Why are people soo divisive on Witcher 3 combat?

[PillarBiter]

Because the combat is above averange compared to most ARPGs, but way below averange compared to a good action game or obviously something like Dark Souls. However The Enhanced Edition mod makes the combat a billion times for fluid, challenging and rewarding. It is day and night, and going back to vanilla seems impossible.

I'll agree to that. Indeed, the combat is good for an open world RPG, but not sufficient for an action game. The only game to mix these decently is Kingdoms of Amalur, imho. Thign is, anytime anyone says the combat is bad just gets me triggered because it's just not true.

That said, just because it's not at the level of an action game, doesn't mean it's not enjoyable. And I understand that people would have wanted/expected more of it, but it is what it is. Enjoy what you're given and don't hold your hopes too high. You'll live in a much less dark world.

 

[release_15]

I'll agree to that. Indeed, the combat is good for an open world RPG, but not sufficient for an action game. The only game to mix these decently is Kingdoms of Amalur, imho. Thign is, anytime anyone says the combat is bad just gets me triggered because it's just not true..

Interesting. Always wanted to try KoA. That franchise held so much promise, it's a pity it was lost.

Regarding the topic at hand, I've always found TWIII's combat a fairly flawless mix between RPG number crunching and straight up tactical manoeuvering. It's an elegant solution for an RPG already brimming with countless systems and their intertwined complexity. I love it. Even a friend of mine, who usually despises RPGs and any kind of numbers- or turn-based system, plays the game on the easiest difficulty setting and considers it a great action game. It's not perfect, but it's much more intuitive than TWII. That game had a much steeper learning curve. I can definitely appreciate the effort put into making this one more approachable.

 

[Paul_cz]

Witcher 3 has fantastic combat, at least in my experience. It has to be fantastic considering that it hasn't started to bore me after two playthroughs and 520 hours played.

Meanwhile, by the 70th hour of both Dark Souls 1 and 2 that I finished, I wanted it to be over. So boring and repetitive, just combat combat combat no variety in gameplay at all, and the combat is vastly overrated. Didn't even bother with Dark Souls 3. Although Bloodborne appeals to me at least a little thanks to its awesome aesthetics.

 

[mico11]

I find it soo werid how people have radically different opinions on this games combat. People either love it and call it smooth while others call it a clunky, janky and a terrible mess.

Dunno I enjoyed it. Maybe some people play it at lower framerate and that can have effect?

It's a meme to hate on TW series combat, I thought W1 and W3 were great mechanically, with W2 feeling a bit rushed

 

[DeadEyeisReady]

Dunno I enjoyed it. Maybe some people play it at lower framerate and that can have effect?

It's a meme to hate on TW series combat, I thought W1 and W3 were great mechanically, with W2 feeling a bit rushed

Even with higher framerates Witcher 3 has some of the worst combat in recent memory not including the Witcher 2 which was literal aids. Its not a meme to hate on the games combat it sucks total dick. CDPR has some the crappiest combat designers in modern gaming. They make Bethesda combat systems look like it was made from FromSoftware. CDPR please hire better combat designers in you're company the current people you have are clueless.

https://youtu.be/poh0CqoKsYI?t=48s

https://youtu.be/dmtTYJ0SXBE?t=4m40s

---------- Updated at 03:14 AM ----------

I never had the SLIGHTEST problem with the Witcher combat system, it is cinematic and awesome and superstylish, especially with KNGR`s slow motion combat mod where all the critical hits are shown in slow motion.

The only problem the combat system had, was this forced combat stance with auto-lock-on even on big distances - Geralt refused to run away and kept facing the enemy even when the enemy was already very far away.
Geralt was not directly controllable and steerable anymore but kept dancing and circling around a locked-on enemy all the time, one had to make a dozen jump-rolls when wanting to avoid a combat with a too strong enemy before the auto-lock and forced-facing in the enemy`s direction had finally been disabled when Geralt was about 1000 meters away of the enemy. And controllable and steerable again instead of constant circling around his target and moving slower than a mining truck while in combat stance.
But this auto-lock forced combat stance problem and moving like a slow tank even when locked-on enemy was already 10 miles away, has been patched already, and there are sliders for the camera and combat stance / auto-lock option sliders in every second camera or Witcher overhaul mod, so no problem anymore

You can now control Geralt as usual in combat situations, he can run and he can jump whith his swords drawn and in combat-stance, and the auto-lock kicks in only in the vicinity of a single enemy Geralt really wants to attack - and he can turn around anytime and run away from the sword fight when health is low, and is not forced to make several dozens of jump-rolls anymore to drink swallow potion.

Otherwise of this super-slow mining truck like behaviour while in combat stance (which has already been patched and is overhauled in every second mod) the combat in Witcher 3 is superb, cineastic sword moves, awesome finishers, the best motion capturing ever made in any game can be enjoyed in Witcher 3.
Especially the cat school whirl is the best ever seen in any sword combat situations.

ROFL just ROFL. In all seriousness anyone who says the combat in the Witcher 3 is good has no clue what a good combat system actually is. Bloodborne/Dark Souls, Nioh, Dragons Dogma, DMC: Devil May Cry and Arkham games actually have great combat.

---------- Updated at 03:29 AM ----------

Because they got spoiled by Dark Souls

Nope people aren't spoilled by Dark Souls they just call out shitty combat when they see it. The Witcher games have shitty combat its that simple.

 

[arkhenon]

You know, I know the chances of this happening is pretty low, but I wish they made Cyberpunk 2077 an RPG with turn-based combat. Yup, I definitely want it to be more strategic and less action-oriented. Maybe that way people who might think of it as something that it is not even trying to be would not be interested in it, and would not even want to try it in the first place.

I mean, comparing an "RPG" with nearly pure action games such as DMC and Arkham series or more twitch action-leaning games such as Souls/Borne and Nioh... I believe you went into this game waiting for something that it definitely is not even trying to do mate Comparing it to Dragon Age: Inquisition or Kingdoms of Amalur would have made much more sense, but those ones (especially DMC and Arkham series)... I even saw some people comparing it to Shadow of Mordor, and I'm afraid if it goes like this people will try to compare it to God of War or Assassin's Creed.

 

[kissybyc]

Not targeting anyone, but calling the combat bad without giving a reason doesn't help anyone's argument...

My two cents is that the game's combat is pretty okay. It CAN be played elegantly, stylishly, and very fun. BUT, it can also be played boringly (slash, Quen, roll etc.), and the problem is that the game does not punish boring gameplay bordering exploit. It doesn't reward fancy gameplay either beyond that it looks cool.

So here goes my biggest gripe with TW3 combat: the mechanic doesn't go hand in hand with the style. In the end of the day, combining alchemy, multiple signs, light/fast attacks and precise dodging only kills enemies marginally better than spamming attack and roll. So for most people who are very used to the mindset of just "beating the game," they are not encouraged to explore the elegant ways to play the game. However for someone like me who wants to see Geralt fight like a witcher, I choose to use the full arsenal of animations and signs the game has to offer, not so much that it makes the fights significantly easier, but that I get a kick out of roleplaying as a real witcher. And that's actually really fun, but you sorta have to decide to do that. The game mechanics itself doesn't help you there.

Let me see if I can upload a video of my own gameplay sometime...

 

[PillarBiter]

My two cents is that the game's combat is pretty okay. It CAN be played elegantly, stylishly, and very fun. BUT, it can also be played boringly (slash, Quen, roll etc.), and the problem is that the game does not punish boring gameplay bordering exploit. It doesn't reward fancy gameplay either beyond that it looks cool.

Actually pretty accurate. I always liked the style meter of devil may cry (dear god not the last DmC one, but DMC 3 and 4). It awarded you more points for reaching higher ranks, which you could use to level up your moves etc.
I realise that witcher-fans of the old witcher games would cry blood and murder over it, but a similar system (more exp for combining signs, bombs, potions, different swordplay, not getting hit etc.) would play more towards the rewarding game.

Also, (and this is getting off-track, but still is a little bit about combat) I've contemplated that the witcher 4 game shoudl be an action-oriented game more akin to DMC4 gameplay wise using Ciri's overpoweredness as a tool for hear break-neck acrobatics. Just a thought, no need to hate.

 

[Martinvls]

Not targeting anyone, but calling the combat bad without giving a reason doesn't help anyone's argument...

My two cents is that the game's combat is pretty okay. It CAN be played elegantly, stylishly, and very fun. BUT, it can also be played boringly (slash, Quen, roll etc.), and the problem is that the game does not punish boring gameplay bordering exploit. It doesn't reward fancy gameplay either beyond that it looks cool.

So here goes my biggest gripe with TW3 combat: the mechanic doesn't go hand in hand with the style. In the end of the day, combining alchemy, multiple signs, light/fast attacks and precise dodging only kills enemies marginally better than spamming attack and roll. So for most people who are very used to the mindset of just "beating the game," they are not encouraged to explore the elegant ways to play the game. However for someone like me who wants to see Geralt fight like a witcher, I choose to use the full arsenal of animations and signs the game has to offer, not so much that it makes the fights significantly easier, but that I get a kick out of roleplaying as a real witcher. And that's actually really fun, but you sorta have to decide to do that. The game mechanics itself doesn't help you there.

Let me see if I can upload a video of my own gameplay sometime...

What do you call elegant way? Use axii, then quen, then put yrden and then start slashing until quen broken then again axii, quen, yrden? Is this elegant? With this simplistic and obvious order you can kill anybody who is not resistant to axii no matter how powerful they are (if you can pierce their armor of course, and if you can't they are invincible no matter what you do). And in late game replace Yrden with Rend and slash helpless "boss monster" with critical hits? And if he is resistant to axii but then he is usually susceptible to fire and then you don't need any combo just spam igni? Basic quen shows that AI is so stupid that can't coordinate even two simultaneous hits in row, and alternative quen is simply a cheat.
Signs are completely overpowered and the only reason for what you need sword is fact that signs (with exception of burning effect) can't do big damage in late game.
Your every sign is hard counter to any enemy (unless he is resistant to it), I remember that only really challenging and interesting battles were against monsters with high resistance to signs, otherwise it's just easy beating. And you don't need to spent a lot of character points for this, a dozen of points and 150% sign intensity make your game a cakewalk until lvl 20+. And if you are 20+ there are so many effective ways to kill with different obvious builds so I can count only a few times when I was unable to defeat "sure-death-monster" from first try. And I am casual average player, I played most RPGs on normal difficulty and never feel a need to rise it in first walkthrough.
Also there are so many things that can prevent you from death - dodge, parry, block, quen, undying. So any poor monster, even if he is lvl 35 and you are 20 can't kill you because even if you fail your dodge, you are protected by quen and even if you made second mistake in a row you are protected by undying, so you need three mistakes in a row to die and only if monster can one-shot you. Of course there are some tricky boss monsters, but that's just a few percents of all battles.
So you are completely right - it's not that battle is bad in animation or responsiveness (not ideal, but good for RPG genre), it is simply unbalanced, if your "elegant ways" are working they are OP, and if they are not working then only way to win is sword+quen. After 100 hours you are getting bored of all that sign combinations and you just want to know where story ends so you are just slashing you way killing monsters in a most fast way (and sword+quen is the fastest). And this unbalance came first of all from AI stupidness. Why they can't simply attack all together? I played a dozen of "best of the year" RPGs and if there weren't clever AI available, then they will simply attack as a horde and slaughter you in few seconds without dancing around, roaring, waving fists and other useless actions which they are doing in TW3.
So that's your list of reasons (why combat is not great if you already know it mechanics):

1. Stupid AI
2. Unbalanced numbers
3. Unrewarding after lvl 11 (witcher's gear is always the best, it's extremely rare that you can find relic sword more effective then witcher's)

Of course many of you can say that you are happy with battle, balance and diversity, everything is cool, you are having fun for 500+ hours already.. I believe that you may have such opinion and it is sincere. But then you mustn't try another "best of the year" games because they can make you mad with elation and astonishment.

(sarcasm) You know that there were hundreds of spells in Baldur's Gate 2 and you simply can't make a step in dungeon without using at least two dozens of them? And it is balanced and designed in that way that you are not bored by endless changing spell lists, every battle you need to use micro-control because there are traps, weapon reach, weapon speed, timings, instant death and we were stupid young boys when it was released and still we were able to handle all that without getting bored.
And now you are telling about "elegant" ways in game with 8 spells, 2 basic attacks, 2 specials, useless crossbows and very situational grenades. There are not elegant ways in this game, only illusion of it.

Oh. I'm sorry it's not honest to compare TW3 battle to such clumsy, old and unrefined RPG-games like BG2 / Skyrim / ME2, they are all in top 10 on Metacritic, and TW3 "best game EVER!!" is not... TW3 is under Diablo in that rating.. Diablo.. plain slasher, with random-generated dungeons levels and loot... So Blizzard's random generator from twenty years ago is working better then CDPR's handmade game balance..
i don't know about what decent battle in TW3 you are talking about, it is worse even in comparison to the RPG-genre popular competitors, without comparisons to modern action games..

 

[PillarBiter]

wall of text

We get it, you don't like the combat. You're a broken record, let others voice their opinion instead of forcing yours on them.

 

[Martinvls]

We get it, you don't like the combat. You're a broken record, let others voice their opinion instead of forcing yours on them.

A forum member asked for a reasons and I gave him reasons - both in-game and comparative to other games, and those reasons are not my subjective opinion, they are just facts and statistics. You can tell me (us) what are yours "elegant ways" to play TW3, I'll happily try them because I love this game and want to explore it world more times but I simply don't know what to do aside from skill combinations mentioned above and from which I already tired.
Please prove your point and give advice - how to play TW3 in a new interesting way in second or third walkthrough (or give a link to forum where such ways are shown and productively discussed), I'm sure all that people irritated with lack of diversity and balance in combat after first 50 hours of game, they will be thankful.

 

[TouPoutsou]

A good way to enjoy the combat after 100 hours, if you are on PC, is modding. Gameplay mods can actually do WONDERS. There plenty of them that are all amazing, like The enhanced edition, School of Roach or Better Combat. They all substancially increase the challenge of the game, and you have to use most of the tools you have to succeed. Enhanced Edition, playing unlocked(no auto target) is my favourite, due to giving you more control of which attacks you can use with the attack distance modifier, also it has more stats like poise, new andrenaline, vigor and stamina functions, and also attack speed, which makes combat much more fluid and less slow paced(if you build for it).

Generally these mods work wonders. The combat will never be as good as Dark Souls, because let's face it, it has the great combat in any Action RPG ever created, but it can be on par or (IMO) even much better than Dragon's Dogma, any Elder's Scrolls game or any Hack N Slash ARPG like diablo, titan quest etc. Comparing The Witcher's Combat to classic RPGs or pure action games is not fair or even make sense.

I agree that unmodded, the combat has issues, but IMO it is not even close to being that bad as most people here make it out to be. It still is superior than a good 75% of game tagged under the "Action RPG" label. As i said comparing it to pure Action games is unfair and dumb.

 

[Martinvls]

A good way to enjoy the combat after 100 hours, if you are on PC, is modding. Gameplay mods can actually do WONDERS. There plenty of them that are all amazing, like The enhanced edition, School of Roach or Better Combat. They all substancially increase the challenge of the game, and you have to use most of the tools you have to succeed. Enhanced Edition, playing unlocked(no auto target) is my favourite, due to giving you more control of which attacks you can use with the attack distance modifier, also it has more stats like poise, new andrenaline, vigor and stamina functions, and also attack speed, which makes combat much more fluid and less slow paced(if you build for it).

Generally these mods work wonders. The combat will never be as good as Dark Souls, because let's face it, it has the great combat in any Action RPG ever created, but it can be on par or (IMO) even much better than Dragon's Dogma, any Elder's Scrolls game or any Hack N Slash ARPG like diablo, titan quest etc. Comparing The Witcher's Combat to classic RPGs or pure action games is not fair or even make sense.

I agree that unmodded, the combat has issues, but IMO it is not even close to being that bad as most people here make it out to be. It still is superior than a good 75% of game tagged under the "Action RPG" label. As i said comparing it to pure Action games is unfair and dumb.

Thanks for info, I just bought a PC for modding purposes and that Enhanced Edition looks very interesting on Nexus (as some other mods like item lvl requirements removing). I think removing of item level req together with increased difficulty and rebalanced battle mechanics may give interesting results.

P.S. mod description is fun as hell, my mood is trembling with anticipation of the end of work day, thanks again.:smiling2:

 

[Riven-Twain]

Moderator's note: A couple posts have been deleted. Please, remember to keep the discussion polite, on-topic, and avoid insulting others, even if you disagree with their opinions. Thanks. Carry on.

 

[SigilFey]

What do you call elegant way? Use axii, then quen, then put yrden and then start slashing until quen broken then again axii, quen, yrden? Is this elegant...?

I can easily sympathize with your point of view! The "solution", I think, is both far too subjective to be real and not possible if games like this wish to maintain their mechanics. The difficulty lies in designing a lateral combat system that also creates a nice challenge level. Here's how I see it:

The Witcher 3 tries to let players improvise their approach to combat to suit their play-style or character build by providing various attacks, tools, and signs as options. Right here, we have a slew of issues that boil down to catch-22 situations. Which should inherently be more powerful? Fast attacks? Power attacks? Ripostes? Signs? Crossbow bolts? Bombs? If I choose one -- I immediately make that the superior option, and I begin to nerf the other approaches. If I leave them balanced, I begin to make the game too easy, because no matter what players do, they win. I start to add enemies with specific strengths / weaknesses that certain character builds will have an advantage over / weakness to. This can create frustration when one character build whomps an enemy, but another finds it completely impossible to defeat. The great Quest for Balance begins...and there's bloody no end to it.

I think games that take a combat approach similar to TW3 all suffer from the same situation. I'll take Kingdoms of Amalur and Assassin's Creed into account as two similar extremes (Amalur off to the far left as a more open-ended experience, Creed off to the far right as an even more linear take on the player character.) In the end, all three games wind up with characters that are able to "spam" certain attacks to win. All three games offer skills, that we wish were implemented more effectively, that just seem to become obsolete over time. It's the nature of the approach. A game cannot offer players the ability to play how they wish, and simultaneously offer consistent challenge, fluidity, and balance. Eventually, someone will notice a clunky inconsistency. (Plus, all three games have been accused of being "too easy" by a lot of players.)

So what do all three of these games offer? The ability for players to handle the combat with style. You don't have to. You can get by in each game by mashing the basic attack button. But the games also allow players to hone a specific fighting style and create a "customized cinematic experience" during combat. The challenge is not simply winning (like in Dark Souls or Dragon Age), the challenge is also in making it look as frickin' cool as you possibly can while doing it.

I guess the games sacrifice overall difficulty for a more horizontal aesthetic appeal. Now, it's down to each individual player as to whether they like that or not.

 

[arkhenon]

I, for one, nearly NEVER use Quen to make the combat more interesting (and it looks cool to dodge stuff, especially if you don't use the roll too much )

 

[Garrison72]

I, for one, nearly NEVER use Quen to make the combat more interesting (and it looks cool to dodge stuff, especially if you don't use the roll too much )

Quen has been a strategy killer since the second game. I almost never use it. I hate that it's even integrated into the skill tree. It should be a rare, special ability.

 

[PillarBiter]

I can easily sympathize with your point of view! The "solution", I think, is both far too subjective to be real and not possible if games like this wish to maintain their mechanics. The difficulty lies in designing a lateral combat system that also creates a nice challenge level. Here's how I see it:

The Witcher 3 tries to let players improvise their approach to combat to suit their play-style or character build by providing various attacks, tools, and signs as options. Right here, we have a slew of issues that boil down to catch-22 situations. Which should inherently be more powerful? Fast attacks? Power attacks? Ripostes? Signs? Crossbow bolts? Bombs? If I choose one -- I immediately make that the superior option, and I begin to nerf the other approaches. If I leave them balanced, I begin to make the game too easy, because no matter what players do, they win. I start to add enemies with specific strengths / weaknesses that certain character builds will have an advantage over / weakness to. This can create frustration when one character build whomps an enemy, but another finds it completely impossible to defeat. The great Quest for Balance begins...and there's bloody no end to it.

I think games that take a combat approach similar to TW3 all suffer from the same situation. I'll take Kingdoms of Amalur and Assassin's Creed into account as two similar extremes (Amalur off to the far left as a more open-ended experience, Creed off to the far right as an even more linear take on the player character.) In the end, all three games wind up with characters that are able to "spam" certain attacks to win. All three games offer skills, that we wish were implemented more effectively, that just seem to become obsolete over time. It's the nature of the approach. A game cannot offer players the ability to play how they wish, and simultaneously offer consistent challenge, fluidity, and balance. Eventually, someone will notice a clunky inconsistency. (Plus, all three games have been accused of being "too easy" by a lot of players.)

So what do all three of these games offer? The ability for players to handle the combat with style. You don't have to. You can get by in each game by mashing the basic attack button. But the games also allow players to hone a specific fighting style and create a "customized cinematic experience" during combat. The challenge is not simply winning (like in Dark Souls or Dragon Age), the challenge is also in making it look as frickin' cool as you possibly can while doing it.

I guess the games sacrifice overall difficulty for a more horizontal aesthetic appeal. Now, it's down to each individual player as to whether they like that or not.

Da's wha I'vu bin sayin'!!

But you know, less eloquent-like.

 

[Martinvls]

The Witcher 3 tries to let players improvise their approach to combat to suit their play-style or character build by providing various attacks, tools, and signs as options. Right here, we have a slew of issues that boil down to catch-22 situations. Which should inherently be more powerful? Fast attacks? Power attacks? Ripostes? Signs? Crossbow bolts? Bombs? If I choose one -- I immediately make that the superior option, and I begin to nerf the other approaches. If I leave them balanced, I begin to make the game too easy, because no matter what players do, they win. I start to add enemies with specific strengths / weaknesses that certain character builds will have an advantage over / weakness to. This can create frustration when one character build whomps an enemy, but another finds it completely impossible to defeat. The great Quest for Balance begins...and there's bloody no end to it.

Enhanced Edition mod solves all this - when stamina, adrenaline (vigor in EE) and health became your valuable resourse - you can't spam anything anymore because it will deplete these resources and make Geralt weaker. So you need to make precise hits and decisions to be most effective. Of course that mod isn't ideal, but it was created by one person in his free time and also anybody can personalize it for himself, shifting game difficulty from mad experimental easiness to extremely hard.
But of course, that gameplay may be too encumbering for people who want just to relax enjoying story with some action after work/study etc

So what do all three of these games offer? The ability for players to handle the combat with style. You don't have to. You can get by in each game by mashing the basic attack button. But the games also allow players to hone a specific fighting style and create a "customized cinematic experience" during combat. The challenge is not simply winning (like in Dark Souls or Dragon Age), the challenge is also in making it look as frickin' cool as you possibly can while doing it.

Yes, as I see there is new generation of players which value visuals first of all, for whom any game is interactive film, and gameplay elements are secondary. I was shocked how popular are mods which remove weight limit and give 999999 of gold. So even after game was so simplified in gameplay elements in comparison to TW1, masses of players try to simplify it even more. I won't judge them, anybody may play how they want. But there is still a lot of old-school gamers who want to meditate only near campfire, who don't believe that tons of potions can be restored with one bottle of alcohol and who didn't understand why lvl 25 witcher is invincible to level 5 wolf, but from other side can't do any damage to lvl 40 ordinary monster just because that monster has enormous armor without any actual reason for it. (he is not golem, elemental, just another piece of flesh)

So why not create two or more separate game balance presets with different levels of immersion and realism? I think there will be much less whining (and there are lots of them in "General feedback") and metacritic score will be significantly higher if such presets were in base game.

 

[yyb0568]

Gameplay/combat always one of CDPR's biggest weakness just like the game's uncomfortable control. It's has lots of problems in the design layer, however what's worse is it's implemention layer, like famous game magezine Edge review says " It's has lots of technology issues " so they give it 8, sometimes witcher is overrated.
For example one of the basic thing in combat develop is the hitboxes, however the programmers at CDPR do bad job in it, so you can find things like
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpOcHj9C2Fo or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEa7RjlLWRg these things inflence player's feeling another example is the soft lock system, lots of people sick of it, however some game like Batman has similar system received by more people just because Rocksteady do quite a good job in the lock system it's comfortable and accurate.
And I find a interesting thing that's Geralt's sprint inertia, maybe developer think it more reality but in my opinion it's stupid just stupid like roch's control, sorry seriously but very practical, In morden game industry you will found very little developer will do like this because they all know game is play NOT watch control over performance, you can make it more reality but remember one thing NEVER interrupt player's control.
All in all CDPR need learn lots of things, just begin rework the old red engine then let's programmer and animator learn how to create comfortable controls. Just solve these BASIC technology issues, you will find many thins are different.