Mass Effect Trilogy vs. The Witcher Trilogy?

[fantesmeee]

Mass Effect Trilogy vs. The Witcher Trilogy?

Mass Effect Trilogy vs. The Witcher Trilogy? Which appeals to you more and why? Two different worlds (lore) and characters. Two different approaches to make RPG games.

 

[Cheylus]

Too different for me to judge objectively.

Since most people here will praise TW over ME: I tend to give more value to games with a "homemade" lore. Sci-fi is more interesting to me too (you have to imagine species/politics/economy/cultures/technology/architecture... whereas in "fantasy" games it's more or less always the same since Tolkien, dragons, kings, beggars, civil wars, swords, medieval setting, pretentious elves and mages, and manly dwarves).
What bothers me is that nobody except BioWare tries to make space opera RPG (Kotor then ME), even if ME was a success.

As games though, with the "lore" or universe apart, I liked TW series more (from artistical, "roleplaying", writing and technical standpoints).

 

[toudis815]

Damn hard. Completely different from the very beggining. First of all you create your own Shephard, and Geralt is character that exists for 30 years, so for me it's impossible to compare the protagonists. I love both games. ME 1 was a masterpiece and even after so many yeas I have an appetie for another playthrough. W1 was good, maybe even great but for me ME1>W1. I'd like to notice that first installments of both trylogies' ve been the most climatic. In second installments, both games improved graphics, gameplays and became a less RGP unfortunately. Suicide mission in ME2 was completely epic, but overall W2 had a much better, complex story and was alomast perfect for me. So ME2<W2. It's hard to talk about ME3 because I don't know what should we talk about - the game with radiculous 3 colors ending and a very important character that we have to buy in DLC or a game with extended cut and all DLC's. Ehh no comparation ME3<W3 because CDPR treated fans in a serious way. What I like about ME more is that many choices really matter from beggining till the end (Virmire) and in Witcher...let's be honest not so much. I also give Bioware a credit for creating all the characters like Wrex, Garrus, Liara, Javik, Mordin, from scratch, while CDPR just had to not screw pre - existing characters up


In general, I'would say Mass Effect Trilogy < Witcher Trilogy, but hey...still waiting for Andromeda

 

[Pug.]

Since most people here will praise TW over ME: I tend to give more value to games with a "homemade" lore. Sci-fi is more interesting to me too (you have to imagine species/politics/economy/cultures/technology/architecture... whereas in "fantasy" games it's more or less always the same since Tolkien, dragons, kings, beggars, civil wars, swords, medieval setting, pretentious elves and mages, and manly dwarves).

The fact that fantasy novels and games make use of the same quasi-medieval setting and fictionalized races doesn't make them any less original. There is still a lot of room within the confines of that genre for a writer to put his or her unique spin on things. When Shakespeare composed his plays in the 16th century, he drew heavily on literary conventions and tropes that had been established almost 2,000 years ago in Greco-Roman antiquity, but you don't see anyone calling his works banal.

 

[killkenny1]

Mass Effect Trilogy vs. The Witcher 3 Trilogy

Mass Effect Trilogy vs. The Witcher 3 Trilogy

The Witcher 3 Trilogy

The Witcher 3 Trilogy

Wait what? The Witcher 3 has three games in it already?!?

 

[Rawls]

Probably Mass Effect. Mainly because speculative fiction is more interesting to me than fantasy. It's plausibility makes it more interesting to me as a genre. Thus it has a leg up from the get go. But they are my two favorite RPG series of the last decade.

Having said that, the World of the Witcher is certainly more thoroughly painted than the galaxy in mass effect IMO. Much of the depth essential to understanding the world in Mass Effect is learned in the Codex, which while very interesting is not ideal from a storytelling perspective. I think the witcher does a better job of showing you its world while in the game rather than just in the glossary (which is there and nice, but less necessary than ME Codex for me).

On characters... I would say that the characters in the Witcher are more interesting, but I felt more connected to the characters in Mass Effect. I cared about a lot of my crew in Mass Effect. I was emotionally invested in Sheppard, Liara, Tali, Garrus, Wrex, Ashley, Chakwas, Joker, Mordin, MIranda, Jack, Sarama, Thane and even Legion. That's just off the top of my head. There are honestly not a ton of characters that I get emotionally attached to in the Witcher series. I think it's understandable within the series because Geralt is a witcher and the less personal story told in the first two games, but that doesn't change how I feel about it.

EDIT: I would add that as a single game I would say that TW3 would probably win. I think it would go TW3, ME3, ME1, TW2, ME2, TW1 for my personal tastes.

 

[killkenny1]

I loved ME1 (I even replay it to this day), but as a whole ME trilogy didn't grow in my opinion. It started to digress with ME2 and by the time ME3 came out it fully turned into crap. Played ME3 for 3-4h after which I couldn't take it anymore. Same ol' stuff dumbed down even more. Rehashed story didn't help it either. The same way I feel about DA games. Incredible first game, but sad end.
TW trilogy on the other hand, I could see progress there. With every new TW game it improved over the last title. And I couldn't keep away from them! Sure, it also went more mainstream (remember when there was no hand holding in TW series?), but quality control was still there. So as an overall package, I find TW games to be better.

 

[cyseal]

Different genres and playstyles. Uncomparable.

 

[eskiMoe]

I got bored of ME after the second game so The Witcher for me.

 

[Garrison72]

ME1 comes close, but the other games have serious flaws and the ME trilogy just tanked for me at the end. Bioware does not have a good track record with sequels. Their writing and world building fall short of The Witcher. Not to mention quest design. I still loved ME1 and ME2. ME3 can die in a fire.

 

[Cs__sz__r]

Witcher.

Though it's a bit biased as I didn't play ME3.

 

[MrBroche]

This is an easy one for me, Mass Effect. I really enjoyed the Witcher trilogy, the first two are really solid but flawed games with great characters and story. However, it's only really the third game that I adore. With ME, on the other hand, I love pretty much the whole series. ME 2 is my favorite game of all time, and ME 3 would be up there too if it weren't for that god awful original ending. Everything from the world building to the character development, the way the story progresses, etc. It's amazing. If I had to rank the games from each series it'd be.

1. Mass Effect 2
2. The Witcher III
3. Mass Effect 3
4. Mass Effect
5. The Witcher II
6. The Witcher

 

[fantesmeee]

Wait what? The Witcher 3 has three games in it already?!?

I meant the Witcher Trilogy, but it seems I cannot fix the title. Maybe a moderator can? If not, two DLCs, plus vanilla, equals a trilogy

In fact, the Witcher 1 is what I love the best, still rememeber the time it was released in 2007 or so.

1. Mass Effect 2
2. The Witcher III
3. Mass Effect 3
4. Mass Effect
5. The Witcher II
6. The Witcher

Mass Effect 2 is what I am playing right now. No spoilers please, but there is TOO MUCH shooting, to my mind. This is not an RPG game for me, but a shooter with some RPG elements. What appeals to me, though, is the universe, the sci-fi worlds within the universe, different races, lore, climate, even music. I mean, the game is good, but we have not seen anything better in this setting as far as RPGs are concerned, though this is not an RPG. ME1 does feel more like an RPG, but it is too old for me right now. I mean, shooting and the graphics is not that good as in ME2, ME3 etc.

 

[dragonbird]

I meant the Witcher Trilogy, but it seems I cannot fix the title. Maybe a moderator can?

Done

 

[Eredin_Breacc_Glas]

I meant the Witcher Trilogy, but it seems I cannot fix the title. Maybe a moderator can? If not, two DLCs, plus vanilla, equals a trilogy

In fact, the Witcher 1 is what I love the best, still rememeber the time it was released in 2007 or so.




Mass Effect 2 is what I am playing right now. No spoilers please, but there is TOO MUCH shooting, to my mind. This is not an RPG game for me, but a shooter with some RPG elements. What appeals to me, though, is the universe, the sci-fi worlds within the universe, different races, lore, climate, even music. I mean, the game is good, but we have not seen anything better in this setting as far as RPGs are concerned, though this is not an RPG. ME1 does feel more like an RPG, but it is too old for me right now. I mean, shooting and the graphics is not that good as in ME2, ME3 etc.

I agree with just about all of that.

Too be fair, though, they don't really make TRUE RPGs, anymore. When I say "R.P.G.", I'm thinking "Baldur's Gate", not "Dragon Age II", the Mass Effect games, etc.. Even the Witcher is more stream-lined, when it comes to the actual R.P.G. element(s). The closest I think the industry has come, so far, in this millennium, was DA:O. TW2 came darn close. But, 90% of these modern "RPGs" are just a whole bunch of shooting/fighting, and a couple of decisions that require no intelligence, and have the same out-come, no matter what you choose. How are you going to call DA:I an R.P.G., for example, when there is only one ending, and the game plays out more or less exactly the same, no matter what choices you make. That game had as much decision making as Call of Duty. Actually, BO2 may have had more.

If someone would give me enough money to create my own R.P.G., I'd show 'em.

 

[fantesmeee]

I agree with just about all of that.

Too be fair, though, they don't really make TRUE RPGs, anymore. When I say "R.P.G.", I'm thinking "Baldur's Gate", not "Dragon Age II", the Mass Effect games, etc.. Even the Witcher is more stream-lined, when it comes to the actual R.P.G. element(s). The closest I think the industry has come, so far, in this millennium, was DA:O. TW2 came darn close. But, 90% of these modern "RPGs" are just a whole bunch of shooting/fighting, and a couple of decisions that require no intelligence, and have the same out-come, no matter what you choose. How are you going to call DA:I an R.P.G., for example, when there is only one ending, and the game plays out more or less exactly the same, no matter what choices you make. That game had as much decision making as Call of Duty. Actually, BO2 may have had more.

If someone would give me enough money to create my own R.P.G., I'd show 'em.

I totally agree. Just look at Fallout 4. This is a perfect example of what you are talking about. They TRY to re-define the definition of an RPG (to kids), which might potentially contain elements of shooting because of the universe or the setting. However, what they try to do is to appeal to the Battlefield/Minecraft sort of players while pissing off RPG players that grew up on the series etc.

I think it does not pay off AT ALL to turn an RPG series into a shooting/fighting game with some elements of what it used to be. I think it has become a sort of trend to create a different game under a certain NAME/FRANCHISE. We/players CANNOT accept it, and we should let them know that this does not work, no matter if it is the Witcher 4, Fallout or any other game. They should make another title, in different genre, without making use of a well received and popular RPG games in order to appeal to a wider audience etc. I mean, changes are welcomed, but changing a game into a different genre is NOT. Even though, I am aware that it can be harder to grasp for a "creative developer" — if copying from another genre is creative at all, heh.

 

[killkenny1]

I meant the Witcher Trilogy, but it seems I cannot fix the title. Maybe a moderator can? If not, two DLCs, plus vanilla, equals a trilogy

In that case, ME is octology then

 

[toudis815]

Too be fair, though, they don't really make TRUE RPGs, anymore

Maybe Pillars of Eternity?

 

[Zanderat]

Maybe Pillars of Eternity?

Legend of Grimrock? Wasteland 2? Divinity:Original Sin? Dead State?

 

[227]

The way I see it, the Witcher series has been about creating experiences few people have actually asked for ("I'd like a scene where someone's eyes are gouged out... oh, and lots of politics and situations where I'm not a clear-cut hero of the world™!") and somehow making them enjoyable to ordinary gamers, whereas the Mass Effect series has been focused on delivering what the players explicitly state they want to see in their games. Especially for the later games.

I can respect the Witcher games for their "we do us" approach, even if things like the third game's move to an open world strikes me as a bit of a pander, but I can also see where people enjoy the Mass Effect games for giving them what they want. I just don't find the latter a particularly creative way of making games. The first ME is pretty good, but the "you are badass space Jesus and everyone is super-intense-lens-flare-drama and wants to ride you like a water buffalo" vibe of the later ones seriously pushed me away.

Sooooooooo... Witcher. Though at least the ME games had the same voice actors between games. I'm going to have to find a way to turn off the voices when I try to play through the first Witcher game again because they're just... all... wrong.