PPL criticize Witcher 3 combat yet Dark Soul isn't even good

Why do people dog on the Witcher combat system when Dark Souls combat is sluggish and clunky. I literally back stabbed enemies just to finish them off quickly. Unfortunately there are order flaws the soul games have that people tend to ignore.

I don't get it either. Dark Souls always made me feel as if I was fighting underwater or something. I can see why some would like it, because it is (probably, I have never swung a sword myself) a lot closer to real-life sword fighting. Medieval fights between armored dudes weren't very elegant, that's for sure.

I never was into Dark Souls from personally playing them. From my experience I doubt its the actual combat mechanics that draw people in to the game.

lol rolling around in armor = real life sword fighting?

I love the Witcher series. TW3 is my GOTY and love it more than any souls game.

But, no. Dark Souls requires proper control of your character, attacks have a sense of weight behind them, timing is crucial.

In TW2 and 3, free Quen + unresponsive, clunky feeling combat sort of "ruins" it.

it's still good and enjoyable imho, but, no, DS is much better in this regard. But TW focuses of many other elements, like storytelling, so it's cool

i have not play dark souls but i actually like Witcher 3 combat . The adding of dodging added alot to the game and playing on hardest difficulty you really have to choose your signs and bombs to use

I have no fucking clue why people dislike the combat in TW3. It is very satisfying imo.

And Dark Souls is vastly superior, for different reasons.

yep its so hard to get proper control especially in PVP ( DS in a nutshell)

Dark Souls it actually feels good when you hit something with a sword. In the Witcher that shit is limp dick as hell. **** cdpr getting the game feel right for hitting something, they can't even get the game feel right for walking in that game. It's atrocious. Anyway The Witcher 3's combat mechanics and poor game feel don't stop it from being enjoyable as the gameplay mitigates its short comings with some solid questing and the monster stuff actually can carry that lame ass combat. But yeah it's a massive step down from what the From Software games provide, it's a massive step down from the combat in Dragon's Dogma, it's not up to snuff with the turn based variety of rpgs (the great ones at least), and that's only judging it in the vacuum of rpgs. You broaden that horizon to other games that are built around hitting shit with a melee weapon, and it's a step down from a lot of things.

Wait there were people praising DS combat?

I said closer to real life, not an exact replica of what people did back then.

@godspellwh: i'll admit the barrel roll was funny and dumb in DS, but that's a bad example.

In TW2, barrel rolling was not only free, but an easy way to avoid attacks. Usually, if you got surrounded by bandits/guards, rolling everyfuckingwhere was the best solution. So it was even worse.

Thankfully, TW3 uses side stepping now.

Darksouls have excellent combat that completely shits on Witcher. The worlds design, open nature, and in general (as a game), completely shits on the Wticher.

The bold absolutely, but the world design is a matter of perspective.

The Souls games have a brilliant handle on atmosphere and they probably have the 2nd best handle on metroid styled world design in the 3D Space next to the Prime games. But that satisfaction leads more to mechanical triumphs and all that jazz. The Witcher 3 is legit impressive on a technical level in a different. The attention to detail to making that setting feel believable shows a willingness to make the setting a part of the story in the same vein as an Obsidian, but with the technical mastery of a Rockstar.

There are a lot of areas the Witcher 3 isn't all its cracked up to be, but that world design sure as hell isn't one of them.

lol at anyone saying DS had better game design

Dark Souls has very satisfying combat

@TheFadeForever: Witcher 3's design is unarguably shit. Identical houses, and same tree everywhere. Randomly placed towns and cities, The same 5 NPCs populate it's cities. The whole game world feels as if it was designed by one developer. Any game is better designed than W3.

I like Witcher 3 combat more honestly. That Witcher3's dodge is so much better than Dark Souls rolling. I mean in Witcher 3 you can do both, dodge and rolling, while Dark Souls you mostly always roll to avoid damage which is pretty unrealistic. Geralt can dodge not only back, but also, depending on to which direction you press your analog stick , to the left or to the right, and also, by pressing repeatedly, he can graciously pass among several opponents, and you only need to roll to avoid area attacks of monsters, which makes Witcher 3 combat much more tactical and thoughtful than that of Dark Souls. The only thing that Dark Souls does better is that its monsters have much more complex attack patterns. Witcher 3's monsters become quite predictable after a while.

People that say that Witcher 3 combat is bad have no idea how actually to fight in this game. They just spam rolling and button-mash.

Yep you might as well say that to GTA and turns of other games

Unlike you, I don't talk about games I didn't play nor do I command games for having shit design.

Never been a fan of Dark Souls combat. It's pretty tedious. You just wait your enemy to attack then block or avoid it and hit couple times back. Being aggressive and taking the initiative gets you killed. In W3 in one-on-one fights you can be aggressive and keep the initiative like in real fights. While there's plenty of stupid stuff in W3 I still like it's combat better.

When people resort to rolling and backstabbing that's something

LMAO. The video by itself is funny, but in reference to DS, it is hilarious. Thank you for that. BTW, I love both games and the combat is fine in both.

Both have bad combat, as does skyrim. most people seem to be able to ignore bad combat more then they can ignore bad graphics, bad story, etc. IDK why. Bllodborne, witcher 3 and dragon age all have shitty combat, yet all 3 got rave reviews and dragon age won GOTY last year. gaming isn't about gaming anymore, it's about open world, graphics, story and characters more then gameplay.

Well I was never aware DS had good combat anyways

I am kinda with you regarding DS2 where there is very little ways to play aggressively. BB combat though feels more rewarding and edge of your seat by comparison of the other two (DS and TW3).

Although, I like the Quen Build in TW3 that lets you play all out and still recooping some health from the shield. DS2 feels a little too slow for my liking.

Sword of the Berserk: Guts Rage

Now that shit is satisfying combat.

A least you can dodge without rolling in the Witcher that greatly improved the combat for me.

Why do people dog on the Witcher combat system when Dark Souls

No.

No.

No.

While I can't stand you, you at least get some props for liking Berserk.

Here is the problem with modern society right here. People are morons. They have no sense of subtlety. Everything is either the best thing in the world or the worst.

Repeat. Morons.

It's so funny that ppl compare TW3's huge and vast and captivating world to DS's "meh" world ! TW3 is way better when it comes to design and graphics, in Combat it's rather a subjective matter ... but i like TW3's combat more as you have a lot more options and it has more variety to it.

Honestly if you guys are looking for deep and meaningful combat, promote turn based combat in video games instead of real time.. I mean Chess, a turn based head to head game, is over 1500 years old and it is still considered one of the most strategic and competitive games in the world.. Real time is as much about twitch factor as it is about actual thought process..

@sSubZerOo: Ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous.

Ok hold to everyone saying TW3 has bad combat. Have I been playing the same game as the rest of yall? I found the dodging system good and the side step system good as well. The magic and sword play has been good as well. So unless I have missed something yall trippin'.

IN what way? Should we compare the current real time combat of many of these games to the turn based games out there in what your able to do? In the far greater strategies involved? I noticed you like BG2 for instance, great game.. But it's combat system is a absolute mess of dumbed down and broken mechanics compared to the turn based pen paper engine it was trying to mimic. With things like positioning being basically non existent, and fights like the dragon fights being absolutely horrid in how dumbed down and simplistic they are compared to the turn based mechanics.. Try out Temple of Elemental Evil for instance to see what I mean.

That what I think to not sure what wrong with the combat it not near terrible

I'm going to be completely insane and say that both W3 and DS have excellent combat, and none shits over the other.

IMO, W3 excels when it comes to crowd control and in providing the player with creative tools for problem solving during combat. DS excels in one-on-one combat. Now... both are VIDEOGAMES, and being so it's very easy to point out "stupid" stuff about their systems, because fundamentally all systems are flawed. They are ultimately works of fiction, and it's very easy to ruin fiction if you decide to be completely cynical in your approach and use reality as comparison.

According to my experience both games have one thing in common. The first hours with the game demand some adaptation - and I dare to say, good will. In my first moments with DS I was thinking "this game controls like shit", the same happened with W3, but then after you master the controls both games are extremely satisfying. Yet I think that as a whole the controls in W3 are better than in DS, but that's a matter of personal taste.

Some people just don't have the skill, others the patience. But above all, people like to shit over stuff I guess.

Dark Souls has basic combat at best, it's really not the main appeal of the game.

The Witcher's combat is absolutely terrible, but that isn't the main appeal of the game either. Too bad there was so much of it.

Instead of some basic or fluid combat to go along with the rest of the gameplay, the Witcher forces you to slog through endlsss spam/quen fests. the combat ultimately becomes grating and diminishes the quality of the game.

@sSubZerOo: You're just not comparing like with like, there is absolutely no comparison to be made here. The Witcher and Dark Souls are not shooting for tactical battles, they are real time battles. Action games are a mixture of skill, spontaneity, concentration. That's what people want from them. There is room for both real time and turn based, but there is no real comparison to be made between the two. Making observations as to how one falls down in certain areas compared to the other is a bit like comparing a leisurely hot air balloon ride to a busy commute to work in a car and then saying, "wouldn't it be all better if instead of sitting in a traffic jam we'd all spend our time in a scenic, beautiful journey?" or "Hot air balloons are shit. I couldn't get to work in one, it would take me all day". Completely missing the point.

Lol this is true even outside of PVP

I love the combat in both games. In Dark Souls it is more about timing and blocking whereas I find the Witcher 3 and even 2's combat to be more like a dance. Hitting attack at the exact peak of the move continues it so much more smoothly into another. I took my time to get the combat down, maybe 15 hours before I fully understood the movement aspect

I know you will stab me to death for saying this out loud, but that's exactly how I feel about weapons (and shotguns and "HEADSHOTS" in particular) in Resident Evil 4. Instead of witnessing a powerful decapitation, you had this weaksauce nonviscerality.

I don't see it, RE4's headshots are pretty satisfying. But to each his own.

The witchers combat has always reminded me of the arkham games, or assassins creed.

Still better than Skyrim, but only just.

What a scrub ass thread.

The souls games have very tight controls to the point that if you get hit it's 99% of the time you own damn fault, TW3 on the other hand is fairly floaty and can sometimes be fairly unresponsive though still tons of fun as far as i'm concerned.

One things for sure, TW3's combat is leagues better than TW2's.

This, you always feel in full control of your character in a Souls game. Very few third-person action games deliver on that, surprisingly.

I like TW3's combat because it's fast and fun, but there a lot of situations where I found myself fighting the clunky/glitchy movement controls instead of my target.

The thing so many seem to (somehow miss) in this comparison is that Dark Souls and The Witcher 3 hold different goals in mind in their approach. Dark Souls (at least from what I remember, it's been a while) is predominantly focused on one on one fights. The Witcher not only does that, it also manages to incorporate and tackle group fighting, in what I'd argue, a much better way than what DS would be able to. You put 8-10 foes against someone in DS and have them try to manage with that engine, then put someone in Witcher doing the same with its engine, and there's no doubt as to what game would come out on top.

Context matters, so I don't see why so many find it suitable to judge The Witcher with DS being held to the standard when their goals are not one and the same. Let's make Witcher the standard with its strengths and do the same critiquing DS or BB.

For what both games require inherent to the game's demands, its combat for the most part works brilliantly. I have the feeling many who bemoan TW3's fighting are rolling like mad, spamming attacks, and then throwing their hands up. There is a particular way you have to fight, and it's slow and calculated. You can't play combat like an idiot and then lay blame at its feet. The only gripe I have towards TW's combat is that it falls apart in confined spaces.