Posted August 14, 2017
I had about 10y gap in my gaming career and it was released during that period ;) Now I'm trying to play all the games I've missed and all the classics I wasn't able to beat/understand when I was a kid. This one is from the first category.
Have you played the sequel? And what do you think about the series? :)
Cavalary: Saw that complaint before, and I still look oddly at it. Yes, there's not that much to DO, not many different skills (usually in my case about as much use of Aard stamina allowed, plus occasional Igni, and then yeah, click when the cursor changed and keep up the swings), but to me it seemed to just... flow, just feel right (unless surrounded and group style not being the best idea and having a hard time clicking on the right enemy, since I stuck to OTS camera). After all, it's not a RTwP party-based game to expect lots of stuff to juggle.
I agree that there is nothing wrong with the game, it's again just a matter of expectations. From books I know that witchers used many different methods and tactics to fight the monsters, which are hard to beat without special skills or elixirs. I can easily imagine amazing gameplay with turn-based fight requiring different strategies for different monsters; or just fights strongly based on different elixirs being obligatory to win. What I've got here is only clicking with some alchemy, which is intriguing, but in general not even necessary if you're good enough in clicking. It's somehow dissapointing, but you're right, I must admit that I was never bored or frustrated with Witcher's fights and in general it works fine as a casual, relaxing gameplay style. Have you played the sequel? And what do you think about the series? :)