![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
How does The Witcher compare to Oblivion?
- Thread starter hunter33
- Start date
Its very different, It feels almost bioware'ish, and thats a lofty post
Differences from oblivion
#1) Your character is someone with a backstory, a solid set of traits, someone you can associate with rather than "you, the nameless hero"
#2) third person combat, obviously
#3) Skill trees, but the ability to build them up quickly, lots of selection
Its a very different game, but its excellent in my opinion, definitely on par with some later bioware games (KOTOR, Jade Empire)
Differences from oblivion
#1) Your character is someone with a backstory, a solid set of traits, someone you can associate with rather than "you, the nameless hero"
#2) third person combat, obviously
#3) Skill trees, but the ability to build them up quickly, lots of selection
Its a very different game, but its excellent in my opinion, definitely on par with some later bioware games (KOTOR, Jade Empire)
Phazedplasma
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2004
- Messages
- 149
Its a very different kind of rpg, like the above poster mentioned but I like it better.
RPGs are my favorite genre but I never got into NWN. From screenshots and reviews, The Witcher looks similar to Dark Messiah of Might & Magic. But I got bored of DM:M&M fairly quick. A Witcher demo would solve this dilemna
What kind of RPGs are you into then?
And to dj_2004: Yes; you actually play a character who is integral to the story (namely Geralt, who is an unusually interesting anti-hero kind of guy) unlike Oblivion, where your character is generic, lifeless, and generally void.
check out some videos of the game from http://www.gametrailers.com or youtube.com if you want to see what its like
dopefishzzz
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 20, 2005
- Messages
- 269
QFT.
MMORPGs are my fav, but I haven't played any of them in a while because they require way too much time committment.
I must be more of a simpleton than some of yall IMO Oblivion has a rich and
interesting storyline if you work through the main and side quests. I generally don't care for the concept of being pigeonholed into a certain role & persona (such as Geralt in The Witcher) because part of the fun of an RPG for me is tailoring my character exactly the way I want. Still not going to dismiss Witcher though without learning more about it and seeing some video. DMM&M was pretty good but a little too dark and unhappy for my taste, plus it had a big emphasis on combat rather than RP and world development type stuff. I wish Oblivion had a more involved combat system.
I must be more of a simpleton than some of yall
IMO Oblivion has a rich and interesting storyline if you work through the main and side quests. I generally don't care for the concept of being pigeonholed into a certain role & persona (such as Geralt in The Witcher) because part of the fun of an RPG for me is tailoring my character exactly the way I want. Still not going to dismiss Witcher though without learning more about it and seeing some video. DMM&M was pretty good but a little too dark and unhappy for my taste, plus it had a big emphasis on combat rather than RP and world development type stuff. I wish Oblivion had a more involved combat system.
I appreciate both styles of RPG presentation (distinct, fixed characters and generic, highly customizable characters). I got to enjoy some deep and rewarding character creation and progression in Mask of the Betrayer for NWN2, and now I'm enjoying a more personal and detailed story in The Witcher. It's a good year for PC RPGs.
I used to like MMOs. My first was Asheron's Call, and I played it for two years. I also had a blast playing City of Heroes with friends, but I got tired of World of Warcraft very quickly. There just isn't enough innovation and risk-taking in MMO development lately. Richard Garriot promised that for Tabula Rasa, and delivered something so typical of MMOs it might as well be WoW, but with more guns than swords (and no races).
Now I always prefer a single player RPG. They're always deeper and more interesting, and feel more like fun and less like work.
I used to like MMOs. My first was Asheron's Call, and I played it for two years. I also had a blast playing City of Heroes with friends, but I got tired of World of Warcraft very quickly. There just isn't enough innovation and risk-taking in MMO development lately. Richard Garriot promised that for Tabula Rasa, and delivered something so typical of MMOs it might as well be WoW, but with more guns than swords (and no races).
Now I always prefer a single player RPG. They're always deeper and more interesting, and feel more like fun and less like work.
Just watched some Witcher videos, pretty cool. Not sure if I could get into the game, it does seem rather dark like DMM&M and I can't relate well to Geralt. I like to RP a stealthy outdoorsman type, good with a sword and bow, a dislike for cities, and a limited user of destructive and healing magic. This usually means stereotypical "ranger" or some derivative thereof in an RPG. I played Ultima Online, EQ and Dark Age of Camelot quite a bit in the past but am not going to get into MMORPGs any more. Too much time required, there are other things in life, and I'm married. Never got into AC, NWN, EQ2, WoW or the other big ones. EQ is still probably my best gaming experience ever. I played Dark Sun and Eye of the Beholder as a kid, they stand out as very good SP experiences as does Oblivion.
The fighting system is awful in The Witcher. You just click on an enemy and when your character is ready he'll attack, its not a responsive system where you feel in control. You can also chain attacks by clicking again when the cursor highlights. Sometimes you can get surrounded and your character is stuck blocking and cannot move.
Outside of the fighting system its a good game though and its definitely worth trying.
Outside of the fighting system its a good game though and its definitely worth trying.
the witcher and oblivion have graphics that are pretty much on par with eachother, if i had to give one game an edge the witcher would get it, this game is just beautiful. the witcher is a true RPG where you really feel like you're the character that you play. the storyline is excellent and not redundant. it has comparable play time to oblivion, its advertised at 80 hours your first time through, but is quite a bit higher if you complete all the secondary quests. oblivion's world is more open feeling, and that's one of the two areas where it bests the witcher, the other being the controls. in the witcher you will get frustrated several times at not being able to move how you'd like to. overall this game is a masterpiece that in all honesty should get game of the year but probably won't due to other games getting hyped much more.
The Witcher is in many ways more of an RPG than Oblivion, and if you're looking for a more serious RPG then the witcher would be preferable, however I would not say that The Witcher looks better than Oblivion, it's still a nice looking game but Oblivions outdoor areas are still second to none in my opinion.
I've not played much of The Witcher so far, nor am I particuarly a fan of RPG's but I'm liking it except for the rather stiff combat system.
I've not played much of The Witcher so far, nor am I particuarly a fan of RPG's but I'm liking it except for the rather stiff combat system.
At first I didn't know which key to use for attacks lol.
I have both games and prefer Oblivion so far. I admit, I only got The Witcher delivered today and I'm sure it will get much better later in the game.
Andrew_Carr
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 2,777
You say Oblivion has better controls than the Witcher? Holy shit, they must be really bad. I can't stand Oblivion's interface.
While I'm not going to argue that the Witcher's combat system is great by any means, there's a couple of things wrong with the above - there's at least a few viable methods of crowd control and if that fails, one can double-click/double-tap past enemies to dodge around which seems to override any automatic behaviour (blocking, passive dodging) as far as I can tell. I've frequently moved myself out of a ring of enemies using that method with no trouble. Also, in hard mode, one actually has to time one's own attack chains as opposed to having the game show when to continue them.
That aside, yes, it's a fairly simplistic combat system, but I don't really find it to be that much of an issue. My biggest beef with the game at the moment is the fact that maps aren't stored in cache when you change zones, resulting in relatively long waits practically every time one zones, compounded by the fact that the game autosaves practically every time one zones as well.
Oh God, yes.
Oblivion's UI does indeed sucketh, but there are tons of UI mods out there. BTMod and Darnified UI are two I tried, and both were much better than the stock game UI. I still use BTMod. Bethesda seems to embrace the concept and encourage the modding community. Wonder if there will be user mods for The Witcher?
There's been talk of CDProjekt releasing a modding kit to the community at some point, but I can't speak either way as to the truth of that.
The combat system for me killed it. I made it through about 20 minutes of this and couldn't take anymore. At least Hellgate London has a responsive combat system. I may try it later, but after playing Oblivion and Hellgate, this game has about as much immersion as my foot in a mushy turd.
It took me a while to get the hang of combat, as I would double clicking a lot and wondering why he wasn't attacking
... once I realized that you had to click and wait a sec then click again at the right time to continue the chain it felt much smoother.I've gone from a passive stance on this to a more aggresive one, I could put up with the akward combat system for a bit, but now I've reached a boss that they've made completely solid, I need a responsive combat system that does what I tell it, not just makes the character stand there and get owned. So far the game had surpassed Oblvion in many ways but this one boss has spoilt the entire game for me now, I'm actually quite angry about it, I don't feel like playing it anymore, which is a bad trait to associate with a game to be honest.
See my post in your other thread. Also what difficulty are you playing on? And are you double tapping movement to dodge / roll?
SPARTAN VI
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2004
- Messages
- 8,762
Oh no! I would never associate The Elder Scrolls with the mediocre, casual gamers' delight, that is the GTA franchise.
..but it is fun to kill a patrolling guard and jack his horse.
I was following along until you said "serious" RPG. I know you didn't mean that literally, like Oblivion is a joke or anything. Is The Witcher more of an RPG simply because it's linear and has a thicker plot? I find Oblivion's open end nature more appealing, but it never hurts to have a little bit of everything. Games like KOTOR, Grandia, and Morrowind make up my top 3 RPGs.
Phazedplasma
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2004
- Messages
- 149
Some people didn't look at the controls/pay attention.
When you get surrounded you can just dodge out of the way.
Don't knock a game until you know how to play it.
When you get surrounded you can just dodge out of the way.
Don't knock a game until you know how to play it.
I took out no less than 12 drowners, drowned dead, and various other creatures at once in act 2, and I only took a few hits. You have to stay mobile and use signs and group stance to keep enemies from overwhelming you. If you get mobbed, double tap any direction to break free.
There is a lot more strategy involved in this game's combat than most people realize. I think some people get into it, put together the third person view and the sword, and think "Ooh, Diablo!". If you play this like Diablo, you will die. A lot.
There is a lot more strategy involved in this game's combat than most people realize. I think some people get into it, put together the third person view and the sword, and think "Ooh, Diablo!". If you play this like Diablo, you will die. A lot.
dopefishzzz
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 20, 2005
- Messages
- 269
I DO love the combat system.
Simple and interactive.
The only downside for me are sound glitches.
Even my loading times are pretty fast. (10 sec outside, 3 sec inside)
Best single player RPG of the last 2-3 years if you ask me.
LOTS of content. GREAT story.
Simple and interactive.
The only downside for me are sound glitches.
Even my loading times are pretty fast. (10 sec outside, 3 sec inside)
Best single player RPG of the last 2-3 years if you ask me.
LOTS of content. GREAT story.
Spare-Flair
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2003
- Messages
- 7,471
Unfortunately, since there's no first-person view - I'm not going to play the Witcher. I haven't been able to enjoy 3rd person view games since...well Shenmue (which I wish was first person).
stoney_titan
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2007
- Messages
- 2,018
Gazoontite! Never heard of the game.
Anyways, is the Witcher easier on the system compared to Oblivion?
MMORPGs are my fav, but I haven't played any of them in a while because they require way too much time committment.
I must be more of a simpleton than some of yall
interesting storyline if you work through the main and side quests. I generally don't care for the concept of being pigeonholed into a certain role & persona (such as Geralt in The Witcher) because part of the fun of an RPG for me is tailoring my character exactly the way I want. Still not going to dismiss Witcher though without learning more about it and seeing some video. DMM&M was pretty good but a little too dark and unhappy for my taste, plus it had a big emphasis on combat rather than RP and world development type stuff. I wish Oblivion had a more involved combat system.
Oblivion would seem rich in story for some one who likes to play MMO games which are about as bland and flat in story as a games can possible get.
I can't tell if you meant that as an insult or an opinion. Either way it's a sweeping generalization and a lot of people would not agree. There are not many games out there with a more solid storyline than Oblivion.
It's not an insult. It's my opinion. In any case there few games with a storyline with more depth than Oblivion (though they do exist). I wasn't disagreeing with that. What I am saying is that MMO's have very flat and almost non-existent stories and therefore they don't compare favorably to a single player RPG in that regard. Anyone who is used to MMOs might see Oblivion as having a rich storyline in comparison. That's what I meant by the comment.
Another way of looking at it is that, from your characters point of view, the story in Oblivion seems distant and impersonal because your character is not really part of the story. Since you have such a degree of customization, your character is not distinct and unique in that world, so the character's personal involvement in it is almost nil.
On the other hand, The Witcher features a much more restricted character development model, but presents a character who is distinct and is inherently involved in the game's story. There are many personal elements for Geralt in the story, particularly in his relationships with other characters. These sorts of connections just don't work well in MMOs and games like Oblivion, where everyone else treats your character as a nameless, faceless non-person.
One easy way to note the difference is in voiced dialogue. In Oblivion, your character is never referred to by name, since you can name him/her whatever you want. In The Witcher, NPCs frequently refer to Geralt by name. This is more immersive from a roleplaying perspective.
Each style has its limitations, but both are perfectly valid. The Oblivion style is more gameplay oriented in that it allows a huge range of character builds. The Witcher's style is more story oriented, in that it involves the character you play much more deeply in the events of the story. You can't really have both in the same game, and people will usually prefer one or the other, depending on their tastes.
On the other hand, The Witcher features a much more restricted character development model, but presents a character who is distinct and is inherently involved in the game's story. There are many personal elements for Geralt in the story, particularly in his relationships with other characters. These sorts of connections just don't work well in MMOs and games like Oblivion, where everyone else treats your character as a nameless, faceless non-person.
One easy way to note the difference is in voiced dialogue. In Oblivion, your character is never referred to by name, since you can name him/her whatever you want. In The Witcher, NPCs frequently refer to Geralt by name. This is more immersive from a roleplaying perspective.
Each style has its limitations, but both are perfectly valid. The Oblivion style is more gameplay oriented in that it allows a huge range of character builds. The Witcher's style is more story oriented, in that it involves the character you play much more deeply in the events of the story. You can't really have both in the same game, and people will usually prefer one or the other, depending on their tastes.
Official word now, they're planning on releasing a toolkit as well as further campaign modules to the community.