I never understood why people say Witcher 3 combat is wack

[duckbutta]

Sounds like a classic to me

After you pay 90 dollars and wait 2 years for the GOY edition that cost 80

 

[Khalil's_Black_Excellence]

After you pay 90 dollars and wait 2 years for the GOY edition that cost 80

 

[Flexington]

Acrcadium: home of the unhappy

 

[Fani Willis fan]

It's floaty, combat in newer games started feeling like it had weight to it around that time. TW3 was lagging behind.

 

[Neuromancer]

People just be saying shyt.

 

[Fatboi1]

People are conflating things like stats and builds with how good combat is. To me combat is the feel of the game. I don't care if I can equip 40 rune stones with modifications and a golden sock that boosts my agility. If the moment to moment feel of the combat is mediocre then all that is moot. Ass Creed especially Shadows feels much better to play moment to moment than what I remembered of Witcher 3.

 

[Gizmo_Duck]

People are conflating things like stats and builds with how good combat is. To me combat is the feel of the game. I don't care if I can equip 40 rune stones with modifications and a golden sock that boosts my agility. If the moment to moment feel of the combat is mediocre then all that is moot. Ass Creed especially Shadows feels much better to play moment to moment than what I remembered of Witcher 3.

I mean i would hope so, assassins creed is an action series and the games are 11 years apart

 

[MeachTheMonster]

People are conflating things like stats and builds with how good combat is. To me combat is the feel of the game. I don't care if I can equip 40 rune stones with modifications and a golden sock that boosts my agility. If the moment to moment feel of the combat is mediocre then all that is moot. Ass Creed especially Shadows feels much better to play moment to moment than what I remembered of Witcher 3.

The post you quoted.

Moment to moment you can say Ass creed combat is “better”

But over the course of the game Witcher 3 combat evolves enough that’s it more compelling to play imo.

Ass creed gameplay in general is very shallow. It looks/feels good but it’s almost on rails at times.

Witcher 3 feels more “clunky” but it’s lots deeper and something i’d rather come back to over the ass creed games.

I specifically acknowledge ass creed “feels” better.

Didn’t conflate anything.

This is why comparing an RPG to an action is stupid.

There’s so much more going on in an RPG, the “combat” is more about powers/skills/planning/etc than it is moment to moment action with the controller.

 

[Fatboi1]

The post you quoted.

I specifically acknowledge ass creed “feels” better.

Didn’t conflate anything.

This is why comparing an RPG to an action is stupid.

There’s so much more going on in an RPG, the “combat” is more about powers/skills/planning/etc than it is moment to moment action with the controller.

but that's why I said having more "depth" doesn't make something better.
Killzone 2 had a lot of "Depth" to it's shooting mechanics with it having accounting for weapon sway, heaviness, recoil and all that but that doesn't make it's combat better than say Halo 3 which was much more simple. Depth for the sake of depth doesn't substitute for fun.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

but that's why I said having more "depth" doesn't make something better.

I vehemently disagree. Probably why our opinions are so far apart on “Movie Games”

2 had a lot of "Depth" to it's shooting mechanics with it having accounting for weapon sway, heaviness, recoil and all that but that doesn't make it's combat better than say Halo 3 which was much more simple. Depth for the sake of depth doesn't substitute for fun.

Halo had “depth” in its simplicity. Kinda like nintendo games do.

 

[Guess Who]

Combat was weak. If your game’s combat is action based, regardless of genre, you want to feel like your controller inputs do what you’re telling them to do. With this game the inputs are laggy, you can’t interrupt movements in a way that feels fair and natural, aiming is weird, etc. It just fails in terms of responsiveness. And to have a main character that’s supposed to be some elite fighter, dude feels like a white belt in the dojo with his movements.

The combat is just bad. Period.

 

[Camammal]

Combat was trash, I hates games with clunky and floaty combat. Thats the only reason why I stopped playing it.

 

[Fatboi1]

I vehemently disagree. Probably why our opinions are so far apart on “Movie Games”


Halo had “depth” in its simplicity. Kinda like nintendo games do.

Yeah it had depth and felt good to play which is amazing.

Similar to how Smash Bros Melee had insane depth but was very simple on it's surface.

Witcher 3 doesn't "feel" good to play. It's an experience.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Yeah it had depth and felt good to play which is amazing.

Similar to how Smash Bros Melee had insane depth but was very simple on it's surface.

Witcher 3 doesn't "feel" good to play. It's an experience.

I agree it doesn’t “feel” as good as other games.

Most RPGS don’t because your success in combat is not about your skills with the controller, it’s all about the numbers you can run up.

Only WRPG with legit great combat is Avowed, but for that they had to sacrifice some of the RPGness of everything.

It’s always a give and take, which again is why i don’t like comparisons across genres.

 

[Killer Instinct]

You don't play Witcher 3 for the combat. That said, I didn't care for the combat at all. Lowered it to the lowest setting and enjoyed the writing, characters, side quests, and branching narratives. Dudes really picked up W3 expecting a Souls experience or Sifu