The Witcher - Retrospective Interview @ CVG
 

CVG talks to Michal Madej about The Witcher in a short retrospective-style interview:
More information.

Too bad I never experience the fighting in The Witcher as "exciting" or "fun".

Yeah.. the fighting and the boring npcs (They appear a mix of childish fantasy with cruel and sexistic themes more found in mature fantasy) killed my enthusiasm. Ive not even finished the game.

Indeed, the fighting system is quite bland and reminds me more of Dragon's Lair than a CRPG.

Obviously I'm a bit biased here, but I don't know how anyone could really dislike the combat. It's a bit repetitive in the beginning, but once you get a few styles upgraded and get into some of the larger battles, I think it's great. Jumping around, evading attacks, switching styles on the fly, mixing in some of the signs… it's a lot more engaging than a lot of games. Out of curiosity, what are some of the RPGs you felt had better combat? I'm guessing you're more fans of the Oblivion-style game, or alternately you're hardcore RPG guys who dig turn-based or pseudo-turn-based?

I liked the fighting in the Witcher.

Better than in any similar game. I always think these 1st/3rd person RPGs has had a tedency to not do much out of combat. But I think The Witcher actually did make something out of it.
And then it looked cool too.

Hey guess what?! It WAS mature fantasy! I am interested though from under which stone have you dug up "sexist themes"?

I'm sorry, but I can't seem to get my hands wrapped around the combat in The Witcher. The combat, for me at least, just seems more developed to an Xbox 360, with its three different styles e.g. you either press the, a,b or c button to fight in one of these thre distinctive style mentioned.

Also, the combat for me, seems to have more to do with character skill than player skill. How well you do in combat depends on your, not Geralt's, timing, and your, not Geralt's, dexterity. And my dexterity isn't that evolved. However, I still can fight in The Witcher, it just seems to ruin the game experience for me.

At least I could learn combat in Gothic 1 and 2, and I really really like the combat in BG1 and Diablo and Gothic in which you just click on an enemy or monster - and then just hit them (in the head) till they're dead…

I just can't seem to get the grasp of hitting when the correct sound? is displayed or the sword? turns the correct colour. The story is great, though :)

There are a number of cues for when to attack (at least when you're playing on Easy or Medium). Click once to initiate the attack, keep your cursor on the monster, and when the sword icon gets a little flame around it, click again. That's probably the easiest cue to follow.

@ Aries100: It surprises me to hear you say that you picked up Gothic's combat more readily than TW's. I found Gothic to be much more demanding in terms of personal reflexes.

@ Tom Ohle: Ah, leave 'em alone, there's nothing like a praiseworthy comment from a developer to bring out the detractors with their silly comments that would baffle the reasoning ability of most everyone.
I for one, had trouble liking the combat at first, as it seemed like I would click and he wouldn't do anything. Once I figured out what was going on I was able to get the hang of it, and now I enjoy the combat immensely! I think it is very well designed. - Incedentally Tom, it may be of interest to you to know that I actually have an easier time with combat on the hardest setting than I do with the easiest. The bright flashy timing icons that appear on easy settings were actually a distraction rather than a help. Once I switched to hard it allowed me to focus on the rythym and gracefullness of the moves, which improved my ability to time attacks. … cool huh?

Then listen to me …

I really don't think so, because The Witcher is sitting between the chairs and falls through, IMHO. If you want really engaging combat, you have to offer a more direct control for the character. As soon as a fight begins in The Witcher, I sit emotionless in front of the screen, just waiting for the flaming sword symbol (or other cues). It's nice to look at, but I want more interaction. BTW, I don't like it when games start with a combat situation. This was an error in Gothic 3, in Ultima VI and even in Beyond Good & Evil - The Witcher made it even worse by mixing it with some really annoying cutscenes and dialogues.
(If you want less engaging combats, look at Ultima VII. I love how you can just press "C" for Combat and watch your Avatar and his companions fighting the evil monsters. That's the style I prefer for a 2D-game like Ultima.)

Neither. I really like the fighting in Gothic I and II and in Ultima Underworld I and II. Even Arx Fatalis was funny sometimes.

Sorry that I don't like your game that much. :(

Yes, I have tried that, but it just seems that Geralt just keeps attacking the monster untill the flame icon lits up, and then I click again. In the meantime, I seem to be doing nothing at all. No, that's not all alltogether true. I also seem to be jumping and hopping around to avoid the enemies which I often do.
The big thing for me is that you have three distinct styles of combat you can choose to use - and I never seem to have figured out which style to use - yet.

The reason I got the grasp of the combat in Gothic 1 and Gothic 2 is simply this: You attack with the keyboard (or the mouse). You can block with the keyboard.
In short, I feel, I have more control over the combat in Gothic 1 and Gothic 2.

No problem at all -- I was actually just curious about what you didn't particularly like about it.

Group Style is kinda of self-explanatory. If you have 3 (or more, enemies) use this. A warning though: don't use group style where there are green friendlies around. It is easy to accidentally hit or kill one of them.

The Fast and Strong Styles: you can either memorise which style against whom from Journal or wiki (not recommended) or, simply, if you see that you aren't doing too well with one style, switch to the other.

I think it's fair to say the combat has been widely praised, in the main. For myself, it's definitely not the best system ever but I quite enjoyed it.

The reason I compared it to Dragon's Lair is that it's basically a matter of timing single clicks - where as in DL it was a similar process of memorizing and timing clicks and movements.

I don't deny that The Witcher looks pretty good, and that combat can be easy on the eyes. However, as a player I'm severely understimulated in that area, because it takes zero involvement beyond waiting for the flaming sword. I admit, I stopped during chapter 2, so I haven't witnessed the later powers. But believe me when I say that I never felt challenged in the least, in any combat up until that point. You simply select the appropriate combat style and single click away.

Good examples of real-time combat systems would be Gothic, World of Warcraft, Hellgate London, and Diablo.

For good turn-based combat systems, I think Fallout, Temple of Elemental Evil, Blades of Arkania, and Goldbox games are great choices.

The Witcher combat is definitely one of the least entertaining systems I've tried, and I've tried hundreds.

Diablo is a click fest?, hellgate london is equally to any standar 1st person shooter but with a sword (like oblivion/morrowind). Gothic in other hand is one of the best combat system i have see around, was broken on gothic 3, wow i dont know, because i have never play it but it remind me to any standard fighting system.

I understand the timing thing on the game, because on the novel, there is a lot of description on the training of a witch and every combat of geralt, everything is timing, every move is like a dance. I really enjoy that was in some way added on the game.

I read somewhere about let the skills of the player show on the game is a rpg consola thing (you know for the controller), and know how to costumize your caracter and let him clean out all the bad guys (or good) is a pc rpg thing, i think witcher offer both thing, and for me is a nice thing :D.

A good way to love the game is reading the novels, the only problem with english speaking is there is no version on english of all the saga of geralt (in spanish there is 6 books translate and the final book it comming this months).

If you ask me if i enjoy the fights, i can truely say yes, because it stick a lot with the novels and is diferent on every game i have play from some time to this days. (is boring play the same thing all days, and then a game come out and offer the same system of fight?).

By the way, if someone really like PS:T, go play the expansion of Neverwinter nights 2:Mask of the Betrayer, awesome game, i really enjoy it, i hope the west gate module offer something like it.

OFFtopic: any idea whats happening with the pc games this days?? i mean the rpg games, i got years i dont see any isometric view game around? (in neverwinter i just move the camera, i did same with witcher, in some way it reminds me with the isometric view games :D, the problem is not the same thing as play fallout 2 or PS:T like example, i refer to the view).

Sorry my english i am from Venezuela.

I always say one thing, if you like the story on games and dont like any other aspect of it, then go read a book :D
________
Extreme Vaporizer Review

I enjoyed the combat in The Witcher - more than some games, less than others.

I just wonder why people seem to want to force all games to conform to a certain style of combat or they won't like it … ?

What's more txa while hack & slash or ARPG can stand or fall by the combat system employed this isn't (or at the very least shouldn't be) the case with RPG.

Nobody forces anything. Why don't you accept that some people find the combat in certain games pretty boring and are thus not pleased with the gameplay?

So you say that in RPG combat=gameplay and that RPG can be judged purely on it's combat system?

No, I didn't say that. What are you trying to imply?
Combat is a part of the gameplay. If a part of the whole gameplay is broken, I can't say that I'm totally pleased with it. Got it?

In case of the witcher it isn't only the combat which I don't like, just to be precise.