Witcher... here we go again.

[KIrving]

If they were to make a game with an independent setting telling an independent story they might as well write it themselves and call it somthing else and save themselves £££ in royaty fees.!

Yes, that would be ideal. It's a pity that so many game developers do not do this.

 

Most RPG's I've played arn't really about "Your Charicter", there more about "the world around them"... even if a NPC says "its YOUR destiny to XYZ", its really about XYZ, you just happen to be a small part in its ABC. The Witcher is different in that respect, because it is actually all about YOU (the charicter Geralt).

Wow, so if I play the game and as such play the character 'Geralt' who is male and a Witcher, I'm playing 'me'? So 20 points in skill A and 40 points in skill B and choosing a few different responses will make my male witcher called Geralt extremely different from someone else's Geralt? It sounds like a pretty impressive game then!!

 

Truth to be told, you probably wouldn't even say a word if it had fixed female character, I bet.

That's feminism or just plain old hypocrisy?

Yep, because there are just hundreds of games out there with a fixed female protagonist and only a few games with a fixed male protagonist. There's so much choice I don't know what to boycott first.

 

Sarcasm aside (just in case you didn't notice), I would have a problem with a fixed female protagonist in a game 'heavily' touted as an RPG and would say as much.

 

Granted, if I saw a run of fixed female protagonists in any game genre I'd be convinced that I'd suddenly ended up in an alternate universe.

[Domi]

Wow, so if I play the game and as such play the character 'Geralt' who is male and a Witcher, I'm playing 'me'? So 20 points in skill A and 40 points in skill B and choosing a few different responses will make my male witcher called Geralt extremely different from someone else's Geralt? It sounds like a pretty impressive game then!!

 

Exactly. Particulary when Geralt is an already established character in a few novels....

 

Domi, I understand your option and what you are trying to say about not being able to personalize everything about your character, but it has more to do with what rights the developers bought from the creator than what they wanted to do. They bought the rights to make a game about the story of this Witcher.

 

Besides as someone said, if you don't like it, don't buy it. Everyone will have their own opinion.

 

And that was the gist of my post: I am not buying it, because I don't like the set up and I am dissappointed because it was using AE that is set up to handle multiple protagonists, widely advertised on Bio's site, blah-blah-blah....

 

As for Witcher, they say that they planned in the beginning to allow a few different classes and female protagonists as well. And then in the end they went with the fixed male lead, that Geralt guy. Which is what put the game on my 'ignore' list the moment I dug up that piece of info.

 

Still, I suppose you'd play it if it was a predefined female protagonist, am I right?

 

If there was a level of customization, ie I could build my female protagonist at least on the level of JE, yes, I would have bought it. No, the character customization is not the only requirement I have to a game I would by, but it is one of the 'must have'.

 

The problem with JE was that it was impossible. Unless you're refering to infusing cardboard personality into a character.

Oh and by the way, closed fist and open palm was just a load of bullcrap and didn't really work the way it was supposed to.

 

I thought it worked pretty well, and I thought that the personality was not a cardboard cut-out at all. In fact, I hought that the idea of the Spirit-Body-Mind transfering itself in the conversational stats (Intimidation, Charm, Intuition) was a better way of going about it than the class-dependent 3.5 ED Diplomacy, Intimidation and Bluff. I liked it how it affected the character, and I definetly loved most of the conversational options it opened up, and the different reactions the character was getting. I loved that the character had plenty of humorous, non-generic options as well. I also felt that with the variable and cool cast, the PC had a lot of chances to build the 'shadow' relationships, the ones that were not 'in the game', but which are emptionally important for me when I play the games.

 

I do, however, have a problem with you claiming that JE is the perfect RPG. It's an enjoyable title, hell I had fun while playing it, but the paragon of roleplaying gaming it ain't.

Still, that makes me wonder : why did you start a new topic for that then?

 

Started a new topic for what...?

 

Jade Empire - because I wanted to share a review and express my excitment with the game. You don't believe it is a pinnacle, I do. It was the most cohesive story that I saw with an interesting backstory for the customized main lead, good NPCs, it did a great job catching the humor of the mundane and blending it in with the fantasy setting, it finally had a definitive art style (the first game since IWD series) and it had a fantastic dialogue. I saw no other game that had everything I like in the games wrapped in one cool package.

 

Witcher - because I was so badly dissappointed at the moment; I experienced a strong negative emotion and acted up on it. I am used and not afraid of sharing my opinions with the rest of the folks here, even if we do disagree, reading other people's opinions, and all that, because if nobody chats, the forum will be a dead place, and who wants that?

 

Out of curiosity curiosity, what's impressive to you?

 

Really impressive? Well, of course BG1 when it just came out was incredible because it first introduced the idea of a party-based game to me, and the NPCs back then blew me completely away. Jade Empire as a whole game. Dialogue structure and the idea of the friendship sequences in KOTOR was impressive. Dialogue Innovations in BG2 were impressive. A few sequences in NWN2 (Keep's Siege, Nolaoth) were impressive. WeiDU was impressive, and TUTU from the fan-made stuff. I also think that despite all the drawbacks I will happily rant about when particulary annoyed by it, Electron Toolset is impressive.

[Guest Guest]

Sarcasm aside (just in case you didn't notice), I would have a problem with a fixed female protagonist in a game 'heavily' touted as an RPG and would say as much.

 

Granted, if I saw a run of fixed female protagonists in any game genre I'd be convinced that I'd suddenly ended up in an alternate universe.

 

You sir are oh so sharp, it's miracle you haven't cut yourself yet.

 

Sarcasm aside (just in case you didn't notice), did I ask you or Domi? No? Thank you.

 

"If there was a level of customization, ie I could build my female protagonist at least on the level of JE, yes, I would have bought it."

 

And yes, here's the answer.

 

But I don't suppose you understand what a hypothetical question is. I'm eagerly awaiting for your well thought and educated response. Really.

[Guest Guest]

I thought it worked pretty well, and I thought that the personality was not a cardboard cut-out at all. In fact, I hought that the idea of the Spirit-Body-Mind transfering itself in the conversational stats (Intimidation, Charm, Intuition) was a better way of going about it than the class-dependent 3.5 ED Diplomacy, Intimidation and Bluff. I liked it how it affected the character, and I definetly loved most of the conversational options it opened up, and the different reactions the character was getting. I loved that the character had plenty of humorous, non-generic options as well. I also felt that with the variable and cool cast, the PC had a lot of chances to build the 'shadow' relationships, the ones that were not 'in the game', but which are emptionally important for me when I play the games.

 

 

And who's talking about 3.5 ED? All it matters that in the end you're forced to either play a good or evil character, hell, the choice at the end of game pretty much invalidates the decisions you've made and just ignores how you acted throughout the game. I call that bad roleplaying.

 

 

Started a new topic for what...?

 

Jade Empire - because I wanted to share a review and express my excitment with the game. You don't believe it is a pinnacle, I do. It was the most cohesive story that I saw with an interesting backstory for the customized main lead, good NPCs, it did a great job catching the humor of the mundane and blending it in with the fantasy setting, it finally had a definitive art style (the first game since IWD series) and it had a fantastic dialogue. I saw no other game that had everything I like in the games wrapped in one cool package.

 

Witcher - because I was so badly dissappointed at the moment; I experienced a strong negative emotion and acted up on it. I am used and not afraid of sharing my opinions with the rest of the folks here, even if we do disagree, reading other people's opinions, and all that, because if nobody chats, the forum will be a dead place, and who wants that?

 

Heh, if everyone started a topic when he'd "experience a strong negative emotion"....

 

Out of curiosity curiosity, what's impressive to you?

 

Really impressive? Well, of course BG1 when it just came out was incredible because it first introduced the idea of a party-based game to me, and the NPCs back then blew me completely away. Jade Empire as a whole game. Dialogue structure and the idea of the friendship sequences in KOTOR was impressive. Dialogue Innovations in BG2 were impressive. A few sequences in NWN2 (Keep's Siege, Nolaoth) were impressive. WeiDU was impressive, and TUTU from the fan-made stuff. I also think that despite all the drawbacks I will happily rant about when particulary annoyed by it, Electron Toolset is impressive.

 

Actually, that wasn't a question for you, but okay.

I was impressed with the gritty world of Witcher, which tackles modern problems : racism, terrorism; which is not about saving the world and not about the fight of good against evil - it's pure politics.

The dialogues have "personality" and the developers made a mature game (no, that doesn't mean swearin' at the every corner).

I was also impressed with its combat system which is both flashy and very tactic.

Is it worth trying? Damn right.

So yeah, I guess in the end it's all about personal preferences. Still, I think people should at least give it a chance. I've played both JE and Witcher. You haven't.

[Avenger]

And how that justifies having the male lead only? The game I pray is not an exact replay of a novel. You can get that by reading the novel. It's like their job to ajust the story that it could become the player's story in a CRPG setting. I wish Bio didn't endorse yet another spit into female gamers' face.

 

Sorry, guys, but this issue always angers me.

 

Lol, Domi, why don't people complain about Tomb Raider being a lass?

Last time i heard you about this, it was about PST. While i don't know the backstory of the 'the Witcher', PST wouldn't simply run well with a female protagonist.

 

The problem is not because some games are not running a female protagonist, the problem is there are few games which have a female only protagonist.

I don't think it is a 'spit onto the female gamers face'.

 

Actually, I wouldn't have any problem with a female only protagonist, if the story is OK. I don't think genders are so easily swapped. Though, it would be fun to see a game which has both genders selectable (and maybe different races too), and the story significantly differs based on these selections. Sure, it would be a lot more work for Mr. Gaider and his team, but the replay value would be significant. And pickies like you would surely like it.

[Domi]

Last time i heard you about this, it was about PST. While i don't know the backstory of the 'the Witcher', PST wouldn't simply run well with a female protagonist.

 

PS:T would have run just fine with a female protagonist with a couple of tweaks to the story (different genders of the incarnations or a powerful hagspawn instead of the hag/some gender-independent powerful being like a demon/devil or lesbian affair; and of course the genitals 1 swaped for the equivalent 2) plus enable a different romance for a female PC (seeing that the PS:T romances were like thirty lines... no big deal). And the only time I could play PS:T was when I played as a female with Monty doing female-specific commentary. I know that I could have swaped it about relatively easily, if not for the gorram main char graphics (though I thought Fall From Grace avatar suited me Okay) and the movies, which I am sure wouldn't have been that much problem to handle for the artists back then.... Look, I've read through the main gender-dependent files, and they really were no big deal to tweak. Hells, Deionarra was a piece of cake, and so was Monty... just replaced the jokes, and make a cloak stirr in the eteheral barking wind instead of that horrible white dress of hers. At least when it was Kivan, I had some sort of emotions summoned by the scene, instead of just being annoyed by the cheesiness of the dialogue.

[Avenger]

You should have dropped a lot of lines of Grace and Annah.

And i couldn't imagine a Deionarra-like character as male.

 

And you would need a lot of new lines for Morte vs. protagonist

There are also some gender specific jokes between Morte and the NO which wouldn't sit so well with the NO as female. (Like talking about the zombie women while the NO is also a kinda zombie).

[Domi]

I assure you that Deionar worked just fine with minor ajustments to his lines. He actually worked better than the female version, because he became a deeper character imo.

 

And yep, I re-wrote Morte's lines. Morte was hitting on the Namless Lady along with the zombies and her replies were different as well. It was funny, while male version of Morte was just 'ewww, why can't I kill it?' for me.

 

Grace was to become a burned incubus ('casue I swaped the avatars with him, so he was the happy owner of the TNO's hot looks) which with the minor tweaks to his lines worked just great, and was prefectly interesting, and Annah had a lesbian crash on the Nameless Lady, for anyone willing to interpret her lines that way.

[Simbriant]

Out of curiosity curiosity, what's impressive to you?

 

Well, I usually judge a game based on three things:

 

1. Graphics/Art Style - This is the first thing anyone notices when they look at a game. Does it look like Pong or Final Fantasy: Advent Children? Personally, I really don't care if a game has photorealistic graphics or not as long as they are good and will catch my eye.

 

This is one reason why I like a game like Team Fortress 2 over Counter-Strike: Source.

 

Granted, I don't expect everyone to like the same art style/graphics I do. Everyone has their own tastes. I'm not saying the Witcher's graphics are bad. They are good, but it's nothing that really catches my eye or makes it stand out from other games.

 

2. Story - I actually like the game to have a story. Something other than "You have been summoned to fight a great evil. Now here's five bucks and a sharp stick. Go conquer evil!" A little character development or interaction doesn't hurt either. If not for the main character, then at least for secondary characters. It helps make the game world feel a little more real.

 

3. Gameplay - This is the most important. You can have the best looking game in the world but if it's not fun to play I'm going to PO'ed that I wasted money it. And I sure as hell won't buy anything else from that studio again.

 

This is one of the reasons why BG has lasted so long. The game is fun, even though it's graphics are kind of dated, and the mods increase the replayability infinately.

[Guest Guest]

1. Graphics/Art Style - This is the first thing anyone notices when they look at a game. Does it look like Pong or Final Fantasy: Advent Children? Personally, I really don't care if a game has photorealistic graphics or not as long as they are good and will catch my eye.

 

This is one reason why I like a game like Team Fortress 2 over Counter-Strike: Source.

 

Granted, I don't expect everyone to like the same art style/graphics I do. Everyone has their own tastes. I'm not saying the Witcher's graphics are bad. They are good, but it's nothing that really catches my eye or makes it stand out from other games.

 

That's all purely subjective, so let's leave it that.

 

2. Story - I actually like the game to have a story. Something other than "You have been summoned to fight a great evil. Now here's five bucks and a sharp stick. Go conquer evil!" A little character development or interaction doesn't hurt either. If not for the main character, then at least for secondary characters. It helps make the game world feel a little more real.

 

Then you'd be pleased with witcher - you're not saving the world. It's more of a personal quest and there's no ancient evil involved - just political powers. There's a great of deal of interaction and what I think was the best idea - when you're forced to make a decision, you won't see the consequences right away. They are revealed much later and usually neither choice is a "good one".

 

3. Gameplay - This is the most important. You can have the best looking game in the world but if it's not fun to play I'm going to PO'ed that I wasted money it. And I sure as hell won't buy anything else from that studio again.

 

This is one of the reasons why BG has lasted so long. The game is fun, even though it's graphics are kind of dated, and the mods increase the replayability infinately.

 

 

Witcher has perhaps the most interesting combat system in cRPG history. You've two swords - steel for humans and silver for monsters and each has three different styles you must use in order to win. Then there's the alchemy, if there's a difficult battle ahead of you, you must prepare yourself and drink powerful but poisonous potions - drink too much and you'll die.

And perhaps the most interesting thing - the decisions. Every problem has various solutions - you won't see all of it during first playtime.

 

So yeah, I think it's worth it. If you're a fan of cRPG's it's a must.

[Simbriant]

Witcher has perhaps the most interesting combat system in cRPG history. You've two swords - steel for humans and silver for monsters and each has three different styles you must use in order to win. Then there's the alchemy, if there's a difficult battle ahead of you, you must prepare yourself and drink powerful but poisonous potions - drink too much and you'll die.

And perhaps the most interesting thing - the decisions. Every problem has various solutions - you won't see all of it during first playtime.

 

So yeah, I think it's worth it. If you're a fan of cRPG's it's a must.

 

Yea, I know. I'll wait and see what everyone else thinks of the Witcher. At the moment I have no desire to play a drugged up-Drizzt.

[vile fairy]

Grace was to become a burned incubus ('casue I swaped the avatars with him, so he was the happy owner of the TNO's hot looks) which with the minor tweaks to his lines worked just great, and was prefectly interesting, and Annah had a lesbian crash on the Nameless Lady, for anyone willing to interpret her lines that way.

 

What would be given as an explanation for such a gender swap, though; why does Fall of Grace changes into an incubus (do incubi even exist in the Planescape setting?) simply because of the choice the player makes during character customization?

 

Fall of Grace was a refreshingly unusual and interesting female character; having her gender changed for no other reason than making "him" a romance option would actually add nothing positive to the PS:T game, in my opinion.

[Guest Guest]

Yea, I know. I'll wait and see what everyone else thinks of the Witcher. At the moment I have no desire to play a drugged up-Drizzt.

 

Comes from someone who hasn't probably read the books and doesn't have a clue about it...Geralt is an anti-hero and they have nothing in common. Also, Salvatore is hack and Sapkowski is leagues away from him when it comes to writing.

So there.

[jester]

PST with an all female cast? Excellent. Whoever said Morte is male btw, I wouldn'wager on Dak'kon's gender either for that matter. So give me Lara Croft prancing about wearing nothing but a winning smile everybody else in tow, why not?

[Kulyok]

Also, Salvatore is hack and Sapkowski is leagues away from him when it comes to writing.

 

Sigh. Alas, no.