Shoot bandits and monsters to the knee or other weak point before battle. Might be helpful if they outnumber Geralt.
Slow reload or reload only after battle will keep everything balanced.
- Status
Shoot bandits and monsters to the knee or other weak point before battle. Might be helpful if they outnumber Geralt.
Slow reload or reload only after battle will keep everything balanced.
After deeper thought.. I think its a bad idea to have a crossbow. Making dagger throwing more efficient is a better option.
Last edited:
Interesting how Geralt recieved it.
"Hey, Geralt! I just jumped through the window of a bedroom and grabbed a crossbow instead of a lute.
Could you come back there for my lute, and uh... take this thing, I don't even know how to use it."
"Hey, Geralt! I just jumped through the window of a bedroom and grabbed a crossbow instead of a lute.
Could you come back there for my lute, and uh... take this thing, I don't even know how to use it."
I can see clearly now. They're gonna switch Geralt's VA to Hugh Jackman, get Kate Beckinsale for Yen and David Wenham for Dandelion. And Dracu-- uh, The King of the Wild Hunt will be voiced by Richard Roxburgh.
Geralt should probably get a fedora as well.
EDIT: Might as well throw in a werewolf form for shits and giggles.
Geralt should probably get a fedora as well.
EDIT: Might as well throw in a werewolf form for shits and giggles.
Last edited:
It seems like the 1st reaction that some people have, when hearing about a new element or mechanic in the game, is to think, "Oh, was that in the books? I better go dig through the books and make sure that Geralt is allowed to do this." In my opinion, that should not be the deciding factor when determining whether a game mechanic has merit to it.
Can't people give CDPR some freedom. It always bugs me a little bit when some people seem to insist that the game follow the lore from the books 100% perfectly and strictly. I guess if Sapkowski writes a story in his next book where Geralt uses a crossbow, suddenly it will be okay to include it in the game. How trivial is that? Because it was never mentioned in the books, Geralt is never allowed to touch a crossbow? I don't recall Geralt attacking enemies with a shovel, or throwing daggers and bombs at them, yet all of that is possible in TW2.
The fact is, most people that get TW3 will probably never read the books. Imposing all of these restrictions to ensure that the game perfectly aligns with the books, I feel, sometimes comes off as elitist. And I am someone who has read the books. What won't make any sense is if there is a crossbow that you can use for hunting, but then it suddenly becomes disabled in combat. I can only assume that people voting for that option, mean to vote for the idea that the crossbow won't be effective in combat. Because suddenly not being able to use it in combat at all, makes no sense.
Additionally, I think there's almost what I would call a logical fallacy involved in many of these conversations where people insist on everything strictly adhering to the book lore. Take this topic for instance: saying that Geralt has never used a crossbow, is not the same as saying that he would never use one. Just because the situation and opportunity never arose in the books for Geralt to use a crossbow, doesn't mean that he is completely antithetical to ever using one. Furthermore, the fact that he never used one in the books, doesn't even imply that he has never used one in his life. If the books don't mention Geralt taking a dump in the woods, does that mean we can assume that he has never "gone to the bathroom" in his entire life.
For people that don't want crossbows at all, I really don't understand your thinking at all? I think it's safe to say that no one will force you to use crossbows if you don't want to use them. That means that the "lore friendly path" will ALWAYS be available to you. If you want to follow it, then you can do so at your discretion. So why vote for not allowing crossbows at all? Because you don't want to use them, no one can be allowed to? You don't have to deprive people of that. Just don't use them yourself. I think is the most poignant point I can make.
Yes, you are playing as Geralt who is a well defined character in the books, but in a videogame it is the player that is in control of Geralt. And with that freedom of control, the player is capable at any point to engage in behavior that is unlike Geralt. For example, I can run around a tree for an hour if I want to, just for the hell of it. Should CDPR ban the ability to run around trees, because it's inconsistent with the Geralt from the books? No, that would be a ridiculous thing to do. Instead, if a player wants to role-play Geralt, faithfully, to how he behaves in the books, then he or she simply won't run around a tree for an hour. There is no reason to ban the people who want to do that.
I'm not trying to call out anyone in particular here. I'm just putting out my thoughts and opinions. ;D
Can't people give CDPR some freedom. It always bugs me a little bit when some people seem to insist that the game follow the lore from the books 100% perfectly and strictly. I guess if Sapkowski writes a story in his next book where Geralt uses a crossbow, suddenly it will be okay to include it in the game. How trivial is that? Because it was never mentioned in the books, Geralt is never allowed to touch a crossbow? I don't recall Geralt attacking enemies with a shovel, or throwing daggers and bombs at them, yet all of that is possible in TW2.
The fact is, most people that get TW3 will probably never read the books. Imposing all of these restrictions to ensure that the game perfectly aligns with the books, I feel, sometimes comes off as elitist. And I am someone who has read the books. What won't make any sense is if there is a crossbow that you can use for hunting, but then it suddenly becomes disabled in combat. I can only assume that people voting for that option, mean to vote for the idea that the crossbow won't be effective in combat. Because suddenly not being able to use it in combat at all, makes no sense.
Additionally, I think there's almost what I would call a logical fallacy involved in many of these conversations where people insist on everything strictly adhering to the book lore. Take this topic for instance: saying that Geralt has never used a crossbow, is not the same as saying that he would never use one. Just because the situation and opportunity never arose in the books for Geralt to use a crossbow, doesn't mean that he is completely antithetical to ever using one. Furthermore, the fact that he never used one in the books, doesn't even imply that he has never used one in his life. If the books don't mention Geralt taking a dump in the woods, does that mean we can assume that he has never "gone to the bathroom" in his entire life.
For people that don't want crossbows at all, I really don't understand your thinking at all? I think it's safe to say that no one will force you to use crossbows if you don't want to use them. That means that the "lore friendly path" will ALWAYS be available to you. If you want to follow it, then you can do so at your discretion. So why vote for not allowing crossbows at all? Because you don't want to use them, no one can be allowed to? You don't have to deprive people of that. Just don't use them yourself. I think is the most poignant point I can make.
Yes, you are playing as Geralt who is a well defined character in the books, but in a videogame it is the player that is in control of Geralt. And with that freedom of control, the player is capable at any point to engage in behavior that is unlike Geralt. For example, I can run around a tree for an hour if I want to, just for the hell of it. Should CDPR ban the ability to run around trees, because it's inconsistent with the Geralt from the books? No, that would be a ridiculous thing to do. Instead, if a player wants to role-play Geralt, faithfully, to how he behaves in the books, then he or she simply won't run around a tree for an hour. There is no reason to ban the people who want to do that.
I'm not trying to call out anyone in particular here. I'm just putting out my thoughts and opinions. ;D
Few months ago, we were guessing, what kind of suprise weapon CDPR prepare for us.
Many thought it will be a silver chain... Well, we were wrong, nobody expect a crossbow to the back
I sincerely hope we still get the silver chain. As for the topic: I voted for hunting only, logic dictates a crossbow would not be of much use to Geralt in combat. My hunch is we'll be aiming the crossbow in the same manner we could aim daggers in TW2.
.Volsung inadvertently brought similarities between Drizzt and Geralt to my mind the other day. Funny how Drow are renowned for there skill with the sword.......and light crossbow
:detective:
:detective:
Last edited:
You remember, of course, that daggers could be auto-aimed by just pressing R. And that they were OP, dealing massive amounts of damage and being only limited by availability. Balance worries me. I am not convinced that CDPR can make the crossbow useful enough that it's cool (and fun) to use it every now and then, without making it too powerful and a valid choice over swords, based on how they've handled non-standard witcher weapons in the past.
But no, if Geralt has a weapon, I don't think it should be limited only to hunting. How does one determine that Geralt is hunting, is there a hunting mode? Is it any good? Is it necessary? Personally, I find the whole idea of hunting (not monster hunting) a bit of a forced feature that really has no place in the game. And, as you said, Geralt using a weapon that requires him to remain stationary and has a slow reload time is just ridiculous, and goes against his fighting style, which is why I see no point in it being in the game whatsoever.
@Villentretanmerth
1- The changes made so far in the series were logical and did not break the lore too seriously, some of them even supported it: If you remember the story "The Lesser Evil" Geralt is said to have hit a rat in total darkness with a fork, so the throwing knives make sense, the bombs also seem very plausible since Witchers are skilled in alchemy, and neither affect the look and feel of Sapkowski's character.
2- I posted this on the other thread, but I think it fits better here. Mods, let me know if its not allowed to post the same thing in two threads.
let me explain my point:
For me at least (and maybe to a lot of people who read the books too) seeing Geralt with a crossbow on his back feels wrong, even worse because like @ReptilePZ said its right next to his iconic swords, it's like seeing Gandalf with a bow, Darth Vader with a blaster or Link with a battle axe, it does not fit with the character's image, nothing prevents any of these characters from using said weapons, but I'm sure if you saw Gandalf carrying a bow on the next Hobbit movie you would flip out. I particularly want to play as the Geralt I grew fond of in the books, and having him crossbowing people is greatly different from the experience I had in the books, and this diminishes the experience imo. If they really want to add this they should at least take it away from his back, because to me having a crossbow next to his swords is sacrilege, and this is without considering how it would affect gameplay, imagine if they do it like assassins creed lock system, or if every fight started with you hitting the first guy with a bolt, it would be terribly lore breaking and would harm gameplay, it feels forced into the experience just to make hunting possible and imo its too much of a stretch. There is a way to do it that I would agree with though , and that would be making it a tool, not a weapon, it would stay strapped to Roach's saddle and you would get it out just to hunt game, it should be virtually useless against monsters and enemies, you would only fire at enemies if they surprised you while hunting.
Thats just my opinion of course but I hope it helped to convey a bit of the concerns some of us have regarding this decision.
Hope CDPR makes the right call :cheers:
1- The changes made so far in the series were logical and did not break the lore too seriously, some of them even supported it: If you remember the story "The Lesser Evil" Geralt is said to have hit a rat in total darkness with a fork, so the throwing knives make sense, the bombs also seem very plausible since Witchers are skilled in alchemy, and neither affect the look and feel of Sapkowski's character.
2- I posted this on the other thread, but I think it fits better here. Mods, let me know if its not allowed to post the same thing in two threads.
let me explain my point:
For me at least (and maybe to a lot of people who read the books too) seeing Geralt with a crossbow on his back feels wrong, even worse because like @ReptilePZ said its right next to his iconic swords, it's like seeing Gandalf with a bow, Darth Vader with a blaster or Link with a battle axe, it does not fit with the character's image, nothing prevents any of these characters from using said weapons, but I'm sure if you saw Gandalf carrying a bow on the next Hobbit movie you would flip out. I particularly want to play as the Geralt I grew fond of in the books, and having him crossbowing people is greatly different from the experience I had in the books, and this diminishes the experience imo. If they really want to add this they should at least take it away from his back, because to me having a crossbow next to his swords is sacrilege, and this is without considering how it would affect gameplay, imagine if they do it like assassins creed lock system, or if every fight started with you hitting the first guy with a bolt, it would be terribly lore breaking and would harm gameplay, it feels forced into the experience just to make hunting possible and imo its too much of a stretch. There is a way to do it that I would agree with though , and that would be making it a tool, not a weapon, it would stay strapped to Roach's saddle and you would get it out just to hunt game, it should be virtually useless against monsters and enemies, you would only fire at enemies if they surprised you while hunting.
Thats just my opinion of course but I hope it helped to convey a bit of the concerns some of us have regarding this decision.
Hope CDPR makes the right call :cheers:
Last edited:
I liked all the projectiles we got in TW2, including daggers. Overpowered, sure, but I think they should stay in and be improved. Like bombs and traps, they added another layer to combat. The crossbow's effectiveness in combat could be diminished by capping damage at a fairly low level, and keeping the reload time realistic. That way, it never becomes a viable option outside of hunting. I understand people's skepticism and it wouldn't break my heart if hunting was ditched. The reason it'll probably stay is huge open worlds typically need a range of activities to keep the player engaged.
Geralt would never use a crossbow on another human ( or elf, dwarf, etc..).. Crossbows are corwards and backstabers weapons. Geralt is none of those. And even if they find nice gameplay elements with it, it just doesn't fit the character at all. If this is eventually confirmed, it will be my first witcher 3 deception.. Even for hunting.. I just can't picture the White wolf using a crossbow..
Actually this is a very good idea. Considering that there is no level scaling in the game, if they make your basic critters like Deer & Rabbits etc that you are allowed to hunt have a very low HP level & your Crossbow caps out at a very low level of damage, then it wouldn't end up being useful later in the game anyway, but would still be useful for hunting. Perhaps if you're hunting a bigger 'critter' the Crossbow might still do much lower damage but you specifically aim for limbs or vital body parts which would slow it down making it easier to get up close & take it out with your Sword.
If it's definitely going to be implemented, I want it to be like this and not a requirement for hunting. With the option to GET IT OFF HIS FUCKING BACK.
- Status