The Witcher 3 vs Dark Souls 3

[drdetroit]

The Witcher 3 vs Dark Souls 3

So just rage quite and deleted DS3 from my computer forever. I just have to rant about what dumb azz shit garbage that game is?! I just can't imagine how anybody can compare the two. Dark Souls 3 is so F-ing stupid, repetitive and boring as hell vs The Witcher 3.

DS3, YOU DIED. That's about it. So frustrating and repetitive, with a goddamn idiot knight that has no stamina nor ability to do anything without running out of vitality (I was level 31 with all my points going towards vitality, vigor, strength and endurance for the most part)...and that camera...what is with that goddamn camera that locks up after killing a goon. Meanwhile I'm getting pummeled by another but the damn camera just stays in one spot just long enough to get you killed.

Not to mention I'm not about to grind my skill level for hours just for more of the same - what a waste of time and money. No story at all. The graphics are so-so. The location is goofy, gloomy and ridiculous. None of the NPC have animated mouth movements when talking to you...and that "YOU DIED" crap which puts you waaay back to the last bonfire. Then you have to kill the same monsters in the same damn spot every time...yeah that's so fun. Nothing is dynamic at all in that crap software. Are the devs just sooo lazy to not include a real story either?

My god, what kind of masochist enjoys that garbage? I almost trashed my machine - that's when I realized that crap just ain't my cup-o-tea.

The Witcher 3 is a work of art. Beautiful landscape, the story is just so well done and the characters are so memorable. I just don't get the comparison everybody makes between the two. Now TW3 is the real deal. Sure, I got a little frustrated with it in Death March, but at least it's nicely balanced and you get some satisfaction after you learn it. Just a wonderful work of art. After losing my mind with DS3, it really made TW3 stand out even more so.

If you're thinking about DS3, I'd think long and hard before dropping $60 on that shitty game. RPG my ass! That is the WORST ever made in my opinion.

Anyhow, I feel a bit better now lol.

Good day,
DrDetroit

 

[finbinoo7]

Can't compare completely different games. Dark souls 3 is an amazing game if you can get over its insane learning curve, I recommend starting with dark souls 1, makes the game easier and more fun imo. Witcher 3 is an open world game which focuses on story and exploration whereas The souls series focuses on its world building and combat. The combat in the witcher is horrible and clunky whereas the souls series combat is fluid and diverse.

---------- Updated at 09:57 AM ----------

oh i almost forgot, git gud casul.

 

[Guest 2364765]

So just rage quite and deleted DS3 from my computer forever. I just have to rant about what dumb azz shit garbage that game is?! I just can't imagine how anybody can compare the two. Dark Souls 3 is so F-ing stupid, repetitive and boring as hell vs The Witcher 3.

They're very different type of games lol.

Dark souls was always more 1v1 action oriented where every enemy has a potential to kill you, whilst all witcher games tend to rely on quantity of enemies rather than their quality (unless it's a boss fight).

Just about everything is different between those games and comparing them serves no purpose really unless you'd set frame of reference as high as the fact they're both 3rd person action rpg games.


With that said, yeah i did not enjoy DS as much as W3. DS3 is merely "acceptable" on PC, mediocre graphics, no mods and poor PVP (especially since it's P2P based).
Nevertheless it can warrant at least one playthrough and even though i can agree it's worse than W3 i wouldn't outright say it's bad.

DS3, YOU DIED. That's about it. So frustrating and repetitive, with a goddamn idiot knight that has no stamina nor ability to do anything without running out of vitality (I was level 31 with all my points going towards vitality, vigor, strength and endurance for the most part)...and that camera...what is with that goddamn camera that locks up after killing a goon. Meanwhile I'm getting pummeled by another but the damn camera just stays in one spot just long enough to get you killed.

I haven't played ALL DS games, however the "YOU DIED" thing is the core of this game, it doesn't give you a handicap when comes to fighting enemies, they can kill you as easily as you can potentially kill them (including cheese tactics).
I can agree with the camera issue, i've been getting it from time to time.

My god, what kind of masochist enjoys that garbage? I almost trashed my machine - that's when I realized that crap just ain't my cup-o-tea.

I can agree it gets boring or outright annoying from time to time, but if you enjoy having an equal playing field against NPCs then it's something you can enjoy from time to time or at the very least through a single playthrough.

The Witcher 3 is a work of art. Beautiful landscape, the story is just so well done and the characters are so memorable. I just don't get the comparison everybody makes between the two. Now TW3 is the real deal. Sure, I got a little frustrated with it in Death March, but at least it's nicely balanced and you get some satisfaction after you learn it. Just a wonderful work of art. After losing my mind with DS3, it really made TW3 stand out even more so.

Yes, and once again because of differences in expectations of target audience. Western players have quite different vision of what builds a good RPG.
Oh and for the record Death March is still too easy, really.

If you're thinking about DS3, I'd think long and hard before dropping $60 on that shitty game. RPG my ass! That is the WORST ever made in my opinion.

Anyhow, I feel a bit better now lol.

Good day,
DrDetroit

Probably, yeah. It's not a game for everyone, but by no means i'd call it shitty. What you have to realize is that it was made for people who have vastly different expectations towards RPGs.

 

[ImprovizoR]

Dark Souls 3 is an incredible game. It's also totally different than The Witcher 3. Different gameplay, different design philosophy, different goals. Everything is different. It's like comparing a racing game with a football game. Just because they're both technically sports games doesn't mean that they should be compared. If you were to ask me which game I prefer, obviously The Witcher 3. But DS3 is not in any way a bad game.

 

[cyseal]

You can't compare DS3 with W3. W3 is heavily story driven RPG while DS3 is based on visual storytelling through architecture, vertical, mazelike level design, gameplay, memorable boss fights. etc

Story is left for the player to piece it together.

These games are quite different from each other, with different game designs and they're uncomparable. Each of them are very interesting to tackle and should be in the repository of true RPG gamer.

Plus, CDProject has left an ode and admiration to Dark souls.
Maybe, Fromsoft will do the same in Ashes of Ariandel.

 

[Pug.]

Never tried a Dark Souls game. The closest experience I've probably had was fighting Iris' Greatest Nightmare on Death March for the first time at the end of Hearts of Stone. That's kind of what I imagine a typical playthrough of DS to be like.

 

[drdetroit]

Good points guys. I was so pissed off last night while trying to get through the path under the Undead Settlement. Man. that game is crazy frustrating. I hate that you have to fight through all the same creatures located in the exact same spot every time you are killed. That part probably got me put off the most...and it's still hard as hell with my knight being unable to sustain attacks and the slow slow slow regeneration of vitality/stamina. Ugh!! Also I had lost like 15k souls which after that I just rage quit and deleted it from my Steam account (but saved my save-game files just in case I want to get angry again in the future).

In any event, the reason I was comparing the two is that I was looking for a similar game to TW3 and DS3 kept coming up. I think it was PC Gamer or some such site that had TW3 rated at like 97% and DS3 rated at 94-95%, and a few other sites that had compared the two. So I figured they were similar in that regard, but like you guys stated (and I found out the hard way) they are about a similar as a Prius compared to a Lamborghini.

Anyhow, thanks for allowing me to rant like crazy and not jumping on me for it. I felt soooo much better after that lol. I might give it another try someday...maybe. But with Mafia III coming out next week, it will be a looong while.

DrDetroit

 

[simonsteele]

I'd say Witcher 3 IS a better game, no doubt, W3 is my favorite game...but Dark Souls is really something too. It's a phenomenal series. Dark Souls 3 may have had some problems, but the adventure of that game in and of itself--wonderful. Loved it. Frustrating? To be sure. But if that is making you mad about Dark Souls...you're kind of missing the point.

This reminds me--I have Bloodbourne on my PS4 and never played it...Dark Souls 3 came out, I never stopped playing the Witcher 3. Wow, what a deal!

 

[drdetroit]

I guess everybody has their own idea of "the RPG", DS3 just ain't in my realm yet, but to be honest, I'm going to give it another go - DLing it again. Something about it is captivating and it calls my name again.

I'm going to go slow, take my time to strengthen my character and hit it later tonight. I'm going to NOT get into a frenzy and rage quit, but learn from my errors. It is a far different animal than TW3, that is certainly clear in my mind.

If anybody here wants to help out, I'm DrDetroit on Steam. Add me and jump in my game (I still don't get how to do that..."invading" is it?). I had someone jump in my game and they were the color red; whatever that means...enemy or what? They didn't attack or anything but watched me get nailed by a couple of warriors with clubs while on the path under the Undead Settlement). Sooo much to learn.

Thanks and good day!
DrDetroit

 

[TouPoutsou]

The first Dark Souls is a masterpiece. No other way to look at it. Sure it had it's problems, and of course it was the worst PC port in the history of gaming, However the atmosphere, the level Design, the WORLD design, paired with the greatest melee combat system in an ARPG to date(surpassed only by the following titles in the series) made it a legendary game that changed gaming forever. And it definetely had a story. It was just that the story/lore was hidden in obsure NPC clues and item description. This new way of story telling was also very interesting at that point.

I feel the same way about The Witcher 2. In my opinion it is a legendary game. It had the greatest visuals/graphics than ANY RPG to date, amazing atmosphere, and a choice and consequence system that was so important that effectively completely changed over 1/3 of the entire game based on your choices, something that to my knowledge had not happened before. Pair that to one of the greatest main quests ever, a very complex political thriller with entirely grey choices, with nothing even remotely semembling a clear good or bad decisions, and you have the materpiece. ALso the combat, despite getting a ton of shit, it was definetely one of the greatest in any WESTERN Action RPG to date, and it was quite hardcore. For me The Witcher 2, in terms of world, quests, dialogues had zero weak spots. The Witcher 3 is one of the greatest games ever created in any genre, but to me personally it will always be inferior to The Witcher 2, because it definetely has weak spots, even in the main quest(some might argue ESPECIALLY in the main quest), and i do not like very much some of it's more mainstream influences.

However, getting back to the original question, even though i think that Dark Souls 2 and Dark Souls 3 are also amazing games, they feel like the same game as the first one, with just improved aspects of the gameplay, and far worse Level/World design and atmosphere, while one cannot praise enough the amount of work that CDPR has put in their sequels. You can see how hard they worked and how many things they changed in their attempt to improve their games from one another(despite if some people including me might prefer an older entry), instead of playing it safe and building entirely upon the previous. In that regard The Witcher 3 to me is vastly superior to Dark Sous 3. The amount of work that has been put on it is not something to be taken lightly.

I conclusion, since you are comparing 2 of my favourite games(series actually) of all time, to me the original Dark Souls, the Witcher 2 and the Wtcher 3 are the best RPGs since Baldur's gate 2.

 

[SigilFey]

I am observing many hostilities. These must become peaceful interactions. Keep the heat out of the posts.

This is an argument...not a fight.

 

[GerardofRiviera]

I've never played a DS game, I just knew from all the reviews and sentiment about the game that it wasn't for me. I never understood why some people criticize TW3 combat, I thought it was of the best I've ever experienced, but I guess since I've never tried DS I can't really compare the two, but I'm wondering what other rpg's have potentially better combat?

 

[Phinnway]

Haven't played Dark Souls 3, but I have played Dark Souls 1

I like the combat in Dark Souls 1 much better. It is much more enjoyable than TW3, IMO. Although I have never beaten Dark Souls 1.

A few complaints about TW3:

• Levels are bullshit. TW3 is open-world. I am a seasoned Witcher. Why I can't I do this quest? Oh... because I am 20 levels too low. Bullshit. I'm glad mods fixed this.
• Combat is boring as fuck. You repeat the same set of behaviors over & over for 150 hours.
• The same tactic works against every enemy. Dodge, & then attack. Dodge, and then attack. Repeat for 150 hours. Occasionally add variety with bombs.
• Pausing before every fight to apply oils & potions interrupts the action. Waste of time. TW1 & TW2 did this better.
• Same potions work against every enemy. Swallow, Thunderbolt, Phitri's Philter, and Tawny Owl. (+HP Regen, +sword damage, +sign damage, +Mana Regen). If you use the same thing every time then why even have this feature? Only variety is Golden Oriole and Black Blood.
• Late-game enemies are bullshit. Every late-game enemy has an AoE stun. This is stupid. Hero is a melee character in-lore. Give me some variety.

~ 47 hours logged in TW1, 129 hours logged in TW2, 188 hours logged in TW3.

edit: In summary, The Witcher's gameplay loop of preparing to fight enemies only works if you actually have to invest time preparing. If you have to spend time researching the enemy and collecting the ingredients to craft the special alchemy items you need to beat him, then the gameplay loop works. It becomes a unique mechanic that connects you to the protagonist and the world. But if all you have to do is open your inventory screen and pop a few potions, then alchemy becomes a stupid, repetitive mechanic that interrupts the flow of combat. TW3 fucked this up by streamlining alchemy, whereas previous Witcher games got it right.

 

[shasiu]

Combat is boring as fuck. You repeat the same set of behaviors over & over for 150 hours.

The same tactic works against every enemy. Dodge, & then attack. Dodge, and then attack. Repeat for 150 hours. Occasionally add variety with bombs.

I have same problem with first and second DS... mostly always the same tactic - block shield -> attack -> run around enemy to regenerate stamina... 90% enemy can be killed in this tactic (even this super big)...

I never liked combat in Souls games, I know that you can play with many different weapons, but to be honest, only few of them are good, and when you must change weapon, cause old are to weak it's a pain, when new weapon have weird movement and you cant fight properly (I watching on you sword of Artorias)...

 

[essenthy]

you must have play tested W3, thats why the combat is so bad OP

W3 doesnt even come close to DS3 combat, the slow ass movement and unresponsiveness is crazy, when i die in DS3 i cant blame the game, my character is responsive enough to blame myself for my mistake, in W3 when i die .... wait, no i never die in W3, its too easy, even on hard ( wich consist of higher damage and more health for enemy ), i facerolled my way from start to finish spamming X, maybe one boss forced me to learn his pattern, thats it

also DS3 atmosphere/art direction is way more ballsy than the Disney B&W, The wild hunt had that, at least it tried in the early builds, but we know how the game ended up

its still a great a game

 

[cyberpunkforever]

these are two entirely different games, dar souls's man mechanic is that you can dia at any time at any point and loose all your souls and have to kill your way out to the next bonfire all over again, don't like it? do't play it, it is frustrating sometimes, but the game is made for you to become a bettter fighter or to put more attention in the fight, the lore and sotry is very limited it's way too muc invention from fans with a little description of a weaon or hnts or clues or etc, and the witcher 3 is too big and complex t analyze, but it's main point is narrative, story, characters, very well designed, the combat is not as challengng as in dark souls but it still has its hard earned lessons,
so if you like tw3 more, then play it and forget about ds, right now i'm playing a very bpretty and borng rpg, i dn't know if i shold quit....
that's just how gaming is

 

[PillarBiter]

I love these kind of posts:
- Gameplay sucked
- fighting sucked
- inventory sucked
- mechanics sucked

Still good game though. Spent 400 hours on it.

:whut:

 

[Maerd]

I think the biggest problem is that DS games are labelled RPGs. They are not. They are action games with rpg elements. Back in the days, action games with RPG-like leveling were called Hack & Slash. Nowadays looks like everyone wants to put an RPG label on every game, which in cases like DS is a marketing bait. The problem with CRPGs initially arose when computers were relatively weak and it was extremely hard to provide decent RPG experience in a computer game, therefore most games resorted into making fighting games with PnP RPG fight mechanics. They called them RPGs but they were not real RPGs, and now we have misunderstanding because of that. So, instead of holy wars I suggest people just start separating the game genres.

 

[Martinvls]

I think the biggest problem is that DS games are labelled RPGs. They are not. They are action games with rpg elements. Back in the days, action games with RPG-like leveling were called Hack & Slash. Nowadays looks like everyone wants to put an RPG label on every game, which in cases like DS is a marketing bait. The problem with CRPGs initially arose when computers were relatively weak and it was extremely hard to provide decent RPG experience in a computer game, therefore most games resorted into making fighting games with PnP RPG fight mechanics. They called them RPGs but they were not real RPGs, and now we have misunderstanding because of that. So, instead of holy wars I suggest people just start separating the game genres.

LOL. Decent RPGs existed long before computers came in every house and their main requirement is developer's ability to make balanced and interesting role-playing system and system requirements doesn't matter much, because RPG core is plain text and math. Computer RPG is NOT game where you play like someone fixed. Computer RPG is a game where you can customize your character and build to your preferences. So as DS3 have much more character customization it is much more RPG then TW3.

 

[Rawls]

LOL. Decent RPGs existed long before computers came in every house and their main requirement is developer's ability to make balanced and interesting role-playing system and system requirements doesn't matter much, because RPG core is plain text and math. Computer RPG is NOT game where you play like someone fixed. Computer RPG is a game where you can customize your character and build to your preferences. So as DS3 have much more character customization it is much more RPG then TW3.

Oh no! "What is an RPG" debate! I personally prefer this definition that I first saw on "sinister design" several years ago and have used ever since:

A game is a ... RPG if it features player-driven development of a persistent character or characters via the making of consequential choices.

At their heart RPGs are about assuming a role, making choices within that role, and having the player's choices have consequences on the environment (whether it be the characters, the story, the setting itself, or ideally all of these) the game is set in. I do think both DS and TW qualify personally. Having said that, character customization is not required IMO, nor is it particularly high on my list of needs in a RPG. It can be a fun mechanic if done well and provided it gives enough depth, but it's not required and IMO often takes away more from the story than it adds in player agency most of the time. The fact that in TW series you play as a set character has very little bearing on how much of an RPG it is for me. Most of the best RPGs I've ever played had a relatively fixed player character - Final Fantasy VI, VII, X & XII, Deus Ex, Mass Effect 1 ,2 & 3, the Witcher 1, 2, & 3. In all of these games, your basic roll within the world is already set by the game itself. In most of them you can change cosmetic details, skill details, and backstory details, but the core of the role is already set.

I can't say which I prefer between TW3 & DS3 because I've never played DS3. I prefer story and character focused games over combat and mechanic focused games and thus I've never felt the need to invest the time and resources into the DS series. I've read about the plots and world designs, and they frankly don't seem very interesting to me. However, I will reserve judgment since I have never played DS.