379
Many are worth checking out
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
379 points (91.8% liked)
Gaming
3164 readers
225 users here now
!gaming is a community for gaming noobs through gaming aficionados. Unlike !games, we don’t take ourselves quite as serious. Shitposts and memes are welcome.
Our Rules:
1. Keep it civil.
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only.
2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry.
I should not need to explain this one.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month.
Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
Logo uses joystick by liftarn
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Play The Witcher 2. Seriously.
Now TW1... shudders
I may be in the minority, but I went and played the first 2 Witcher games (and then the 3rd again) with the intention of seeing how CDPR grew as developers before I played Cyberpunk and I was blown away with how they have ALWAYS been good at making a game atmospheric and immersive. Yeah, the first game the whole combat experience is janky AF (but fun in its own way) and a few of the key character models (Zoltan shudder yeesh) look horrifying, but the game, story, atmosphere, and storytelling that made the Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk 2077 great were all present and noticeable in the Witchers 1 and 2
I feel like that sentiment only applies visually. The world and story of 1, as well as the gameplay if you accepted it was more of an RPG than an action game, felt much better than 2 did, imo, it just looked like absolute shit.
I just struggled hard with the gameplay. Some games throw up road blocks, but TW1 threw up entire mountain ranges for me. Maybe I just didn't quite get something in the mechanics, but it felt like the game would routinely go from playable, to "die incessantly until you grind and overlevel". A lot of the game's difficulty felt like it was just level-gating progression blocks. Maybe I was just trying to go too fast? I admit that I may have just brute-forced my way through things that probably had a more nuanced or subtle solution.
This is also not to say that I dislike TW1 at all. I quite enjoyed it. It just frustrated me more than 2 and 3 combined.
Witcher 1 did want to be more meticulous. Researching the monsters, making specific potions or coatings, using the right weapons and juggling fighting styles, ~~collecting sexy lady cards~~, balancing swordplay with signs, navigating political choices thay would be completely abandoned in the sequels...
I think TW3 already spoiled me all the plot of TW2.
i played 1 and 2 before 3 launched. Allowed me to appreciate the choices i made in 2, and while the plot of 1 for the most part is virtually disconnected from the rest of the series outside of Foltest, gives you appreciation for the heart of stone dlc in 3 when you revisit Shani (especially since i went the Shani route over the Triss one).
because of how disconnected 1 is as a story, it almost could be a side story as its very self contained outside of Foltest' role inthe universe.