So I’m now 40 hours in Witcher 3....

[Mbolibombo]

I dont hate the combat, it's just not very satisfying.
Geralt is stiff as a stick and that ranged combat is extremely poor but Sword fighting and magic is not bad.

My personal opinion ofc!

 

[Prine]

As much as I enjoy BotW for its brilliance in exploration, the combat is atrocious. I agree that the Witcher 3 combat is not only superior it's far, far more enjoyable. Slicing people in half never gets old.

 

[Deleted member 679]

Yeah, I think it's pretty fun too. It does have kind of boring enemies, though, especially bosses, but the DLCs improved a ton on that front. Actually enjoyed every single DLC boss.

 

[jerfdr]

It's not hated at all. Witcher 3 has good combat, and most people love it. I mean, do you really think that this game (in which you spend a large percentage of playtime in combat) could have 98% positive reviews on Steam (out of 288000) if it had bad combat? One could argue that other positive sides carry this game, but this doesn't work like that. A game where you spend many hours in combat just wouldn't get 98% positive reviews if the combat weren't good, period.

There is just an incredibly vocal minority that tries to perpetuate their opinion that "Witcher 3 combat sucks", that is all.
There is probably some intersection of this vocal minority with the "Bloodborne was robbed" people, but it's just a conspiracy theory on my part.

 

[Yautja_Warrior]

Yeah, I never got the complaints about combat either. Maybe playing on PC at 60fps helped, but it's always felt fine to me.

It's obviously not as good as a fast paced action game like DMC, but it's not trying to be that and is totally fine for a slower paced RPG.

 

[Tibarn]

Ah, yes, I saved a list specifically for these occasions so I don't have to retype it every time.

1. The game has absolutely no consistency in frame timing. Think about a fighting game and how each move has a pre-determined number of frames to execute and tied down to a specific button. For example a jab is 8 frames and executed with the dedicated punch button. In TW3, attack is binded to Square/X but the move that Geralt performs is completely random. He can perform a quick downward slash, twirl or leaping slash with one button prompt. The problem with this is that all moves have different frame timings. The leaping slash will obviously take much longer to execute than the quick slash. This will cause the player to either miss the enemy or worse, get hit out of their control
2. There's no weight to the weapons. This is somewhat linked to the first point in regards to frame timing. In attack animations, we have three phases, the windup, the strike and recovery. Most action games would exaggerate the duration of windup and recovery phases to make it seem like the character is putting their all into a move with a very quick strike phase. TW3 seems to have all three phases at roughly the same durations, so they lack the anticipation of a big, powerful hit
3. Enemies don't telegraph their moves properly. In action games, enemies typically have exaggerated windup animations to show which attack they are about to perform. This helps players to read their animations, come up with a strategy and counter appropriately. In TW3, enemy moves are very poorly telegraphed or can at times even be misleading, causing the player to get hit for no reason
4. Enemies are hit sponges. Often, even basic enemies can soak up damage and deliver a hit back even though they're getting hit. This is frustrating especially on higher difficulties because you expect the enemy to be staggered. You timed your move based on the best conditions, you deliver the hit, but surprise, the enemy hits you back
5. There's no weapon variety whatsoever. Now I'm aware axes are in the game, but considering how heavily the game prioritizes swords, it's like the devs are actively discouraging you from trying other weapon classes. This is doubly bad because every single sword handles the exact same way. There's no variance in how one sword may be slower but hits harder or has further reach than another.

Feel free to refute or ignore

Click to shrink...

Exactly this, there's lots of bad things about combat, and all of them add to make it feel really bad. I'd add the lack of damage feedback from Geralt. Sometimes you get hit several times and die suddenly, unless you are constantly checking the health bar is hard to know if the an offscreen enemy has attacked you because Geralt doesn't react naturally. Same with the enemies, it's really common to be hitting an enemy with a attack string and watch them casually ignore the hits and hit you for free. In a good real time combat game all of this would be hinted to the player with smart animation use.

 

[Thwomp]

The problem i'm having with the game is the target system, it sucks against multiple enemies, especially during the "Caretaker" boss.

 

[Zelretch]

And I'm not talking about the physics type stuff in BoTW like blowing up barrels etc,

Click to shrink...

i dont understand why people are so adamant about not considering that stuff combat. If it involves you and an enemy with your intention of killing it it constitutes part of the combat system of the game. Ofc if you ignore 2/3 of what consitutes the combat system and only consider some arbitrary things as combat, you may think the combat to be too basic, but that is on you and your arbitrary rules, not the combat itself.

 

[SunhiLegend]

For me it's the inconsistent hitboxes, the lack of damage feedback most of the times, the lack of satisfying parry/block mechanics, the input lag the game has all the time... The enemies are never interesting to fight against, the humans are maybe the enemies that offer more satisfying combat, but fighting monster with awkward animations and super armor is frustrating in a bad way.

You compared it to BotW, but in BotW direct combat is only one of the possibilities and the game is clearly build around having the option to use the environment during fights. Tw3 has only direct combat, and a lot of it, but never feels good at all.

Click to shrink...

Ah, yes, I saved a list specifically for these occasions so I don't have to retype it every time.

1. The game has absolutely no consistency in frame timing. Think about a fighting game and how each move has a pre-determined number of frames to execute and tied down to a specific button. For example a jab is 8 frames and executed with the dedicated punch button. In TW3, attack is binded to Square/X but the move that Geralt performs is completely random. He can perform a quick downward slash, twirl or leaping slash with one button prompt. The problem with this is that all moves have different frame timings. The leaping slash will obviously take much longer to execute than the quick slash. This will cause the player to either miss the enemy or worse, get hit out of their control
2. There's no weight to the weapons. This is somewhat linked to the first point in regards to frame timing. In attack animations, we have three phases, the windup, the strike and recovery. Most action games would exaggerate the duration of windup and recovery phases to make it seem like the character is putting their all into a move with a very quick strike phase. TW3 seems to have all three phases at roughly the same durations, so they lack the anticipation of a big, powerful hit
3. Enemies don't telegraph their moves properly. In action games, enemies typically have exaggerated windup animations to show which attack they are about to perform. This helps players to read their animations, come up with a strategy and counter appropriately. In TW3, enemy moves are very poorly telegraphed or can at times even be misleading, causing the player to get hit for no reason
4. Enemies are hit sponges. Often, even basic enemies can soak up damage and deliver a hit back even though they're getting hit. This is frustrating especially on higher difficulties because you expect the enemy to be staggered. You timed your move based on the best conditions, you deliver the hit, but surprise, the enemy hits you back
5. There's no weapon variety whatsoever. Now I'm aware axes are in the game, but considering how heavily the game prioritizes swords, it's like the devs are actively discouraging you from trying other weapon classes. This is doubly bad because every single sword handles the exact same way. There's no variance in how one sword may be slower but hits harder or has further reach than another.

Feel free to refute or ignore

Click to shrink...

Yes, completely agree.


When it comes down to it it's just not satisfying to play, it doesn't need to have deep mechanics, combos, arsenal of different weapons/gear etc., just needs to feel good using you're basic sword against basic enemies, hardly ever do the strikes feel like they make any impact, and it doesn't look good either most of the time since it's a lot of spinning around and dodgy movement whenever you're locked on.
It's not all bad, can be good at times but overall just not nearly good enough to sustain a 40+ hour playthrough.

 

[Strangelove_77]

Y'all really need to stop baiting with these thread titles. It's annoying.

 

[Bulk_Rate]

As a longtime Souls player prior to playing TW3, it took a long time for me to adjust. But once my brain internalized dodging or even rolling in most cases vs trying to block everything I had a lot more fun.

 

[j3d1j4m13]

If you're playing on Death March it can be quite a pain to deal with in the earlier stages especially if you're playing on consoles in non performance modes. As others shared it doesn't have consistent enough feedback for the player to really nail its combat. I would have preferred something less flashy looking if it meant consistent attacking animations, feedback, and targeting. To say it's horrible is a stretch in my opinion though.

 

[TheGhost]

I played like 80hours before realizing you can modify the combos you can do by long pressing the buttons.

 

[Stoze]

Ah, yes, I saved a list specifically for these occasions so I don't have to retype it every time.

1. The game has absolutely no consistency in frame timing. Think about a fighting game and how each move has a pre-determined number of frames to execute and tied down to a specific button. For example a jab is 8 frames and executed with the dedicated punch button. In TW3, attack is binded to Square/X but the move that Geralt performs is completely random. He can perform a quick downward slash, twirl or leaping slash with one button prompt. The problem with this is that all moves have different frame timings. The leaping slash will obviously take much longer to execute than the quick slash. This will cause the player to either miss the enemy or worse, get hit out of their control
2. There's no weight to the weapons. This is somewhat linked to the first point in regards to frame timing. In attack animations, we have three phases, the windup, the strike and recovery. Most action games would exaggerate the duration of windup and recovery phases to make it seem like the character is putting their all into a move with a very quick strike phase. TW3 seems to have all three phases at roughly the same durations, so they lack the anticipation of a big, powerful hit
3. Enemies don't telegraph their moves properly. In action games, enemies typically have exaggerated windup animations to show which attack they are about to perform. This helps players to read their animations, come up with a strategy and counter appropriately. In TW3, enemy moves are very poorly telegraphed or can at times even be misleading, causing the player to get hit for no reason
4. Enemies are hit sponges. Often, even basic enemies can soak up damage and deliver a hit back even though they're getting hit. This is frustrating especially on higher difficulties because you expect the enemy to be staggered. You timed your move based on the best conditions, you deliver the hit, but surprise, the enemy hits you back
5. There's no weapon variety whatsoever. Now I'm aware axes are in the game, but considering how heavily the game prioritizes swords, it's like the devs are actively discouraging you from trying other weapon classes. This is doubly bad because every single sword handles the exact same way. There's no variance in how one sword may be slower but hits harder or has further reach than another.

Feel free to refute or ignore

Click to shrink...

As much as I love The Witcher 3, number 1 on here is a real killer and why regardless of whatever mods you try and put on to "fix" the combat, it's never going to be as good as you want.

 

[Ninman]

I hate it. I don't know how a game who is suposed to be one of the greatest games of all time get one of the most important bits of the the gameplay so wrong. I can't count how Many times got stuck on a bad spot cause the game won't let me jump on combat mode. I clocked 60hours of it just to finish the story. Played on a PC 60fps+ with both M+K and xbox control. The combat is just bad and one of the reasons I consider it one of the most overrated games of all time.

 

[Marble]

And I really do not get the complaints about the combat at all!

I played it back on release up to a similar point and I'm w playing the GoTY edition and up to level 18 and about to head to Skellige but I just don't get why this game gets so much hate for it's combat?

For me the combat is more satisfying than the combat in the BoTW (a game I'm currently popping in and out of as well as having similar hours of play time in). And I'm not talking about the physics type stuff in BoTW like blowing up barrels etc, I'm talking specifically about the combat with weapons against enemies being better in The Witcher 3.

so why is it so hated? What makes it so bad?

Click to shrink...

I'm also 40 hours in. Play a game like Bloodborne or Sekiro and you'll understand why TW3's combat is utter shite, just like BotW's combat (even worse).

 

[Complicated]

When Witcher 3 came out its competition was elder scrolls which it blows out of the water as far as combat design goes. Assassin's Creed built on what the Witcher did and is really its only competition even today as far as massive open world games with role playing and in depth storytelling go.

 

[His Majesty]

I'm also 40 hours in. Play a game like Bloodborne or Sekiro and you'll understand why TW3's combat is utter shite, just as BotW's combat (even worse).

Click to shrink...

I like both The Witcher 3 and Bloodborne combat.

 

[ClickyCal']

So...the combat is better than BOTW's if you ignore a big chunk of what makes up the combat in BOTW? Well, sure, I guess.

Click to shrink...

What makes combat up in botw? Parrying over and over again on laser attacks, or bog standard sword and shield combat with moblins.

 

[Silencerx98]

Yes, completely agree.


When it comes down to it it's just not satisfying to play, it doesn't need to have deep mechanics, combos, arsenal of different weapons/gear etc., just needs to feel good using you're basic sword against basic enemies, hardly ever do the strikes feel like they make any impact, and it doesn't look good either most of the time since it's a lot of spinning around and dodgy movement whenever you're locked on.
It's not all bad, can be good at times but overall just not nearly good enough to sustain a 40+ hour playthrough.

Click to shrink...

Exactly this, there's lots of bad things about combat, and all of them add to make it feel really bad. I'd add the lack of damage feedback from Geralt. Sometimes you get hit several times and die suddenly, unless you are constantly checking the health bar is hard to know if the an offscreen enemy has attacked you because Geralt doesn't react naturally. Same with the enemies, it's really common to be hitting an enemy with a attack string and watch them casually ignore the hits and hit you for free. In a good real time combat game all of this would be hinted to the player with smart animation use.

Click to shrink...

I have yet to see anyone properly refute these points I made. Every time I raise them, it's either hand waved or I get, "Your points don't matter, you are nitpicking". These are very real issues that can't be ignored. A game shouldn't be winning 200+ GOTY awards when it fails core animation principles and basic combat design philosophy. It's not bad, it's just mediocre. The only good boss fight was the Grave Digger in the Heart of Stones DLC because he's literally the only enemy in the game that properly telegraphs his moves

 

[thisismadness]

I've never understood the complaints either.

Its not Souls but I don't think its anywhere close to being awful.

 

[Reformed Individual]

Combat in Witcher series is just trash overall. Witcher 3 gets taken from like a 8.5 or 9/10 to a 6/10 for me just because the combat is that bad. Then people go "oH jUsT uP thE DiFFiCUlty" when the difficulty is just a dumb ass artificial difficulty system like Skyrim where it's just "you do less damage to the enemy and they do more damage to you" which is such a shit way of doing difficulty.

For me, doing "light attack, heavy attack, heavy attack, light attack, dodge" on repeat for 100 hours isn't fun.

 

[Marble]

I like both The Witcher 3 and Bloodborne combat.

Click to shrink...

And there's nothing wrong with that. But there's a huge difference between them. Bloodborne's combat is brilliant and makes it almost look choreographed.

Yep this is me and I'm not a good player. I find Sekiro to difficult.

 

[iamaustrian]

It's better than skyrim but that doesnt say much...
Compared to BotW witcher-combat is still a floaty, unresponsive and unpredictable mess.
It's almost as the game itself forgets what to do when more than 2 enemies attack you at the same time.

 

[ThreepQuest64]

Also liked it a lot and never understood why people think it's outright bad. I see that it isn't something solely worth selling your game on, but I never thought for even a second "this is bad." It looks bad ass, has a lot of variety considering you have little magic and mainly sword due to the lore.

I have to types of dodges both with advantages and disadvantages, I can block, I can parry and deflect, I can slow down enemies, I can push them back, I can set them on fire, I can stun them, I can let them fight for me. I can focus targets and easily switch between them, I can as well fight without focusing a target. AND: it's letting me cancel my fucking attacks!!

Spoiler: Endboss Blood and Wine

DETTLAFF - The Witcher 3 Blood and Wine

This was the best boss fight I've ever had. Hope you enjoy it as much as I did. Difficulty: NG+ Death March Music Released and Provided by Tasty Song Title: ...

www.youtube.com

 

[Tibarn]

I have yet to see anyone properly refute these points I made. Every time I raise them, it's either hand waved or I get, "Your points don't matter, you are nitpicking".

Click to shrink...

Yeah, most of the comments will be "it's not that bad" with no real attempt to explain why, or the "vocal minority" nonsense that looks like a weak defense and nothing else. I'm more than happy to discuss about it, but sadly most people is more interested in defending their favorite game than in discussing it.

 

[skeezx]

it's not god awful but on the same token i attempted a playthrough like 3 times, every time around the 20 hr mark it's like "man, i just can't do this anymore...."

if the game came out like 10+ years ago when there wasn't 1000s of games at my disposal with the click of a mouse i'd play the everloving fuck out of it in spite of combat. but yeah... unfun gameplay is not fun.

 

[nachum00]

Ah, yes, I saved a list specifically for these occasions so I don't have to retype it every time.

1. The game has absolutely no consistency in frame timing. Think about a fighting game and how each move has a pre-determined number of frames to execute and tied down to a specific button. For example a jab is 8 frames and executed with the dedicated punch button. In TW3, attack is binded to Square/X but the move that Geralt performs is completely random. He can perform a quick downward slash, twirl or leaping slash with one button prompt. The problem with this is that all moves have different frame timings. The leaping slash will obviously take much longer to execute than the quick slash. This will cause the player to either miss the enemy or worse, get hit out of their control
2. There's no weight to the weapons. This is somewhat linked to the first point in regards to frame timing. In attack animations, we have three phases, the windup, the strike and recovery. Most action games would exaggerate the duration of windup and recovery phases to make it seem like the character is putting their all into a move with a very quick strike phase. TW3 seems to have all three phases at roughly the same durations, so they lack the anticipation of a big, powerful hit
3. Enemies don't telegraph their moves properly. In action games, enemies typically have exaggerated windup animations to show which attack they are about to perform. This helps players to read their animations, come up with a strategy and counter appropriately. In TW3, enemy moves are very poorly telegraphed or can at times even be misleading, causing the player to get hit for no reason
4. Enemies are hit sponges. Often, even basic enemies can soak up damage and deliver a hit back even though they're getting hit. This is frustrating especially on higher difficulties because you expect the enemy to be staggered. You timed your move based on the best conditions, you deliver the hit, but surprise, the enemy hits you back
5. There's no weapon variety whatsoever. Now I'm aware axes are in the game, but considering how heavily the game prioritizes swords, it's like the devs are actively discouraging you from trying other weapon classes. This is doubly bad because every single sword handles the exact same way. There's no variance in how one sword may be slower but hits harder or has further reach than another.

Feel free to refute or ignore

Click to shrink...

Yeah. Your first point is the main reason I hate this games combat. Never knowing which move is going to come out makes it worse than even Elder Scrolls combat for me.

 

[AndrewGPK]

I'm about 20 hours or so into myself, and I too like the combat. Its not up to par with top tier action games and I get the floaty comment, but I think its very enjoyable and dismembering is pretty cool as is the parry. Also, the preparation and integration with magic makes it all pretty fun.


One thing, I unlocked the 'Gourmet' skill because I have the complete edition. I disabled it though because it feels too overpowered at this stage in the game, not ever having to worry about food/potions hardly kinda feels like your cheesing the game.

 

[Cloud-Strife]

As much as I enjoy BotW for its brilliance in exploration, the combat is atrocious. I agree that the Witcher 3 combat is not only superior it's far, far more enjoyable. Slicing people in half never gets old.

Click to shrink...

BOTW combat looks like minecraft combat compared to this.

 

[Grimmjow]

The combat for me gets pretty dull once you hit late game and have your build figured out. You just get so OP that it makes each encounter feel like a chore.

 

[Deleted member 1003]

Glad you're enjoying it and thank you not making your thread title, "40 hours into the Witcher 3, does it get better?"

 

[Dever]

For an ARPG where a significant part of the gameplay is combat, it is poor. Demon's Souls came out in 2009 and had far better medieval, sword-fighting combat with some magic thrown in.

BOTW combat looks like minecraft combat compared to this.

Click to shrink...

Come on now, a flashy gif of a canned animation tells you nothing of how it actually feels to control Geralt in combat.

 

[Tibarn]

BOTW combat looks like minecraft combat compared to this.

Click to shrink...

Sadly, smooth animation work doesn't mean smooth gameplay, and this game is another example of this. I don't think that the combat in BotW is that good either, but at least it's succesful on what it tries to be (a mix of close combat/ranged attacks, use of physics, the environment and the runes, and some light stealth).

 

[DarkFlame92]

Yeah I also liked it a lot. The whole game is just incredible.

Click to shrink...

Yeah. It does its job excellent

 

[Cloud-Strife]

For an ARPG where a significant part of the gameplay is combat, it is poor. Demon's Souls came out in 2009 and had far better medieval, sword-fighting combat with some magic thrown in.


Come on now, a flashy gif of a canned animation tells you nothing of how it actually feels to control Geralt in combat.

Click to shrink...

Here you go.. Witcher 3 regular combat and is still way better than BOTW's.

 

[Silencerx98]

Yeah, most of the comments will be "it's not that bad" with no real attempt to explain why, or the "vocal minority" nonsense that looks like a weak defense and nothing else. I'm more than happy to discuss about it, but sadly most people is more interested in defending their favorite game than in discussing it.

Click to shrink...

Sad, because if more people accept the combat as okay rather than criticize it, CDPR has no reason to improve. It's like how Netherrealm has no reason to fix the core animation principles because their fighting games are constantly the best selling in the genre and win multiple awards even though they animate like ass. Most people don't break down a game technically, they just go with blanket statements like "It's good" or "It's bad" and that's sad.

I challenge those in this thread who think the combat is good to look at my list and come up with good counterarguments to each point

 

[Master Chuuster]

The combat gets much better if you engage with the supplementary systems, like concocting bombs and oils and potions and stuff and use that to your advantage. The problem is, you can easily get through the game without ever touching any of those systems (at least on Normal), which means the combat ends up being a shallow, button mash-y, hack-and-slash affair. And while it's fun in the initial hours, it's not fun enough for a game that's 80 hours long.

Thankfully the game has plenty of other strengths that more than make up for that.

 

[astro]

I don't know about good/bad, but I've never been able to enjoy the combat much.

Tried it on easiest just hack n slash.
Tried it on hardest where you really need to play tactically.

Just never feels fun to me, and is a big reason why my playthroughs of the DLC have stagnated.

 

[Cloud-Strife]

Sad, because if more people accept the combat as okay rather than criticize it, CDPR has no reason to improve. It's like how Netherrealm has no reason to fix the core animation principles because their fighting games are constantly the best selling in the genre and win multiple awards even though they animate like ass. Most people don't break down a game technically, they just go with blanket statements like "It's good" or "It's bad" and that's sad.

I challenge those in this thread who think the combat is good to look at my list and come up with good counterarguments to each point

Click to shrink...

I don't agree.. read every comment and everyone is saying that combat is the part of the game that needs the most improvements for Witcher 4.

Most of us agree that the combat is not terrible like some people is trying to make it look. Is good enough and of course they can improve it in the next game.

 

[Silencerx98]

The combat gets much better if you engage with the supplementary systems, like concocting bombs and oils and potions and stuff and use that to your advantage. The problem is, you can easily get through the game without ever touching any of those systems (at least on Normal), which means the combat ends up being a shallow, button mash-y, hack-and-slash affair. And while it's fun in the initial hours, it's not fun enough for a game that's 80 hours long.

Thankfully the game has plenty of other strengths that more than make up for that.

Click to shrink...

I finished the game on Death March and didn't have to rely on spells most of the time besides Igni and Quen and the whole game was a cakewalk. These supplementary features are no replacement for nailing proper core combat mechanics.

I don't agree.. read every comment and everyone is saying that combat is the part of the game that needs the most improvements for Witcher 4.

Most of us agree that the combat is not terrible like some people is trying to make it look. Is good enough and of course they can improve it in the next game.

Click to shrink...

Really? Half of this thread is saying that the combat is enjoyable. If I were a developer at CDPR, that would imply that it's at a satisfactory state and I should focus my time and resources elsewhere like having more and bigger quests with more different outcomes. Also, there are people who defend NRS games even though their animations are fundamentally flawed, giving them no incentive to fix it. I'm seeing the same thing happen here

 

[Buttzerker]

Ah, yes, I saved a list specifically for these occasions so I don't have to retype it every time.

1. The game has absolutely no consistency in frame timing. Think about a fighting game and how each move has a pre-determined number of frames to execute and tied down to a specific button. For example a jab is 8 frames and executed with the dedicated punch button. In TW3, attack is binded to Square/X but the move that Geralt performs is completely random. He can perform a quick downward slash, twirl or leaping slash with one button prompt. The problem with this is that all moves have different frame timings. The leaping slash will obviously take much longer to execute than the quick slash. This will cause the player to either miss the enemy or worse, get hit out of their control
2. There's no weight to the weapons. This is somewhat linked to the first point in regards to frame timing. In attack animations, we have three phases, the windup, the strike and recovery. Most action games would exaggerate the duration of windup and recovery phases to make it seem like the character is putting their all into a move with a very quick strike phase. TW3 seems to have all three phases at roughly the same durations, so they lack the anticipation of a big, powerful hit
3. Enemies don't telegraph their moves properly. In action games, enemies typically have exaggerated windup animations to show which attack they are about to perform. This helps players to read their animations, come up with a strategy and counter appropriately. In TW3, enemy moves are very poorly telegraphed or can at times even be misleading, causing the player to get hit for no reason
4. Enemies are hit sponges. Often, even basic enemies can soak up damage and deliver a hit back even though they're getting hit. This is frustrating especially on higher difficulties because you expect the enemy to be staggered. You timed your move based on the best conditions, you deliver the hit, but surprise, the enemy hits you back
5. There's no weapon variety whatsoever. Now I'm aware axes are in the game, but considering how heavily the game prioritizes swords, it's like the devs are actively discouraging you from trying other weapon classes. This is doubly bad because every single sword handles the exact same way. There's no variance in how one sword may be slower but hits harder or has further reach than another.

Feel free to refute or ignore

Click to shrink...

Nothing to refute you are completely right. It's just none of this affects my enjoyment of the combat at all. I like the options of the bombs and signs and don't mind the sword being weird.

Bear in mind ELEX had some of my fav combat this gen and I can't stand Soulsborne combat for being too "smooth" so I'm a bad example but not all of us are ignoring your points. You're right I just don't mind.

 

[Eugene's Axe]

For a moment, I thought the title was gonna follow up with "Does it get any better?"

Click to shrink...

Thank god that wasn't the case. For some strange reason I hate negative threads.

 

[danhz]

its just not fun, serviceable.

 

[Tibarn]

In my opinion, the main problem is that the game combat is not good as a deep RPG combat (it has no interesting skill trees, and compared to a good RPG there's not enough customization options or interesting tactics to use during combat ), and as an action game is not good either, as it has been explained the game has lots of problems with animation work, lack of enemy feedback, fluid controls, good hitboxes...

At the end, is a mediocre mix of both, that maybe some may find enough for a game that relies heavily in the writing and graphics, but the same as the game basic controls, it feels like a big weak point that I hope CDPR fixes in their next games.

 

[Pharaoh]

Well, to me both TW3 and BotW have bad combat. And that's not even comparing with the best game combats out there, they are bad in their own right but for different reasons. By far the least enjoyable part of both games.

 

[Edgar]

I finished the game on Death March and didn't have to rely on spells most of the time besides Igni and Quen and the whole game was a cakewalk. These supplementary features are no replacement for nailing proper core combat mechanics.


Really? Half of this thread is saying that the combat is enjoyable. If I were a developer at CDPR, that would imply that it's at a satisfactory state and I should focus my time and resources elsewhere like having more and bigger quests with more different outcomes. Also, there are people who defend NRS games even though their animations are fundamentally flawed, giving them no incentive to fix it. I'm seeing the same thing happen here

Click to shrink...

are people who are saying combat is enjoyable wrong? And if CDPR were to focus their resources on quests and more outcomes is that wrong too? Is your opinion more valid than other peoples ? Should they cater to your preferences instead ?

 

[BobbleHeadJesus]

Overblown complaint. Just like RDR2 controls.

Click to shrink...

This. It's a very small vocal minority who complains that the combat is awful. While it isn't perfect, it still very free flowing if you use it correctly.

 

[Augemitbutter]

play on death march if you want to see every flaw. It's generally a good idea to play on high difficulties to get the whole picture.

 

[Cloud-Strife]

I finished the game on Death March and didn't have to rely on spells most of the time besides Igni and Quen and the whole game was a cakewalk. These supplementary features are no replacement for nailing proper core combat mechanics.


Really? Half of this thread is saying that the combat is enjoyable. If I were a developer at CDPR, that would imply that it's at a satisfactory state and I should focus my time and resources elsewhere like having more and bigger quests with more different outcomes. Also, there are people who defend NRS games even though their animations are fundamentally flawed, giving them no incentive to fix it. I'm seeing the same thing happen here

Click to shrink...

Read again.. of course you can enjoy it because is good enough and it helps alot that everything else is so good on the Witcher 3 ( story.. the open world.. side quests.. music etc etc). No one said that is perfect and doesn't need improvements.