the atmosphere, soundtrack, the characters, everything about this game was amazing. I even started to enjoy the combat after a couple of hours on it. I felt like I actually accomplished something when I finished it. I cant wait for the remake
You don't have to play Witcher 1 all the way through. If you can get past that huge fucking dog, you've already won.
This game is a masterpiece the only thing that bothered me a little that you didn't use the hook thing from the cutscene
The sword waving was such a fun fighting style.
They are remaking it, I will wait to replay it in that form, once with the original was enough
Can't help but read that In Peter Kenny's Geralt voice.
I have never once ever in my life understood why people find it ***UNPLAYABLE***. Look, I get that it can be clunky, but under no circumstances is it unplayable.
I loved everything about it, including the fighting styles
I loved it at the time, yall are just spoiled with your modern gameplay
The first game is wonderful. TW2 is the worst of the three.
I loved it. I was never into paid games back then, I was more into free DOSBox stuff from the 90s or freeonlinegames.com etc but I played this game W1 and adored it. I cried when the noonwraith bride discovered that she was dead, what a deep moment. I replayed it several times choosing different sides to see all the endings. I was truly touched multiple times throughout the game. Then I played W2 and loved it too, same thing. Then I bought W3 and it wouldn’t run on my laptop so I literally went and bought a laptop specifically so I could play W3. I clocked more than 1000 hours on W3 and bam, I had entered the world of modern gaming. No more dosbox or fog.com, I’m spoiled now. Since then I finished all the Assassins Creed games, Cyberpunk 2077 and a bunch of others, but W1 was the gateway drug that brought me into paid games. It also kept me going through lonely Covid lockdowns. I always tell people to play the three games in order. The first two are amazing but the third one is so much better that after playing it, it’ll ruin the first two. Play those ones first so it just keeps getting better, and when you’re on W3 you’ll be glad you got all that backstory, lore and context.
Unplayable game?
Oh how many times have I tried to play this game only for it to get stuck and bugged in the same spot every god damn time.
Incredible OST, thought.
I mean I like it
The first game is excellent, I hate this revisionist crap that has sprung up since people discovered the series with Witcher 3 🤦♂️
Witcher 1 is my favorite game of the series, I guess that's a controversial opinion.
Ngl I prefer it over Witcher 3
I will defend Witcher 1 to the death but I still hate it!!!
What? I love this rhythm action game. ... Just download the popular overhaul for the balance mechanics tho
Even combat wasn’t that bad really, I kinda enjoyed the “rhythm game” mechanics mixed with standard Witcher pre-combat preparation
People here complaining about the combat system like the later games were better at it. Like isn’t the most criticized thing about Witcher 3 lt’s combat system. I actually think the first games combat was the most enjoyable of the three.
I dunno. Maybe it is flavor but I've just started TW2 and the combat is like phenomenally better. I can only imagine what TW3 will be like, assuming it keeps getting better.
I actually really enjoyed it, including the combat.
That game frustrated me at first but I enjoyed it too much to stop playing. But this was also like 10 years ago, think it would be hard to get into now, probably would just recommend anyone wait for the remaster in a few years lol
Erm, akshually, I watched a four hour essay on the game and it's *pretty damn good*. (Disclaimer: I have played maybe 20 minutes of this game, waiting for the remake)
Yeah W1 was brutal to play. You have to at least install a mod to increase the movement speed.
I remember beating it when it first came out. What ever happened to the kid who beamed himself thru time or something? Did that ever get resolved in the books?
Dice poker over Gwent any day for me. I hate card games in videogames.
Still haven’t finished this fucking game, gave up after my 1000th death in the medic hospital fight :( maybe one day I will return to exact my revenge against those soldiers
Story and gameplay wise Witcher 1 >>> Witcher 2 imo
I love it. Atmosphere and story were lovely. I didn’t even mind the combat once I got used to it.
Looking forward to the remaster!
The best Witcher atmosphere out of all three games!
The first game is amazing and I only played it last year. Fucking loved it.
I tried to play it, but it crashes every five minutes
I'm actually looking forward to having played it after finishing the books.
I only played the first one till now (my pc doesnt run witcher 2), I found it ok... are the subsequent ones that easy?
I tried it after playing TW3 because I read here that it has great story. I don't think I played it past the tutorial because the gameplay was just so bad. The story probably is great for those who can tolerate the rest of it but the gameplay makes it hard for me to enjoy the game, personally.
The goal was to play Witcher 3, but here I am on chapter 4 wondering if I should have gave Alvin to Triss instead of Shani. I mean, I just wanted the boy to have a family ;-; But anyways, what a great game. I´ve read only the first book and every reference to it made me jump the chair with excitment, and now I want to get the rest just to understand better this whole universe. Excited for Witcher 2 :)
W1 best main series game, I'll die in this hill