Witcher 3 - Two Hearts of Stone Reviews

HiddenX

HiddenX

The Elder Spy
Staff Member
Original Sin Donor
Original Sin 2 Donor
Supporter
Joined
October 18, 2006
Messages
20,078
Location
Germany
Eye spotted two reviews for the Witcher 3 Expansion Hearts of Stone:

The Escapist:

The Witcher 3 - Hearts of Stone Review - Storytelling Excellence

Hearts of Stone is CD Projekt Red's first paid expansion for The Witcher 3. Except, it isn't really an "expansion". In gaming, the word expansion conjures up images of huge packs of additional content, that often drastically changes the playstyle, or bring with it an entirely new experience. I think of Heart of the Swarm for Starcraft II, or Throne of Bhaal for Baldur's Gate. Hearts of Stone on the other hand, is best compared to the DLC "episodes" of games like Fallout 3 and Borderlands - a short, self-contained adventure that simply takes place within the original game's world. But please do not take this semantics discussion as a negative, for Hearts of Stone, despite not really being an expansion, is most definitely worth the price of admission. [...]

Bottom Line: Hearts of Stone, despite not really adding that much new "stuff", tells an amazing, engaging story that is worthy of the $10 price tag. While The Wild Hunt was the conclusion to an epic, climactic saga, Hearts of Stone is simply another story in the life of Witcher Geralt.

Recommendation: If you're looking for an expansion of The Wild Hunt, you won't find it here, but if you are just looking for another bite of CD Projekt Red's incredible world-building and character development, then Hearts of Stone is for you.

Score 4.5/5
Click to expand...
Polygon:

Witcher 3's first expansion isn't terrible or great, and that's the problem

"Hearts of Stone," the first actual "expansion" style DLC for The Witcher 3, is difficult to write about, because your interest in it is going to be based entirely on how much you want more Witcher 3. Because as much as any singleplayer DLC release I've played in as long as I can remember, "Hearts of Stone" is very much more of what the base game is already full of.

In a move that almost felt geared toward me as someone who no longer has a Witcher 3 save, "Hearts of Stone" can both fold into your existing game or be played completely independently, with a new Geralt pre-leveled to 30 with decent gear to start. The DLC gets things moving quickly, introducing a new set of characters that quickly sweep Geralt into a supernatural feud involving powerful forces and the quintessentially flawed human element that's become a kind of trademark for developer CDProjekt.

[...]

Here's the thing: There's already an enormous amount of that in The Witcher 3 proper. It's not a game light on content by any definition, and my time with "Hearts of Stone" doesn't put it near the top of the game's best-of list. If you've absolutely exhausted The Witcher 3 and want more, then "Hearts of Stone" is definitely that. But most of the way through the story, I don't feel especially compelled to play more.
Click to expand...
More information.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
20,078
Location
Germany
Ah, polygon. Never change from that piece of shit that you are.
 
Joined
May 24, 2011
Messages
322
About Polygon I can only say that it's being rediculed about everywhere I go. Means not just Steam and official games boards but also in comments on PC Gamer and other gaming sites. Not by me, I avoid mentioning it.
Ah well, bad reputation is better than no reputation at all, right?

From Escapist however, after their 10/10 to DA2, I expected 273543548365248/10 here at least. ;)
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
Do you wish me to skip those reviews from Polygon? Or have they still any value?
 
Eye said:
Do you wish me to skip those reviews from Polygon? Or have they still any value?
Click to expand...

If you printed them out, I guess they'd make for some okay toilet paper.

Beyond that, no. No value at all.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
364
joxer said:
About Polygon I can only say that it's being rediculed about everywhere I go. Means not just Steam and official games boards but also in comments on PC Gamer and other gaming sites. Not by me, I avoid mentioning it.
Ah well, bad reputation is better than no reputation at all, right?

From Escapist however, after their 10/10 to DA2, I expected 273543548365248/10 here at least. ;)
Click to expand...

Seriously, the ONLY site I never click, not even for a laugh. I'm not sure if even metacritic still includes their ratings.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
3,898
Location
Croatia
Eye said:
Do you wish me to skip those reviews from Polygon? Or have they still any value?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I would keep them just for laughs :)
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
4,721
Eye said:
Do you wish me to skip those reviews from Polygon? Or have they still any value?
Click to expand...
Don't skip anything! Keep them.
Internet is a place with "pic or it didn't happen" rule. The only way to preserve history is to keep it through articles elsewhere so the parent site can't say they never existed.
pibbur who said:
But you just did.
Click to expand...
Here yes. Other sites I tend not to. ;)
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
Thanks to all who answered the question. I've decided to keep them.
These articles might push Watchers to comment, which, to me, is a positive outcome, even if the comment itself is higly negative. Besides, we all need an outlet, a chance and place to get rid of daily annoyance. ;)
 
BoboTheMighty said:
Seriously, the ONLY site I never click, not even for a laugh. I'm not sure if even metacritic still includes their ratings.
Click to expand...
well, i for one have also ignored pc gamer and ign for years as well, especially after ridiculously kind oblivious scores iirc.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
314
cutterjohn said:
well, i for one have also ignored pc gamer and ign for years as well, especially after ridiculously kind oblivious scores iirc.
Click to expand...

I would say it has been many years for myself. Most of the people here hit the nail right on the head for most games for me.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
3,381
Ovenall said:
I'm starting to tire of W3. I love the game, but holy cow is it long.
Click to expand...
Get refund right now and grab last Wolfenstein.
$50, 50 Gigs of HDD space needed, you finish it in one afternoon.

win win
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
Ovenall said:
I'm starting to tire of W3. I love the game, but holy cow is it long.
Click to expand...

I haven't played witcher 3 yet but I agree with this in general. I would like to see shorter more focused and content packed games vs 200+ hour marathons that get rather repetitive around 1/2 way through.
 
sakichop said:
I haven't played witcher 3 yet but I agree with this in general. I would like to see shorter more focused and content packed games vs 200+ hour marathons that get rather repetitive around 1/2 way through.
Click to expand...

Well there is a ton of content in TW3 not saying other larger games do. I finished almost everything in TW3 in about 150 hours. I bet 50 of those hours were taken up by playing Gwent. But take POE it is a nice game but once you are done with chapter two the story is so boring.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
3,381
sakichop said:
I haven't played witcher 3 yet but I agree with this in general. I would like to see shorter more focused and content packed games vs 200+ hour marathons that get rather repetitive around 1/2 way through.
Click to expand...

Except that TW3 doesn't have to be repetitive. One can try a couple of witcher contracts and PoIs and then follow just the main and secondary quests. It should take about 100 hours or less and those quests aren't repetitive at all. They are a joy to play in fact.
If somebody's attention span (or time available) is shorter than following only the main quest should take about 60-70 hours.
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
4,721
zahratustra said:
Except that TW3 doesn't have to be repetitive. One can try a couple of witcher contracts and PoIs and then follow just the main and secondary quests. It should take about 100 hours or less and those quests aren't repetitive at all. They are a joy to play in fact.
If somebody's attention span (or time available) is shorter than following only the main quest should take about 60-70 hours.
Click to expand...

Yes you are 100% correct.

I would explore, main quest, Gwent, Contract, Gwent, etc... At no point did I ever feel I was in some hamster wheel. I traveled to Skellige as soon as I figured out the quest to get me there. Spent some time there, didn't want to do to much so headed back.

I think I even posted as a spoiler once for everyone to go back to Kaer Morhen and explore all over. There was some great gear and what not to find there.

I will not try and convince people who do not first like the witcher games, second think skyrim is the second coming. Though will say this if you get bored playing TW3 or think it is to long then maybe RPG are not for you.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
3,381
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
4,721
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom