Does anyone now how to activate the 1280x720 resolution in Witcher 3 ? Thanks for help...
XP system for Combat/Exploring is terrible! (enemies twice your level give 2 XP?!?)
The xp system in witcher 3 is just as bad as in witcher 2, there is literally no point in fighting or exploring 90% of game because you get nothing and it costs more to repair your equipment after fighting than the value of the exp you get from combat... non-mission based enemies are essentially plants that you have to hit to get them to drop their ingredients!
This terrible xp system makes doing anything outside of missions a completely unfulfilling waste of time. what makes TES exploration great is the fact you could build up your character while doing it. ITS FULFILLING! MEANINGFUL! FUN!, wicther exploration is pointless and monotonous.
Its definitely more realistic to avoid combat whenever possible, but the whole point of a game s to make combat fun and make the player want to experience it not see all random enemies as a nuisance.
Please make a patch that gives a meaningful amount of experience for non-mission based enemies.Having to kill 500 enemies to level outside of missions is stupid... this isnt an FPS. (preferably with an option in the menu system to allow fan boys to have their choice monotony)
The xp system in witcher 3 is just as bad as in witcher 2, there is literally no point in fighting or exploring 90% of game because you get nothing and it costs more to repair your equipment after fighting than the value of the exp you get from combat... non-mission based enemies are essentially plants that you have to hit to get them to drop their ingredients!
This terrible xp system makes doing anything outside of missions a completely unfulfilling waste of time. what makes TES exploration great is the fact you could build up your character while doing it. ITS FULFILLING! MEANINGFUL! FUN!, wicther exploration is pointless and monotonous.
Its definitely more realistic to avoid combat whenever possible, but the whole point of a game s to make combat fun and make the player want to experience it not see all random enemies as a nuisance.
Please make a patch that gives a meaningful amount of experience for non-mission based enemies.Having to kill 500 enemies to level outside of missions is stupid... this isnt an FPS. (preferably with an option in the menu system to allow fan boys to have their choice monotony)
"what makes TES exploration great is the fact you could build up your character while doing it. ITS FULFILLING! MEANINGFUL! FUN!, wicther exploration is pointless and monotonous." tes fun? I haven't had on tes, 1% of the fun I am having now on the witcher 3...you joking dude,each fight is a fuckin challenge,and when you defeat a basilisk that have 10 lvl more than you to loot the treasure he is keeping it is waaaaaay more gratifying than killing the stupids dragons of skyrim 
and about exp on monsters,they never did that... monsters never give more than 1 or 2 points in this game...it's a fact you gonna have to live with...that's not a stupid mmo
and about exp on monsters,they never did that... monsters never give more than 1 or 2 points in this game...it's a fact you gonna have to live with...that's not a stupid mmo Skyrim was released in 2011. 4 years ago, and still lots and lots of players play it. Many games, even good games, when you stop playing them you move on. Skyrim, you leave it after some time playing other games, you come back.
It may not be your type of game, but saying "TES fun?" is just trolling.
each fight is a fuckin challenge,and when you defeat a basilisk that have 10 lvl more than you to loot the treasure he is keeping it is waaaaaay more gratifying than killing the stupids dragons of skyrim
He is not talking about the fun of the battle itself. He is saying that the reward should be more worth than the cost of the battle. And I think he is kind of right. Between the food to recover health, and the repairs, you spend more gold than you earn in any random encounter. And the xp you get is also very low. So, like he politely (more than you) explains, the problem is that it's more profitable to avoid random encounters, and while that would be accurate comparing to real life, this is a game, and searching for battles should be encouraged and rewarded.
and about exp on monsters,they never did that... monsters never give more than 1 or 2 points in this game...it's a fact you gonna have to live with...that's not a stupid mmo
Thanks for that great argument... oh wait, you are just repeating what he says that concerns him and tell him to suck it up, wihout any explanation on why you think that it works better this way.
Im playing on the hardest difficulty and id say its about as hard as the souls series, but its not as hard as Ninja Gaiden.... Either way the point isnt the difficulty the point is that - there is no point... there is no reason to kill anything outside of mission its just a waste of time and money, there is no reason to ever go off the beaten path unlike in Skyrim because in the witcher you gain nothing from doing so...
So far I've learned that you should focus on the ? areas mostly as clearing monster camps for example gives you a decent haul of xp especially if it creates a new settlement. By now the main story is too hard with the level and xp I have (hardest difficulty as well) so I'm off doing a few ? to get some extra xp in and hopefully improve my gear
Different games do things differently - play the one(s) you like and/or don't expect them all to be the same (which would be pretty boring).
In ES games you level your skils by doing things, so you need to do a lot of things - metric boatlaods of boring repetition just to get skills up. I kind of find the character development in ES games to be pretty weak (the mechanics of the system - too much grinding and/or cheesing to skill up). I also find the combat in ES games to be pretty lackluster. it's action style, sort of, but not all that skill oriented (and being able to pause and chug potiions indefinitely/anytime kind of removes any real danger). But I loved Skyrm for the content and the overall experience.
I'm loveing Witcher 3 as well. The xp flow is different from ES...so what...you get 10-50xp for quests early on instead of thousands - it's scaled differently. Not a big deal. It'd be goofy if you got tons of xp for killing mobs compared to finishing quests, right? There's less combat in general and the battles are more intense and require a greater attention to detail (far better combat IMO). Loving it so far.
I like DAI too and it has it's own quirks and flow.
In ES games you level your skils by doing things, so you need to do a lot of things - metric boatlaods of boring repetition just to get skills up. I kind of find the character development in ES games to be pretty weak (the mechanics of the system - too much grinding and/or cheesing to skill up). I also find the combat in ES games to be pretty lackluster. it's action style, sort of, but not all that skill oriented (and being able to pause and chug potiions indefinitely/anytime kind of removes any real danger). But I loved Skyrm for the content and the overall experience.
I'm loveing Witcher 3 as well. The xp flow is different from ES...so what...you get 10-50xp for quests early on instead of thousands - it's scaled differently. Not a big deal. It'd be goofy if you got tons of xp for killing mobs compared to finishing quests, right? There's less combat in general and the battles are more intense and require a greater attention to detail (far better combat IMO). Loving it so far.
I like DAI too and it has it's own quirks and flow.
Nobody is complaining about getting 50 instead of 2000. The problem is that only doing quests is worth the fight. You say it's not a big deal? Well I think it's a big deal in a game that sayis exploring is so important. For me, going to the quests or ? marks is not exploring. Exploring is going where you don't see anything, and fight on your way, looting the rewards. But if every fight leaves me less pwoerfull (more poor) it looses its exploration incentive.
Why is it goofy that killing a wolf gives you same xp than killing a wolf because a farmer told you so? And we aren't asking for the same, I also like more xp for doing quests, but it should give a minimum reward that is more than the cost of the food and repairs of killing it.
Different game do, do things differently... some clearly better than others, and in order to improve upon anything you must criticize its weaknesses in order to expose them.
I was not claiming the TES series was perfect, but the exploration in TES is many many times superior to the Witcher because its fulfilling to get XP from doing it.
Getting 2 xp per kill meaning you need 500 enemies to level up is the worst kind of grinding... the kind that take so long and has so little reward it is not worth doing (NOT FUN). Grinding levels in skyrim takes little enough time (if you know how) and you get enough reward for it to be worth actually doing (FUN).
I have no problem with the quests nor combat system... i have problem with having a vast world that i want to explore but it takes lots of work to do and i get no reward in the game for doing it.
FarCry 2 all over again...
I was not claiming the TES series was perfect, but the exploration in TES is many many times superior to the Witcher because its fulfilling to get XP from doing it.
Getting 2 xp per kill meaning you need 500 enemies to level up is the worst kind of grinding... the kind that take so long and has so little reward it is not worth doing (NOT FUN). Grinding levels in skyrim takes little enough time (if you know how) and you get enough reward for it to be worth actually doing (FUN).
I have no problem with the quests nor combat system... i have problem with having a vast world that i want to explore but it takes lots of work to do and i get no reward in the game for doing it.
FarCry 2 all over again...
Last edited:
I didn't put a comparison shot for Geralt, because that's very easy to see in-game. It's harder to get a pack of wolves to stand still to take the shots ;p
You gain plenty, it's just a matter of approach.
Try to have an open mind, don't assume that something which doesn't conform to your standards is instantly bad design, maybe it's there for a reason? maybe it makes more sense in the grand scheme of things.
The Witcher games have never been afraid to limit the player on purpose. Whether it's the second entry, forcing you to drink potions before battle or the third, taking away your ability to grind levels and money. They ask the player to give up on something, but return whatever you invest with interest. It's just not so apparent that you will immediately notice, this kind of design is what permeates those games.
At the very edge of White Orchard to the South West, right at the border of the playable area. There is a "herd" of nekkers, around a dozen in all, they are level 6. On the surface, they are no more dangerous than a pack of wolves, using group tactics and nabbing at your health. But a little overconfidence and you will quickly learn a terrible truth. They are smarter than wolves, attack in groups of 3 or more. Are quick to retreat and dodge around as they did in Witcher 2, they jump much further than they used to, and specifically target your back for bonus damage. They are not guarding anything, they are not near any of the "?" signs. There is not a chest of loot or a pretty sight to be seen either. And yes, you get few XP points for defeating them, so why seek them out at all? turns out, most of them will drop a mutagen, which as far as I can tell cannot be acquired anywhere else in the prologue until you defeat the Griffin. And even then you will only get one, not 6 or 7. Their blood and claws are worth a lot of coin and valuable crafting materials too.
You don't get to be the "poor" adventurer that has a purse filled with enough gold to by a city. Your pockets won't be filled with enough loot to equip an army. You don't get to permanently remove all the monster infestation on the continent. You don't save humanity (or.. non-humanity?) but that's not a bad thing. Learn to work around your limitations and you will find a kind of fun that's impossible to find in Skyrim. The kind of fun that comes from genuinely needing to kill a pack of monsters, and not because the game designer told you to do so.
Try to have an open mind, don't assume that something which doesn't conform to your standards is instantly bad design, maybe it's there for a reason? maybe it makes more sense in the grand scheme of things.
The Witcher games have never been afraid to limit the player on purpose. Whether it's the second entry, forcing you to drink potions before battle or the third, taking away your ability to grind levels and money. They ask the player to give up on something, but return whatever you invest with interest. It's just not so apparent that you will immediately notice, this kind of design is what permeates those games.
At the very edge of White Orchard to the South West, right at the border of the playable area. There is a "herd" of nekkers, around a dozen in all, they are level 6. On the surface, they are no more dangerous than a pack of wolves, using group tactics and nabbing at your health. But a little overconfidence and you will quickly learn a terrible truth. They are smarter than wolves, attack in groups of 3 or more. Are quick to retreat and dodge around as they did in Witcher 2, they jump much further than they used to, and specifically target your back for bonus damage. They are not guarding anything, they are not near any of the "?" signs. There is not a chest of loot or a pretty sight to be seen either. And yes, you get few XP points for defeating them, so why seek them out at all? turns out, most of them will drop a mutagen, which as far as I can tell cannot be acquired anywhere else in the prologue until you defeat the Griffin. And even then you will only get one, not 6 or 7. Their blood and claws are worth a lot of coin and valuable crafting materials too.
You don't get to be the "poor" adventurer that has a purse filled with enough gold to by a city. Your pockets won't be filled with enough loot to equip an army. You don't get to permanently remove all the monster infestation on the continent. You don't save humanity (or.. non-humanity?) but that's not a bad thing. Learn to work around your limitations and you will find a kind of fun that's impossible to find in Skyrim. The kind of fun that comes from genuinely needing to kill a pack of monsters, and not because the game designer told you to do so.
Exploriation is your decision, i like the fact that u cant outlevel monsters in certain parts and Wicther 3 is the first game which has this feature and actually nobody notices it. When u are a explorer like me u will get many lvls in other games, but the fights after that are just boring cause u outlevel the npc's in the process
"He is not talking about the fun of the battle itself. He is saying that the reward should be more worth than the cost of the battle. And I think he is kind of right. Between the food to recover health, and the repairs, you spend more gold than you earn in any random encounter. And the xp you get is also very low. So, like he politely (more than you) explains, the problem is that it's more profitable to avoid random encounters, and while that would be accurate comparing to real life, this is a game, and searching for battles should be encouraged and rewarded." with all the loot you get from points of interest,you have more than enough to repair and to buy new weapons... I don't really know what you are talking about,money isn't currently a problem for me "Thanks for that great argument... oh wait, you are just repeating what he says that concerns him and tell him to suck it up, wihout any explanation on why you think that it works better this way. " if all the different game have to be done the same way,what's the point of having different games then? the reward here for killing monsters is the loot. not exp,loot. and I quite love the system.
"Thanks for that great argument... oh wait, you are just repeating what he says that concerns him and tell him to suck it up, wihout any explanation on why you think that it works better this way. " if all the different game have to be done the same way,what's the point of having different games then? the reward here for killing monsters is the loot. not exp,loot. and I quite love the system.That's a great point Derpinsky. What incentive is there to standing and fighting randomly encountered enemy, when the cost of which is to have to repair armour, weapons and go buy/find more food.
Does the small amount of XP reward, outweigh the cost of repairs and food? I've certainly been avoiding more enemy than i have been fighting them in the wilderness.
Does the small amount of XP reward, outweigh the cost of repairs and food? I've certainly been avoiding more enemy than i have been fighting them in the wilderness.
Geez guys, get some avatars or something. It's hard to distinguish all the nonavatar posters.
On topic: They put the focus more on monsters being an obstacle, not a grinding resource. Sometimes you do want to take on some monsters for the treasure they guard or the alchemy ingredients.
On topic: They put the focus more on monsters being an obstacle, not a grinding resource. Sometimes you do want to take on some monsters for the treasure they guard or the alchemy ingredients.
Last edited:
In the beginning I also agreed. But now I get why its like that and I like it. The game rewards you for exploring, but not grinding. You only level up by doing 'Witcher' deeds. Not just running around killing every monster you see. You actually need to achieve something to gain alot of XP, something that makes sense as a witcher. So by exploring you find alot more hidden missions than only the '?' on your map.
To me I truly have come to like this way. So instead of grinding I'm now actively looking for things to do, nests to destroy and people to help.
To me I truly have come to like this way. So instead of grinding I'm now actively looking for things to do, nests to destroy and people to help.