The Witcher 2 Combat System --- WHAA??

[Lightzy]

The Witcher 2 Combat System --- WHAA??

What?!?You live in the age of fantastic games like DMC4, Batmah: Arkham Asylum and Mass Effect.. The Witcher is one of my favorite games of all time, and I have no doubt Witcher2 will be just as deep and beautiful, BUT, for gods sake, did NOONE notice that if you took the Witcher1s actual GAMEPLAY and compared it to any of the abovementioned games (not to mention Mass Effect 2 coming up, etc), it's the most pathetic thing? Hell, even on its own its extremely pathetic. I always felt like the gameplay in Witcher is a damned CHORE I have to go through to see how the story unfolds....Did none of the DEVs at CDPROJECT see Yahtzees Zero Punctuation review of The Witcher ? specifically where he talks about combat?And now I see Witcher2 is exactly the same, according to the video (only being sold as "what the players 'want'" and "more visceral" although in fact from looking at it it seems it plays exactly the same.Please CDproject, I love your story writing, your art, your music, absolutely everything.. just do gameplay this time! If this sort of thing keeps up I'll be 'playing' Witcher3 on my Kindle Copy from DMC, or from Jedi Knight2, or from freakin streetfighter or something, just put some GAMEPLAY in this GAMEMuch love and respect, Lightzy.

 

[TheSilver]

Methinks you have a valid point. Yes, the combat system of The Witcher is different. On it's most basic level it is simply click to kill. However, it is not a "hammer the keys 'til the enemy is dead".I haven't played Batman or Mass Effect, but DMC3, Jedi Knight 2 +3 (Love Jedi Academy). And personally I really liked the combat system of The Witcher. If The Witcher 2 has a similar, or even the same system, I might be a little disappointed because it is the same, but also happy because it is.I have seen Yahtzees review and to an extent even agree. But I also realize that it is not an actual review. The main point of Zero Punctuation seems to be humour and pointing out the things that Yathzee thinks are bad. Taking his whole tangent about the various screens (Inventory, quests, etc). He's right, there are a lot, but I like them.In a last addition, for me gameplay isn't limited to the combat, but also the walking around, conversations, events, choices (especially the choices) and many more things. They all come together to form a beautiful big thing that I love. Take the quest "Vizima Confidential" as example. Geralt needs to find out who he trusts and who not. To do that he has to talk to several people, fight, walk, help, etc. That is what gameplay is to me. That the game gives a reason why I should and can do all the things the game lets me do.Edit: Have you seen his review of Batman?

 

[petra_silie]

Don't overestimate this video. It's just an alpha version which gives us a vague overview what TW2 has to offer but it doesn't focus on a particular feature of the game.We even don't know about the story, quests or monsters, Geralt's friends from TW1, etc.And... there is no official statement yet, which normally has a detailled explanation of the game's features and technics. At the moment it's an uncommented video to gain a bit insight

 

[infernox3470]

Personally I love the combat in the Witcher. Sure on it's most basic level it's just clicking and choosing the appropriate stance, but on harder difficulties there's all sorts of Potions, Oils, Bombs, Signs and Dodging that all play a part in whether or not you survive. I find it entertaining though that you list Batman as an example of a good combat system. That system is arguably even simpler than the witchers due to the lack of stances. The melee combat in that game has the same amount of depth as Fistfights do in The Witcher. Mass Effect also had a notoriously simple combat system although the various ammo types made up for the very simple run and gun gameplay.

 

[Flash]

This video is half year old from early alpha. The only thing this video presents is game engine, QTE and dialog system. There are no recorded mocaps, no professional voiceover, every gap is filled with content directly copied from Witcher 1. Everything you see and hear is not final, far from final.

 

[Corylea.723]

I love the combat system in The Witcher. I have lousy hand-eye coordination, and if I have to line things up or click very quickly or anything like that, I just dont play the game. Part of what I like about The Witcher's combat system is that the skill is mostly in your head, not in your hands: you have to figure out which sword, which stance, which oils, which potions, but once you've got all that figured out, Geralt does most of the work. That's why he's the witcher, and I'm the player, after all. And this is an RPG, don't forget. People who want complicated combat can play FPS's; the focus in an RPG is on preparing your character to meet the challenge, not on fast clicking or weird combos. The depth in The Witcher's combat comes from things like realizing that bloedzuigers are ambulating bombs or figuring out that you can jump over the mob and fight them one-by-one on the stairs and stuff like that.A huge fraction of the posts this forum gets are ones where the poster is complaining that the Beast is too hard, and they can't kill it -- strategy is important here, not hand-eye coordination, and I love that. Please don't change that, CDPR!

 

[k777]

I can see how a Arkham Asylum type of combat system would be really cool for The Witcher, but you are completely forgetting that TW 1's combat system is by far the best out of any "fantasy" RPG ever. Up until now, all we had was: top down click-fests (Diablo style), select target then cast (WoW style), and stupid swing anywhere systems that always felt like you weren't really hitting anything (Oblivion). The Witcher introduced a simple, yet amazing new combat system that was based on rhythm, and I'm glad to see that they are keeping it similar for the second installment.However, I was really upset when I saw that in TW2 there will be context-sensitive, God of War type of moments during boss fights... that is a serious let-down and I really hope it is removed from the final game. I'm sure all real Witcher fans will agree on that.

 

[infernox3470]

However, I was really upset when I saw that in TW2 there will be context-sensitive, God of War type of moments during boss fights... that is a serious let-down and I really hope it is removed from the final game. I'm sure all real Witcher fans will agree on that.

Depends how they do it tbh. If it becomes an excercise in trial and error then it will be a bad experience but if it's more of a "cinematic opportunity". Failing the quicktime events shouldn't fail the fight. (Which judging from the trailer, it doesn't)

 

[k777]

However, I was really upset when I saw that in TW2 there will be context-sensitive, God of War type of moments during boss fights... that is a serious let-down and I really hope it is removed from the final game. I'm sure all real Witcher fans will agree on that.

Depends how they do it tbh. If it becomes an excercise in trial and error then it will be a bad experience but if it's more of a "cinematic opportunity". Failing the quicktime events shouldn't fail the fight. (Which judging from the trailer, it doesn't)

Very true. It would be much better if it ended up not being a "make or break you" thing. However, the real reason why I always hated the context-sensitive stuff is because it essentially defeats it's own purpose; it is designed to give battles a more cinematic feel, yet the player himself is always has to focus his eyes on the area of the screen indicating what button he needs to press, so essentially the only people who benefit from it visually are any third-parties that are watching another person play.

 

[pudi0072000]

Very true. It would be much better if it ended up not being a "make or break you" thing. However, the real reason why I always hated the context-sensitive stuff is because it essentially defeats it's own purpose; it is designed to give battles a more cinematic feel, yet the player himself is always has to focus his eyes on the area of the screen indicating what button he needs to press, so essentially the only people who benefit from it visually are any third-parties that are watching another person play.

That's exactly why I hate QTE's. I go from focusing on my opponent, my sword, etc, and have to stare at the icon, and I'll either mistime or miss completely because I'm changing my focal point. If I do get it right, I have to jump back to the big picture again and try to guess what the enemy's going to do and what I need to do to counter/defeat him. I'd much rather hack 'n slash and have a cinematic afterward.

 

[tlazolteotl]

I can see how a Arkham Asylum type of combat system would be really cool for The Witcher, but you are completely forgetting that TW 1's combat system is by far the best out of any "fantasy" RPG ever.

Does Dark Messiah of Might and Magic count?It uses the Source engine, so it's probably classified as a first person shooter, though quite heavy on the fantasy and melee combat.I love the combat (and am in the process of uploading my own version of a video walkthrough on Hardcore difficulty), but it has terrible everything else ... from plot to level design.For anyone who cares, my youtube channel is Danceofmasks.

 

[Lightzy]

Yeah I see how Arkham Asylum and Mass Effect etc being in that list is a bit weird, but the point is that not that they're more/less cinematic or whathaveyou, rather that they let you PLAY.I don't consider walking around and talking to people 'gameplay' because it presents no challenge. there are different consequences to different choices but not actual challenge.The point is I can't ever remember myself going "Man that was an awsome encounter, I'd like to try that one again" in Witcher, and in fact I remember always feeling the exact opposite ("Oh come on, more freaking drowners? freakin chore") and especially towards the end. And now with the 'leaked' video the Dev is standing there saying how they remade the animations and stuff and it's a lot more cinematic and that's what the players want.NO IT'S NOT! I don't want to sit there like a boob and watch cinema! I'd want smart enemy placement, well designed combat 'arenas', gameplay systems that interact etc.In fact if someone made Jedi Knight 4 right now I'd .... oh man.. What I love most about games like Jagged Alliance2 is that the gameplay is SO SOLID that I've played that game through about 50 times now, just wanting to see how each 'set piece' will turn out.Gameplay is what brings you back, not story.. gameplay engages the mind... story? ... dunno. I've read plenty of books over but I don't remember them being as exciting and certainly not noticably DIFFERENT upon repeated readings.. I mean with games you CAN replay to see more 'bits' but the story is pretty much the same. And anyway I never replay a game who's GAMEPLAY isn't fun. I *tried* replaying the witcher with the enhanced edition patch but gave up because it was so boring.I don't really care what kind of combat system it is so long as it's NOT The Witcher 1s.... It's a tedious chore.I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything though. I just saw the video and I was personally very very dissapointed. Because of my personal tasetes and whatnot and felt like venting just in case someone from CDPROJECT reads it and responds with a "We thought the same also! Our new combat system works like: A, B, C etc" BTW I've Never played the Witcher on anything less than HARD and I don't know about you but I never used any grindstone, oil or bomb and I felt that there was only 1 spell necessary and maybe another 1 for some fun...

 

[username_2067524]

There is a small problem here m8, aside from Mass Effect, none of those games fall under RPG or are even close to The Witcher (I mean DMC4 wtf? Besides DMC4 being a big disappointment its a H&S game). And now I see your point is not only about the combat system itself (which should really be compared more to RPG games, such as NWN or OBLIVION or FALLOUT3 thou no one is in the same direction as The Witcher, even Fable which is my favorite RPG game), but also about the point where "walking around talking to people" is not satisfying for you. Now I just thought the same thing the other day, there is a bit of unbalanced between talking and fighting (chapter 2 mostly) but Mass Effect is FAR WORSE. A game like Mass Effect may have very satisfying combat system, but man I spent hours just talking to people, I spent so much time talking to people that after the first real actual combat when I got back to the "talking part" I just couldn't care less then just rushing on, it was so terrible (and I like talking and interacting and stuff).Now I can keep talking about what games you should compare to The Witcher and keep babbling but I don't want to make a huge post that no one will read, so my point is, maybe you just forgot what The Witcher actually is, an RPG game.

Gameplay is what brings you back, not story.. gameplay engages the mind... story? ... dunno.

Isn't "gameplay" to big? You talked more about the combat system and design between fights and exploration then overall Gameplay, which really includes every aspect of a game. If this is the case and I didn't get you wrong, then I for once Think Oblivion has a very bad combat system, yet I play it quite a lot (thou I do thing there is a good balance between fights and exploration\ talking unlike some parts of The Witcher). Yet again were talking very different games here, its hard to compare.Standing on its own The Witcher has a nice combat system in my idea, you may simply just don't like it. But your points of useless spells, unbalanced sections, low difficulty and such are true, I would also add the useless loot (unless you said so already and I didn't notice). If they (CDPR) can mange a new combat system that can match The Witcher world I would be impressed, cuz so far I never seen any RPG lately with good combat system, its a hard task. Aside from Fable (which combat system I VERY much like), I can't think of any other (and I didn't play Fable 2) game that has such a good game mechanics and especially combat system. We should keep in mind thou that at first The Witcher was designed to resemble NWN 1, which I really really hate (and I really really like TW ofc )Now I should shut up its getting to long and I can keep on saying stuff for ever...

 

[dezired]

Haven't read the whole thread yet, but I'd like to add that I really really like the combat system in TW2. Much better than ME2's or B:AA's (action game vs RPG?)

 

[tlazolteotl]

Every game has issues ... just gonna focus on combat of some big titles out there.I too played Oblivion heaps, and its combat system is made of fail.Like totally.To the point that I crafted a stealth suit (120% chameleon) just so I wouldn't have to deal with combat.Just permanent invisibility and backstab everything in the back of the head.Fun for being a sandbox (and building a ridiculously powerful character), but plot and quests are just weak.Fallout 3? Awesome game but ..VATS is made of dumb .. probability based bullet time, though fun at first, is just janky after awhile.Melee is just a clickfest (being Oblivion-ish) .. at least ranged combat works well.Strengths and weaknesses are similar to Oblivion overall, though it's a somewhat better game.Mass Effect .. played that lots too.Driving the Mako is downright ridiculous. It handles exactly the same (badly) on every planet, yet manages to easily obliterate everything (even on insanity difficulty).Running and gunning is a lot more fun, but suffers from a few major issues.Your squad is a bunch of morons, biotics is way more powerful than tech (both of which are overshadowed by immunity-cycling) ..Pistols are better than assault rifles at every stage of the game (assuming you pile points into your weapon of choice).Overall, a decent game, though the repetitive level design is silly, talking is a chore and a half, but the biggest issue?Unlockables. Sure, I get that squad member upgrades encourage replays .. but unlockable difficulty levels are downright retarded.I love playing it on insanity difficulty, but having had to slog through finishing the game on the lower difficulties ruined the experience somewhat.

 

[56236]

You know, I'm starting to find similarities of the combat system to that of The Matrix Online.Those guys sure knew what they did, but the age of the game didn't allow as much as it does today.The movement options were complex and cheaply executed while here they are complex and richly executed. Don't you think?Anyways, that game is obsolete in many ways, but has great ideas of bullet-time fights and movements employed. eace:

 

[mrbenis]

I hope that combat will be a bit quicker than in TW1. Some new animations wouldn't hurt either, same effect and damage, just a different visual combo.

 

[56236]

I hope that combat will be a bit quicker than in TW1. Some new animations wouldn't hurt either, same effect and damage, just a different visual combo.

I highly doubt that fighting would be increased in terms of speed. Rather, slow it down so we have time to execute more complex combos, ain't that more interesting? eace:

 

[mrbenis]

I hope that combat will be a bit quicker than in TW1. Some new animations wouldn't hurt either, same effect and damage, just a different visual combo.

I highly doubt that fighting would be increased in terms of speed. Rather, slow it down so we have time to execute more complex combos, ain't that more interesting? eace:

No I don't think so, unless Tekken-style multicombos were introduced as the base of combat in the first place. As it stands, it appears that combat has remained a simple "left click to attack, wait a bit and left click again" that reviewers like yahtzee (who is hardly a credible game reviewer, he's more just a comedian).Slowing the combat down, ironically, would favour my suggestion more, allowing more 'fancy' looking combos to be executed, provided everything is aesthetically appealing I don't think most people could care if the tempo was modified +/- 10%.

 

[56236]

I hope that combat will be a bit quicker than in TW1. Some new animations wouldn't hurt either, same effect and damage, just a different visual combo.

I highly doubt that fighting would be increased in terms of speed. Rather, slow it down so we have time to execute more complex combos, ain't that more interesting? eace:

No I don't think so, unless Tekken-style multicombos were introduced as the base of combat in the first place. As it stands, it appears that combat has remained a simple "left click to attack, wait a bit and left click again" that reviewers like yahtzee (who is hardly a credible game reviewer, he's more just a comedian).Slowing the combat down, ironically, would favour my suggestion more, allowing more 'fancy' looking combos to be executed, provided everything is aesthetically appealing I don't think most people could care if the tempo was modified +/- 10%.

Oh trust me, people would care alright. You haven't seen the tiny details being debated in this community :teeth:Now, the game was made more realistic which may mean that you get killed easier from behind like FCR was done and also that Combatants always strike without hesitation. This would mean that you "left click, attack, left click again" theory would go down the drain as you would have to be in constant motion. Maybe it better to lay at a slower pace or no change at all. But hey, who knows? eace: