I think TW3's world is far more alive than Skyrim'. Once I walked into Novigrad, it blew my mind how alive that city really is. It was truly breathtaking. Nowhere is Skyrim gave me that feeling that I'm actually in a living, breathing world. The NPC's are also just typical Bethesda, just walking, talking zombies.
Gaming The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
- Thread starter PlayerOne
- Start date
I think TW3's world is far more alive than Skyrim'. Once I walked into Novigrad, it blew my mind how alive that city really is. It was truly breathtaking. Nowhere is Skyrim gave me that feeling that I'm actually in a living, breathing world. The NPC's are also just typical Bethesda, just walking, talking zombies.
I've just got back into this because of Gwent. I just wish I'd started it sooner because I turned down some quests so I won't be able unlock all the cars.
I fully agree. That's one of the reasons I just can't get into Bethesda games. The world is always huge but never immersive.
For me, Skyrim gave you a more sandboxy feel in that you felt you could anything. Heck even your character was more flexible as compared to the third person slightly hard to maneuver and can't get to certain places Geralt. But that is all hugely compensated for by how well put together all the elements in the world of Witcher 3 are, which makes those in Skyrim look sloppy in comparison. The voice acting, narrative, depth of characters, polish, realism etc is all just far superior.
No comparison for me. As a toy to play with Skyrim was better but as an experience/game/gaming experience Witcher 3, easily.
And now I get why this was game of the year everywhere.
Btw, finding it really hard to enjoy watchdogs after this. What an epic step down
Btw, finding it really hard to enjoy watchdogs after this. What an epic step down
Couldn't agree more. Always felt that Bethesda were terrible at making lively game worlds and The Witcher 3's areas blow it away in feeling lively. So I am shocked that people here are saying that Skyrim's game world is more organic. Imo, TW3's game world is how it shuld be done.
And now I get why this was game of the year everywhere.
Btw, finding it really hard to enjoy watchdogs after this. What an epic step down
One of the most boring games I've played in a long time. Banality personified.
I have a weird soft spot for watchdogs for some reason. Not sure why but I quite enjoyed it.
Skyrim's is an actual sandbox with characters that move all over the map. TW3 mostly just has guards and peasants that stand around the same places. If something attacks in Skyrim then people nearby might attack back, in TW3 monsters and people tend to pretty much ignore each other. Animals hunt other animals but that's about it. Unless I've somehow never seen these interactions in hundreds of hours of play.
I'm not saying it's not beautifully designed and gorgeous with some brilliant touches. It's just that it's all surface with TW3, a cave is a cave. In Skyrim a cave can open up into a dwarven structure that opens into an underground cave system that links to another dwarven structure on another part of the map. My point wasn't really comparing the open worlds, more that one is an open world game and the other is a story driven game that happens to have an open world.
I think TW3 is the better game, but if you took the open world out of it then it wouldn't overly miss it. Skyrim is the better open world for me, but it's not as good at anything else really.
Well, like you said, Skyrim is a sandbox open world so there is freedom in what you can do in that world. TW3 places emphasis on the storytelling/narrative so there are restrictions & limitations present by design. However, I completely disagree that the NPCs in TW3 are static because they are not. They have their own routine cycle and you can interact with a lot of them. TW3's world feels a lot more organic compared to Skyrim because Skyrim's world design is dull and the NPCs feel like generic placeholders even if you have more freedom in what you can do with them. The aesthetic & atmosphere of TW3's world are a lot better than Skyrim, and that goes a long way in making the game world feel alive. It also feels more populated and the nature of the quests makes you feel more immersed in the world. Skyrim fails at a lot of that stuff even if it does a great job with the exploration aspect.
IMO, TW3's game world is the benchmark for how it should be done in WRPGs and Skyrim (along with other Bethesda games) is how it shouldn't be done. Those games emphasize free roam exploration and dungeon crawling over TW3's emphasis on narrative, atmosphere and aesthetic. Bethesda's failure in creating immersive, organic gameworlds is a big part of why I can't enjoy their games (along with their crappy writing and combat systems). And WRPGs are my favorite genre, and I have been playing them for a long time so I have a lot to compare it to.
I feel some are overly harsh on Bethesda here, and I say that as a Witcher fanatic. Bethesda have mastered open world exploration like no other developer and there's no reason they should move away from that. Bethesda's games just have a different focus. You can spend hours exploring and looting a single dwarven ruin, smelt all the ore you collected, smith equipment from it and sell it to merchants. Or just wander about the world map, trying to reach far off places where something completely unexpected pops up. All of this without touching a single quest.
The Witcher 3's game world is beautifully designed but in itself not that interesting. It mainly serves as the decor for the drama where characters and narrative take the front seat. In Bethesda games, the world itself is the attraction. There's room enough for both types of games.
The Witcher 3's game world is beautifully designed but in itself not that interesting. It mainly serves as the decor for the drama where characters and narrative take the front seat. In Bethesda games, the world itself is the attraction. There's room enough for both types of games.
I feel exactly the same way. Skyrim was particularly bad for it I thought.
I can't get the hang of it. I changed it to Story Only, and I am still getting my arse kicked. Now I have got to the bit where you are looking for the bird who smells like gooseberries, but it is giving me a location name, not a marker, and the locations are huge
That's a long-ish quest and I don't know where exactly you are now - though you're certainly still in White Orchard. I don't mean to frighten you but that area is tiny, minuscule even, compared to what comes after.
There's always a marker though. You might have to click on the relevant part of the quest in your quest log, instead of just having the marker on the main quest itself, if that makes sense.
What's the location name?
actually it's the little girl who is now a woman. She is in one of 3 places
I reckon I could get in to it, I'm just currently running aimlessly
It sounds like you've gotten past the prologue and are now in Velen?
Just stick with it!
Dodge and roll are your friends (& Quen).
Agree that there's place for both. However I do personally think a highly well crafted universe easily trumps the ability to piss about and do your own thing. I enjoyed that aspect of Skyrim a lot. The fact that you can jump anywhere and the feeling of freedom it gives you was a lot of fun. But Witcher is simply too well made in comparison. For me it strikes the right balance between sandbox and quality characters/stories.
Is this your first time playing a videogame?
W3 blows Skyrim and Fallout 4 away. Bethesda have a lot of catching up to do.
I tried to play through the Witcher DLC but I now struggle to play this game at all because of how much Dark Souls I've played. The movement and combat feels so shit in comparision. Once you get into the Witcher you can't put it down but its hard to get back into after a long time of not playing it
I tried to play through the Witcher DLC but I now struggle to play this game at all because of how much Dark Souls I've played. The movement and combat feels so shit in comparision. Once you get into the Witcher you can't put it down but its hard to get back into after a long time of not playing it
What platform are you playing it on?
The DLC was fantastic though, great writing, quests, and characters. It even re-balanced the difficulty to make it more challenging (if you remember, The Witcher 3 gets much easier as you level up). I understand that Dark Souls combat is much better but TW3 provides something that Dark Souls can't (and vice versa). They're both great at what they do. The reason why I ask about the platform is because TW3 is a much smoother experience on PC if you have a good one. And the movement isn't as much of an issue when performance is smoother and the control options are more flexible. I never played TW3 with a controller but I'd imagine it could feel quite frustrating with one.
It's The Wire of games for me. I wish I could forget I ever played it so I could play it all over again. All 120 hours of it.
Yeah, I can't compare it to Dark/Demon Souls, which is just a unique experience in that it pushes you to think brink of exhaustion and desperation and gives you the ultimate feeling of satisfaction thereafter. So they're extremely different games.
But Witcher 3 just blows every other RPG I've played, away. I've not been a big RPG person growing up, and have only recently started enjoying them, mainly because I can't stand turn-based combat. So I have loved playing games like Fallout 3 and Skyrim or Oblivion, in particular, but Wicher 3 is comfortably better than them all. If DS is considered to be in the same genre, then that and Witcher 3 are in a separate level altogether for me.
Was more a main quest wasn't it? But you're right, fantastic introduction to Velen.
I thought the contracts were superb as well. Just wish there were more of them.
That's really the sign of a great game. Where you enjoy doing pretty much everything. At the heart of it, I loved being Geralt. Loved getting out there, discovering a new pretty location and kicking ass.
I thought that was TLOU?
I can't wait for blood and wine to come out so I can start a NG+ and play through it all again with the expansions.
Ps4.
Yeah I'm sure it will be great once I get into it which I will probably do when the other Dlc is released as well.
The DLC was definitely more difficult. That caretaker fecker and the final boss gave me enough trouble. That horrible frog prince too.
TLOU is probably Mad Men. The new Blood and Wine expansion will be video games answer to season four of The Wire.
Ok got this, Uncharted collection and new Ratchet and Clank (a series I grew up with and will love for the nostalgia) arriving this week. Which one first, taking into account I'm gonna be really busy so won't be able to invest time properly
Definitely one of the others. This game will just suck you in, and it's probably by far the longest.
Aren't DLC's just like 2-3 hour long add-ons to the main game?
Has anyone played the game on the highest difficulty?
The first one, Heart of Stone, was roughly 10 hours of added story content. Potentially more if you were sidetracked in the new areas of the world map. The second DLC, Blood and Wine, will be 20 hours of story content and a sizable new area to explore. These aren't your average DLC's.
No I think the first one is 10 hours and the second 15 hours long. Something like that. It costs £20 so it can't be that short.
Decided to play through some of the first Dlc right now and wtf that frog boss is unstoppable. Back to dark souls for me
Wow, that's fantastic. So you can play a brand new campaign with these two DLC's built in? Doing this on the highest difficulty might be a good idea.
The second is 20 hours long, not 15. It'll be even longer I reckon with how they've peddled the release date further and further back.
So far for the first one, yup. You can pick it up around mid-to-late game (well you can do it when you please but the level caps are ones that you hit about 3/4th's into the game).
It's unknown whether the second is post-main game or not yet, because the region of Toussaint is a long way south and plot-wise it doesn't really add up to have Geralt take a huge detour away when his whole goal is to find Ciri. And bonk Yen a few times
. I wouldn't call it a "brand new campaign", Heart of Stone still pales in comparison to the length of the main storyline. But it is a separate adventure that will keep you occupied for a good amount of time and offers a couple of challenging battles along the way. It's also surprisingly well written, it certainly doesn't feel like superficial DLC story. It takes place on an extension of the regular world map and revisits one of its cities.
Blood and Wine should be a more significant addition and will take place in a completely new area. Again, we shouldn't expect anything near the size of the main game, but that's just because the main game is absurdly huge.