Bad game Design

[Shockwave1]

I have made it to the Beast in Ch 1 in the game and I have to say, the mechanics of the game are decent, the story is pretty good, but whoever decided on the cut scenes should be shot, flogged, burned, and never work on PC games EVER again. Must be the same guy who worked on NWN hordes because it is the same inane design.
Did anyone else thing the prelude was overdone with cutscenes by about 500% I know you are learning in the prelude but still you couldn't take two steps w/o one.
Then you get into the Ch 1 and how many times does the game force you to put your sword away, walk up to a bad guy and talk to them in a cut scene and then start a fight with no sword drawn and bad guys a foot away. I should be able to talk to people from a safe distance thank you, and with my sword out. This happens several times (the dwarf, the salamandra guards, etc)

Now here we come to the end of CH 1 , the big fight with the beast where do i start. Huge cut scene then you go off to find the beast, can't drink any potions, can't oil up your blade, nothing. You actually GO LOOKING for it COMPLETELY unprepared (and sword in sheath because we wouldn't want to hunt the beast with a weapon in our hands). I thought Witchers were good at hunting beasts. Then if you die you have to redo the huge cut-scene! (unless you save it mid battle)

The game is decent enough otherwise but can someone tell if if this insanity persists through the rest of the game or does it get better?

[swcarter]

The game is decent enough otherwise but can someone tell if if this insanity persists through the rest of the game or does it get better?

There are parts of the game that I would have done differently, but dude, if you think there's too much story and too much dialogue, then go play Hellgate: London or some other action RPG.

The rest of the game is a lot like the first chapter, except it's more complex.

SWC

[Xandax]

<snip>
Now here we come to the end of CH 1 , the big fight with the beast where do i start. Huge cut scene then you go off to find the beast, can't drink any potions, can't oil up your blade, nothing. You actually GO LOOKING for it COMPLETELY unprepared (and sword in sheath because we wouldn't want to hunt the beast with a weapon in our hands). I thought Witchers were good at hunting beasts. Then if you die you have to redo the huge cut-scene! (unless you save it mid battle)
<snip>

Well, you can drink potions and use oil etc after the cut-scene as well, so I really fail to see your objection, other then perhaps you died once or twice in a game, and want to blame it on the cut-scenes.
Nobody says you have to stand around and take a beating, it is fully plausible to move around a bit, use signs etc, to buy time.


And while cut-scenes can be annoying indeed, they can in this game also be skipped, so you do not have to read/listen to each line of dialog.

And yes, you could save after a cut-scene as well, and the game is even so nice to you that it quick saves in different slots, so you can't even mess up the game that way.
And the introduction chapter has long and many scenes yes, but alas, they can also be skipped either by esc or speed clicking through the dialog.

[Shockwave1]

Wow, did either of you read the post?
I am not looking for LESS dialogue and LESS story. I complimented the story and the game itself. I just said whoever designed the cut scenes ruined chunks of that story. I don't want to talk less, but when you spot an enemy down the road from you (think salamandra guards in ch 1) why can you talk to them WITH YOUR SWORD OUT. I'm just looking for realism, and a little freedom within the game.

and Xandax, i'm not an idiot. of course you can move around, and drink potions after you are knee deep in barghests, but i'm just saying they could have ended the cut scene, let you free walk to a pin on the map to fight the beast. It would be different if you were ambushed, but the story says you are going off specifically to hunt the beast. Let me put it this way. Say you are playing a game like Rainbow 6 or some other mission based game and you end off a mission with 1 bullet in your gun and plenty of clips, and there is a cut scene where you board a chopper and get flown to your next mission. It drops you in the middle of a firefight and you still have just the 1 bullet in your gun. It's kinda dumb, and way out of character. Geralt doesn't seem stupid or unskilled, so it sucks when the cutscenes force you to play him that way. If I'm going to fight the beast, i want to oil my blade first, and walk around with my weapon out.
They could have done a lot better keeping you immersed in your character within the story.

[swcarter]

Wow, did either of you read the post?

Gosh, no. Forums are more fun when you post randomly.

I am not looking for LESS dialogue and LESS story.

You said there were too many cut scenes by a factor of 500%. There are very few pure cut scenes in the game. Most involve conversations. Ergo, you think there are too many conversations. Comparing The Witcher to Rainbow 6 of all things only drives this point home more.

Really, you still seem like you're trolling more than anything else.

SWC

[Xandax]

<snip>
and Xandax, i'm not an idiot. of course you can move around, and drink potions after you are knee deep in barghests, but i'm just saying they could have ended the cut scene, let you free walk to a pin on the map to fight the beast. It would be different if you were ambushed, but the story says you are going off specifically to hunt the beast. Let me put it this way. Say you are playing a game like Rainbow 6 or some other mission based game and you end off a mission with 1 bullet in your gun and plenty of clips, and there is a cut scene where you board a chopper and get flown to your next mission. It drops you in the middle of a firefight and you still have just the 1 bullet in your gun. It's kinda dumb, and way out of character. Geralt doesn't seem stupid or unskilled, so it sucks when the cutscenes force you to play him that way. If I'm going to fight the beast, i want to oil my blade first, and walk around with my weapon out.
They could have done a lot better keeping you immersed in your character within the story.

Well, the game isn't Rainbow 6.

But if you demand "realism", then you should demand it in more aspect then just what and when it suits you.
The paths I took in the game, then "Geralt" did not go out hunting the beast, but it found him and attacked.
Also walking around with a temporary "buff" on the weapon, which is timed when you do not know when/if you'll face the beast, is a bad descision, because it could easily run out before you found the beast. Time is a factor, so why waste an oil when you do not know if/when you'll fight.
What you ask to have everything handed to you, to be prepared because you, as the player, not as Geralt, knows that you'll have a tough fight on your hand at this and that time.
And then you (not Geralt) will walk around with his heavy weapon around, waving it around constantly.
You are meta-gaming. You are using your knowledge and suggest that the in-game character should have the same knowledge.

[Shockwave1]

Wow.... it's not R6 thanks for clearing that up.... the example still holds. What world do you live in? Realism is realism. I demand it in all aspects of the game... let's just think about this:

Talking to enemies forces you to put your sword away (unrealistic)
Various other cut scenes force your sword away (only realistic if there was a good reason to put it away)
Forcing you to talk to enemies before you kill them (unrealistic, but forgivable sometimes)
Talking to enemies forces you to walk within sword reach (unrealistic)

As for the beast fight that's part realism based and part game mechanics based. I would definitely oil my sword if I was going off "to deal with the beast" as Geralt says every way i played it If it was wasted it was wasted but it lasts a long time. I mean that's the only way you can use oil... using oil with enemies heading at you is what is unrealistic but the game allows that just fine. Leaving the cave mouth at all give the game that puppet feel, giving you no control over you own actions. I just dislike games where I keep thinking to myself... "I wouldn't be doing this, i don't think the character as described would be doing this".

Drawing your sword in the cut scene for the Beast then it's back in your sheath to start it?
prevented from saving the game before or during the beast fight even though it comes on the heels of a long conversation (unskippable) scene - thats just bad mechanics.

Regardless.... it's a decent game but these things detract from it. I can't belive your panties are all in a twist because teh game isn't' perfect

[Xandax]

Wow.... it's not R6 thanks for clearing that up.... the example still holds. What world do you live in? Realism is realism. I demand it in all aspects of the game... let's just think about this:<snip>

Yes, indeed. Lets think about this....
I'll wager almost 100% that you do not want realism in all aspects, because the simple proof of the matter is why then are you playing a fantasy game, where you can throw fireballs with your hands against all sorts of monsters.
Do you want to only have one shot at playing the game, because if Geralt "dies"; you can't play anymore - a person only lives ones.
How much "realism" and what types you want in a game is so subjective as anything can be.
So I have thought about this, and you should extend the same courtesy before claiming all sorts of things. I live in the real world, I know that realism in computer games are not fun, and I know this because I live in realism. When I play computer games, they break the fabrics of realism, 'cause otherwise, I'd might as well just "do real life" as entertainment instead.


You gripe that the character puts away his sword at times which are inconvenience to you and attribute it to ..... realism of all things.
In the face of slinging around a huge two handed sword while fighting a phantom ghost dog or something, of all things - you claim it is less realistic.

Well - if I were escorting civilians, I'd not run around with my weapon out, especially in Rainbow 6 (or run around with a live granade with the pin pulled out .... just in case).
It is fast to pull out the weapon, it would be "unrealistic" to walk around with it wielding constantly. However you *could* do that alone due to the unrealistic nature of a game, but it is not more realistic.
Also - the dog surprises you - it spawns into existence. Then you can pull your weapons. For what it is worth - you do not even need the oil to beat the little doggie.

What you want is not realism, it is an increased ability to meta-game because *you* know what happens, not "Geralt". Which is even less realistic then anything else.

[Shockwave1]

Well this will be my last post on this because it's just getting stupid now. Again thanks for telling me what I want... it'd good to know. So here goes one more time to see if your little brain can understand this.

Realism withing the confines of the parameters of the game is assumed of course ... my god.. you are right... a fantasy game can't have any realism in it all because it fantasy.. oh know what will we do????

If you have a sword, you expect to be able to use it, if you have magic spells, you expect to able to use them. If the game starts deciding arbitrarily that you can's use your sword here, or MUST use a spell here then it becomes too puppet like. So here is one final example that your little brain might be able to comprehend. I'll even use an example from THIS game because you don't have the ability to understand a more complex comparison. Forget the Beast since you obviously cant get over yourself and think I am complaining about 1 battle you think i lost instead of looking at it as an example. Apparently you know how everyone plays (being the L33t gamer you are), and if it's not like you then they are meta-gaming.

*****Minor Spoiler Warning*********

In Chapter 1, after the inn battle you go to a house that is supposed to be the hideout for the Salamandra. You come to an intersection in the road. In front of a door of a house a hundred yards away or more you see two salamandra guards - it says so above their heads (one can assume you know what they look like or how they dress so it is obvious they are Salamandra).

They have been trying to kill you. You want to kill them. You SHOULD be able to walk around the back of the house sneak up, and come around the corner, sword drawn and smacking away at them. OR if you can't even sneak a little at night you should be able to run down the road,sword drawn and change them.

If you do EITHER of these things in the game. you stop when you get within a few meters of them and TALK to them. When you are done talking they are hostile (so fighting was inevitable) and attacking you instantly After the cut scene THEIR swords are drawn and swining. Yet your sword is put away, and by the time you draw it THEY have gotten the first hit on you (unless you start the battle running away). This is where too much conversation takes away from the realism of the game.

Let's continue... after the battle what do you do? I would keep my sword out and Kick in the door of the hideout and then enter, sword swinging. I KNOW it's their hideout. I'm AMBUSHING THEM. In the game however i enter the house only to be surrounded by 4 guys 2 feet away from me, swords out, swinging at me before i can even react. My sword is sheathed and i have to take hits while i draw it. effectively I am getting ambushed by them. I should have been able to back out of the house if there were too many enemies but I can't step back and take the fight outside (or throw fire signs if they stay inside), so the game should compensate a little by making the room bigger so they aren't within sword reach to start with... I shouldn't be forced within melee range in a battle I am initiating.

If you are telling me there is no bad game mechanics here I think you are high, but you're entitled to your opinion. Personally, I think it takes away from the immersion and realism of the game. No game has done the freedom thing perfect yet, but others have done it better.

[Kreez]

Aww man, just use aard sign as opener and than draw your sword...fights are to easy even on hard. Gotta work with what you are provided with and moaning about it wont do any good anyway...

Besides...games are ment to be fun and if this one annoys you so much maybe get another?
Fallout 3 and Deus ex 3 are comming up soon :mischief:

[Xandax]

<snip>
Realism withing the confines of the parameters of the game is assumed of course ... my god.. you are right... a fantasy game can't have any realism in it all because it fantasy.. oh know what will we do????<snip>

Which is exactly why "realism" - or rather the amount of realism *you* want is subjective.
You do not demand it in all aspects, as you claimed prior you did (What world do you live in? Realism is realism. I demand it in all aspects of the game ... remember?)- which is it? You want it when it suits you. Thus - it is subjective. (as is "immersion" - which is a nice little buzzword when it comes to gameplay preferences).
And within the confines of the game? Well realism there could easily be that it is silly to walk around with a huge sword unless you need to use it.

What constitute bad game design is also extremely subjective - which is quite visible from the scores of people who like Oblivion for example, whereas I, and others, think that game is stupidity made into game-code. However, because I do not like the game, I do not play it (anymore) - but because I do not like situation or feature X ... does that mean it is bad design?

[Lady Dragonfly]

Shockwave1 says:

I have made it to the Beast in Ch 1 in the game and I have to say, the mechanics of the game are decent, the story is pretty good, but whoever decided on the cut scenes should be shot, flogged, burned, and never work on PC games EVER again. Must be the same guy who worked on NWN hordes because it is the same inane design.
Did anyone else thing the prelude was overdone with cutscenes by about 500% I know you are learning in the prelude but still you couldn't take two steps w/o one.
Then you get into the Ch 1 and how many times does the game force you to put your sword away, walk up to a bad guy and talk to them in a cut scene and then start a fight with no sword drawn and bad guys a foot away. I should be able to talk to people from a safe distance thank you, and with my sword out. This happens several times (the dwarf, the salamandra guards, etc)

Apparently, Shockwave1 has a problem with gameplay, and the amount of cutscenes breaking up gameplay way too often, not with the game design in general. He states he likes the game mechanics (underlying rules and their implementation) and the story (narrative aspect of game design).

Gameplay makes a game entertaining and enjoyable.
Now, is gameplay (an important part of game design) subjective or objective? The term "gameplay" is vague and probably pertains to the interactive aspect of a game.
The amount and complexity of interaction with the gameworld determines the overall quality of the gameplay. So, it is objective.
However, you can enjoy or hate the gameplay regardless of how good or bad the overall design might be from a professional critic's viewpoint. After all, every game is aimed at its fan base. A gamer's attitude towards the gameplay is definitely subjective.

Shockwave1's point concerning the cutscenes is valid, imo. The amount of cutscenes is overwhelming. You may love the quality of animation for the heck of it, but it has nothing to do with the gameplay itself.

Many people in the business today seem to be more interested in making movies than in making games. -Tim Skelly.

Shockwave's frustration with being forced to enter a fight having the sword sheathed, mostly pertains to the game mechanics.
It seems he is not as fond of the game mechanics as he previously stated. Read on:

If you have a sword, you expect to be able to use it, if you have magic spells, you expect to able to use them. If the game starts deciding arbitrarily that you can's use your sword here, or MUST use a spell here then it becomes too puppet like.
.......
If you are telling me there is no bad game mechanics here I think you are high, but you're entitled to your opinion. Personally, I think it takes away from the immersion and realism of the game. No game has done the freedom thing perfect yet, but others have done it better.

Inflammatory language aside, he makes a good point, here.
"Realism" in a game is a common sense concept that makes the hero's actions seem rational and the game itself more believable. If a hero is supposed to act irrationally on a regular basis, that is a design's flaw. Small (?) things like the ones Shockwave1 describes, along with a host of other small and not so small things he is yet to encounter, add to the frustration. The extreme linearity of The Witcher doesn't help either.

The Witcher is a good game, but it has many shortcomings. It is far from being perfect, in spite of whatever the numerous fanboys would like us to believe.

[Kreez]

Inflammatory language aside, he makes a good point, here.
"Realism" in a game is a common sense concept that makes the hero's actions seem rational and the game itself more believable. If a hero is supposed to act irrationally on a regular basis, that is a design's flaw. Small (?) things like the ones Shockwave1 describes, along with a host of other small and not so small things he is yet to encounter, add to the frustration. The extreme linearity of The Witcher doesn't help either.

That would make a good point if a game was designed so player could role play as he wished thus making character behave the way he(player) would. But dont forget that the main character here has a long history(from books) behind him, so if he wants to play a tough guy and tak to everyone before drawing his sword and he doesnt like to sneak on people than thats really not a design flaw.

All i'm saying here, this is not a RPG in which you can customize your character behavior, since his behavior is known well from books. As far as gameplay is concerned thats up to each individual to decide based on his/hers prefferences. Personally i thought the game was a nice refreshing change although if i wanted to play a more customisible character with more influence on his behavior i'd choose another game.

[Lady Dragonfly]

That would make a good point if a game was designed so player could role play as he wished thus making character behave the way he(player) would. But dont forget that the main character here has a long history(from books) behind him, so if he wants to play a tough guy and tak to everyone before drawing his sword and he doesnt like to sneak on people than thats really not a design flaw.

All i'm saying here, this is not a RPG in which you can customize your character behavior, since his behavior is known well from books. As far as gameplay is concerned thats up to each individual to decide based on his/hers prefferences. Personally i thought the game was a nice refreshing change although if i wanted to play a more customisible character with more influence on his behavior i'd choose another game.

Well, The Witcher is not RPG, it is an action-adventure game, with gameplay as straightforward as a hooker's customer. So I would not expect any customization or role-playing - there is none to be expected.

I was not talking about lack of customisation or interactivity. I was talking about rational behavior. I haven't read the books, so I was not aware that Geralt was supposed to act irrationally; I assumed this was just a game design flow.
I thought tough guys gave up an advantage of a surprise attack while dealing with outnumbering enemy force only in cheesy movies. Well, I stand corrected.

[Thora3967]

I have made it to the Beast in Ch 1 in the game and I have to say, the mechanics of the game are decent, the story is pretty good, but whoever decided on the cut scenes should be shot, flogged, burned, and never work on PC games EVER again. Must be the same guy who worked on NWN hordes because it is the same inane design.
Did anyone else thing the prelude was overdone with cutscenes by about 500% I know you are learning in the prelude but still you couldn't take two steps w/o one.
Then you get into the Ch 1 and how many times does the game force you to put your sword away, walk up to a bad guy and talk to them in a cut scene and then start a fight with no sword drawn and bad guys a foot away. I should be able to talk to people from a safe distance thank you, and with my sword out. This happens several times (the dwarf, the salamandra guards, etc)

Now here we come to the end of CH 1 , the big fight with the beast where do i start. Huge cut scene then you go off to find the beast, can't drink any potions, can't oil up your blade, nothing. You actually GO LOOKING for it COMPLETELY unprepared (and sword in sheath because we wouldn't want to hunt the beast with a weapon in our hands). I thought Witchers were good at hunting beasts. Then if you die you have to redo the huge cut-scene! (unless you save it mid battle)

The game is decent enough otherwise but can someone tell if if this insanity persists through the rest of the game or does it get better?

I think we're getting a bit side-tracked here..

I'm nearing the end of chapter 3 and I think Shockwave1's right, at least in the aspect of some of the cutscenes being badly placed, leaving your character open to some minor damage at the start of a battle while you oil your blade, drink potions, etc.

Personally, I try to do these things just before tripping a cutscene to avoid that problem. None of the enhancements/potions I've seen so far last so short that they cause problems doing it somewhat ahead, and it saves a bit of frustration with the game's cutscene timing.

As far as your R6 point goes, I (and most people I know) always make sure my weapons are locked and loaded, not just prior to an engagement.

My two cents. Food for thought?