LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksDo you mean the first Witcher game?Originally Posted by MDOI
Do you mean the first Witcher game?
The only thing lacking in The Witcher series so far, for me, is Modding, yeah you can mod, but not as much as Skyrim. But the only thing I don't like about Skyrim is it's a bad console port.
If there was only a game that mixed everything good in both then it would probably be the best game of all time.
Witcher is an old game, it reminds me of BioWare's Knights of the Old Republic (great game by the way). Witcher 2 is by far better than Witcher 1.
You cannot directly say that one is better than the other over all. Because both have there ups and ...uppers haha
LOL I disagree with almost everything here
Well you should notice that models have a very low polygon count, meshes were not that good, everything was ideal for a console, you should read other forums as well when this game went outLOL I disagree with almost everything hereI agree however that previous TES series were meant for the PC. Skyrim for me was like the same thing that happened with GTA IV. Meant for consoles then ported to the PC. They had a lot of time to fiddle with DX10. The Witcher 2 however didn't need DX10 or DX11 to look good. You could see dedication in the way that they put in the settings.
When Skyrim went out there was nothing really special for the PC except modding. Bethesda wasn't thinking about the Elite PC Master Race unlike those guys who did The Witcher 2.
It was not Bethesda that made Skyrim a real PC game. It was the modding community itselfthat's why up until now there are a lot of players playing this game.
You shouldn't read the forums when these games come out. People don't know anything and just moan for the sake of it. If you read the forums you'd think that each new TES game was the coming of the AntiChrist. The models don't have that low a poly count at all, meshes were very good. The only thing Skyrim actually wants for is better animations, but already they're a world better than any previous TES game.Well you should notice that models have a very low polygon count, meshes were not that good, everything was ideal for a console, you should read other forums as well when this game went out
You mean the ones with lower poly counts, worse meshes and terrible animations?I agree however that previous TES series were meant for the PC.
I don't know how you can compare the wonderfully optimised TES V with the buggy frame crawler that was GTAIV!Skyrim for me was like the same thing that happened with GTA IV. Meant for consoles then ported to the PC.
Both games are DX9 no? No difference there. Both look fab in their different ways.They had a lot of time to fiddle with DX10. The Witcher 2 however didn't need DX10 or DX11 to look good. You could see dedication in the way that they put in the settings.
1) Why should there be anything special for the PC? We've already got higher fidelity graphics, greater draw distance etc. 2) The construction set is a HUGE thing!When Skyrim went out there was nothing really special for the PC except modding.
But Bethsoft enabled and fully supported that modding community in the first place...It was not Bethesda that made Skyrim a real PC game. It was the modding community itself
They were really old PC games, you were expecting it to look like Crysis?You mean the ones with lower poly counts, worse meshes and terrible animations?
And no, Vanilla Skyrim doesn't look real nice compared to "What Skyrim should look like" pictures. Witcher 2 however looks incredibly nice for an old game, it even keeps up with todays standards. The draw distance in Skyrim was still limited if you have a pretty good rig. Tweaking the ini file is one of the best options aside from mods
And the modding thing was always there because the Elite PC Master Race wouldn't allow such a thing to be not included. When I said Skyrim was a console port, I'm making it clear that it was designed with consoles in mind. Imagine if it wasn't, the maximum settings for the game would make a decent system cry.
You don't have to be so hot headed about these things for everyone knows the truth, they may deny it, but they know what is true nonetheless.
Though I haven't played the Witcher games, I've heard that they are really good games developed for the PC platform (I'm a PC gamer, and hate consoles xD)
The first Witcher game was excellent. Brilliant gameplay and excellent graphics. The second is a big let down for me. The graphics are great but the game is ruined by way too many cut scenes. I gave up after a few hours play. More and more games are going this way and it would seem that some are 50% cut scenes, 50% gameplay now. I pay my money i expect to be able to play a game all the way through. If i wanted to watch cut scenes i would watch a film.
I really don't get people's complaints about cutscenes. Cutscenes are a big part of story and what essentially what drive it forward. It pissed me off when people complained about mgs4s cutscenes.
They were only incrementally older than Skyrim.They were really old PC games, you were expecting it to look like Crysis?
Out of the box Skyrim still looks gorgeous, and the gameplay is excellent.And no, Vanilla Skyrim doesn't look real nice compared to "What Skyrim should look like"
The Witcher 2 is pretty. It's also very limited compared to Skyrim.Witcher 2 however looks incredibly nice for an old game, it even keeps up with todays standards.
Apart from all those other PC games which don't come with dedicated toolkits?And the modding thing was always there because the Elite PC Master Race wouldn't allow such a thing to be not included.
No it wouldn't - they designed it to be fun for the largest market they could. You don't need an uber rig in order to enjoy a great looking Skyrim. That's not a negativeWhen I said Skyrim was a console port, I'm making it clear that it was designed with consoles in mind. Imagine if it wasn't, the maximum settings for the game would make a decent system cry.
Eh?You don't have to be so hot headed about these things for everyone knows the truth, they may deny it, but they know what is true nonetheless.
Different people like different things. A game can be an interactive movie, or more like roleplaying. Skyrim is an excellent example of emergent story telling - you don't need someone to force your character down a particular route or a cutscene to show you a story, you create your own stories with the way your act out your character and their actions etc. For me, I don't like cutscenes much either - I've got films if I want to watch a story. I buy a game to enjoy playing it primarily.
What bugged me probably the most about Witcher 2 was the QTEs, even when they were dialled down in the options. Thankfully they've said the Witcher 3 will be much more like Skyrim, so I'm looking forward to that.
Seems hot headed indeed...
I would agree with QTE annoyance. And more open world in the Witcher 3 is fantastic news, that what I was missing in W2.
For me . Witcher is a good game and Skyrim also a good game. there is no way of comparing these two because we cant measure one over other .Both games have different stories. So i say Both are best games
if(lifeGivesYou == lemons){
makeLemonade()
}
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote