Name a flaw in this game other than the inherently rpg-shit shallow combat

okay big guy, name those action rpgs that dont suck

inb4 lock on strafe on a linear as fuck enviroment aka dork souls

dark souls.

even lords of the fallen had way better combat.

Dragon's Dogma

Batman is fucking better.

You fags arent even trying, Witcher3 has gameplay as good as that crap. I thought some fag would try pulling a "Ninja Gaiden is an action rpg"

Thread over, i have confirmed people shitting on this game are retarded contrarians.

ok bye :-)

Debatable.

Travel is boring as shit and the map is awful. Alchemy has become shitty and boring. Levelling up does fucking nothing and upgrades are meaningless. And the actual witching part of the witcher isn't there.

I r8 this b8 2/8. Nice try m8

Name one game that wouldnt be better off without the rpg crap affecting gameplay. This shit is a cancer to gaming.

I don't think I have seen anyone defending that shitty gameplay before.Are you trying to say witcher 3 has the best action oriented gameplay?

UBIsoft style open world checklist horseshit.
Batman senses.

No, are you that illiterate? Makes sense

The batman senses make sense for a witcher.
I would like to see you fags play a 100 hours open world game where you had to look for the tracks yourself, everytime, without any kind of marker, and they would be crypt as fuck, of course. Yes, i would enjoy the butthurt of fags not even making past the first quest of the game.

Gothic

You just gotta get it right, so that skills and abilities affect how you play, rather than arbitrarily affect difficulty.

On Gothic you just stick to the pathways, if you stray there is some small hub with a high level enemy. Its the same the whole game. And the innitially good gameplay becomes shit when you can one hit kill everything because of MUH LEVELS.

Shit tier optimization.

The thread isn't over, until I crash this plane!

The fact that i cant bring myself to play it until i've replayed both 1&2 again.

nope

yeah, i lost my saves and was pissed that i had to play the expansions with a stock character that was a weak little bitch compared to what i had built

You can import saves from earlier games?

yep, your saves from 1 and 2 will be used on the sequels

Neat, does it actually add anything other than few token items and extra stats though?

I think we might have another (215) on our hands, boys.

yes, mostly on the third game tough

I though CD projekt were good boys.

The contrarians will be using memes now, but its moot because the thread is already over

Do you feel in charge?

It was over when you changed the goalposts in your second post:

We're not here to emotionally validate your purchases.

forced "stronk wymen" meme

...

I don't understand.

oh nvm is it because he linked the whole link?

Yes.

No niggers

Cringy dialogue, VA. I remember dropping it for a month after finishing the tutorial in Kaer Morhen. It's completely opposite to Bethesda - there's too much personality in the characters, their reactions sound forced and polish VA (yes, I know polish) is absolutely terrible.

I like the aesthetics in this game, pretty good mix of fantasy and slavic middle ages.

it's a fairly bad game and a god awful RPG, anyone that likes it should kill themselves

tbh defined protagonist wouldn't be a bad thing if they didn't put in a shit ton of moral choices

90% of them make Geralt act out of character and it's really artificial since he has a really strong personality and morals.

I don't mind defined protagonists in games that aren't trying to be RPGs, in fact I prefer them if the protagonist is actually interesting (good example: Bayonetta, the game would absolutely not be the same with a blank slate protag). The RPG elements are so weak in TW3 that I'd probably describe it as more of an "action adventure" game with a heavy focus on story.

Generic fantasy world

-pre made main character
-so much voice acting
-somewhat repetitive, idk how, it just felt like.. generic
-I like creating and managing teams
-too long (fine, if I would have liked it, this would have been bonus)
Didn't bother to finish it, I simply don't care what happens in the end

Predefined characters aren't incompatible with RPGs - it just means there will minimal role-playing in the game's story but won't necessarily reduce role-palying in the gameplay.

didnt choose the popular route in witcher 2 and expect continuity in witcher 3? to bad goy!
know check my dubs

It was good
Holla Forums just has this weird psychosis where they will pretend every game is shit and everything sucks and enjoying anything makes you a fag

what the fuck am i reading this game has top tier dialogue

Darling, I've been playing both vidya and pen & paper RPGs all my life, and I just like to make my own characters. In action etc. games I usually don't give a fuck about the character, but then again, those games don't usually have so much dialogue. If there's plenty of meaningful (gameplay affecting) dialogue, I like to make the character from the beginning, otherwise it feels like indifferent and annoying. Thos are 'his words, not mine', if you know what I mean.

..also, at least protagonist should be mute, this is must for me, I hate voice acting. With NPCs it's acceptable, not with the player character. And I like building teams (and managing), that's why I liked Dragon Age: Origins, the team management is petty and stupid, but it's there (this one doesn't like him or her, you can give gifts, silly stuff like that etc)

Explain.
One of the 2 Roche/faggot-elf is canon and it's Dragon Age Leliana "hurrdurr im not rly ded :^)" again?

Unless your predefined character explicitly is a guy that hunts monsters, uses two swords, magic, and potions under all circumstances with no alternative. This game has no RPG in its story and no RPG in its builds.

It runs like shit and doesn't look good enough to justify it.

Also Geralt is a mary sue.

post specs

hm long way from Neogaf arent we? get back to your hole you gutter cunts. Everybody knows the only ones who disparagingly hates TW3 are Neogaf faggots triggered by its lack of nignaknogs and other degenerates

i7 32gb ram two titan x. Doesn't go over 20 fps at 800x600 minimum settings. The game is shit.

It runs like shit.

Ha ha time for the defense force

It's a common occurrence for RPGs to have bad gameplay but here, it's average at worst. There's nothing to blow your mind but it sure as fuck ain't abysmal like you fags imply.

You spend half the gametime just talking to people come on.

All of which can be disabled in the HUD options. The game isn't designed around that though, so it won't always be fun.

Blood & Wine aside where they decided to fill it with memes for some retarded reason, it's got the best writing in vidya in the recent years. You can say the main quest is not exactly interesting and I'd agree, but most if not all characters (that have at least 5 minutes of screentime) feel alive, and that's a pretty great feat for how badly the writing's been in vidya lately.

It's the type of game that has you attend a wedding for a full hour in a small place where you go around and participate in events ranging from chasing pigs to lake-diving for shoes, all the while some faggot ghost is hitting on your gf. It's not the type of game you should get into if you want to KILLING MONSTERS everywhere with complex combo systems and an inventory management to make you sweat. You can argue that it's not your cup of tea, but saying it's shit because it's not what you wanted it to be is silly.

Real curious why you count these as flaws, as most of them are subjective. You're pretty much saying "it's not like these other games that I like". I'd say you should judge a game based on its own merits, not on "it's not Dragon Age".

Open world isn't used well. It should have been more about exploration and immersing yourself instead of just having a large enough area where you go from one marker to the next.

It was made better by turning UI off but not that well. Otherwise the combat's shit when it doesn't need to be.

All flaws are subjective, because some people don't even care about numerically measurable shortcomings like 'cinematic framerate'. I'm telling you my opinions, not someone else's.

But I am, I'm just ahead of you. If I'll say I don't like this, the next thing you'll do (or should) is to ask 'what's better, give me an example'.

So just like literally any other video game - in every game your dialogue choice is limited to the minds of the developer (unless you count Facade), so they're never your words. Only PnP games have limitless potential in dialogue choice and consequence. In turn however, very few choices have meaningful consequence with the majority being inconsequential, whereas in a video game with a limited number of choice, each one has greater potential to have more impact (even if that isn't the case most of the time).

True, the game fails as an RPG in both categories, but I was just noting that not having role-playing in the story isn't that big of a strike against the game in and of itself.

Most games in general have bad gameplay, I don't see this as an RPG occurrence.

YES. Like I said before, I usually don't give a fuck about the character (or story), unless he's my creation.

I liked this game and I've never been to neofag.

It was pretty fun. Op already said one of the bad things was the rpg elements. It should have been pure action adventure like legend of Zelda, without levels.

Why would you play it on a console if you cared about graphics?

I'm talking about the tutorial.

Especially Ciri, worst dialogue I've seen in a while.

Ciri has always been an insufferable cunt.

in the books, she became an infamous drug addict (fisstech) lesbian bandit for some time, before some badass showed up and slaughtered them all.

Anyway, just cuz she's a stuck up bitch who's often annoying to listen to doesn't mean the dialogue is bad. That's just her character, it's good dialogue for an annoying character.

Yeah I know, I've read the books. I was kind of mad that she killed Bonhart later, because she didn't practice even for a second between these two fights (if we don't count slaying old cannibalistic rapist and ice skating)

But I'm talking about the dialogue, it just feels forced as fuck. There are other ways of making character annoying than putting her personality in every word she says.

Same about Geralt, I feel like they tried to enforce the characters' personalities to make newcomers understand them.

Yeah, the games have to force a lot of background and personality in where it hardly fits so people who never read the books can get a bit of a feel for the depth of the characters.

Ciri and Yen are still abrasive bitches, though. Even in the books.

also, follow the red line.

i liked the game, and i didnt even have a problem with the combat, but there is alot of bullshit in it.
and the open world was utterly pointless and only dragged the game down. more linear, diveded into chapters would have played to its strenghts much better.

and dont pretend you dont know any of this you retard.

in a better world people like you would be too retarded to be allowed to live, instead of following the red line you would rather follow the corridors, wow, such improvement, such genius

anti-sandboxfags are cancer

you can't play as a trans-fluid mixed-race demi-dickgirl.

and then theres this mongoloid.
sandboxes are great when they are done right and shit when the developer fucks them up.
and cdpr fucked it up, unless you like ubisoft style sandboxes, in which case you should consider suicide.

Regis didn't get his own mode.

The new alchemy system is shit and I didn't like that you can use potions in the middle of combat.
Combat system was an improvement of previous games in the series, but there could be a harder difficulty to make you git gud at it.
Leveling felt too fast for me, especially after level 20 and almost no mention of squirel terrorists.
Other than that it was a good game, definitely one of the best open world rpgs I played.
Oh, and too few romancing options, in the first witcher you could fuck a ton of characters and get sex cards for it
gotta catch 'em all!

...

She was a qt. Some brave lad should've stepped up and kept her genes in the pool.

Yes, characters that died in your Witcher 2 will actually be dead in Witcher 3, and if they survived then they will be present in Witcher 3 - which affects the overall main plot and quest lines.

...

Ciri is a shit character
The Wild Hunt are a really stupid enemy
Filler content everywhere
There are seriously like 5-6 Male NPC models if they arent important characters and boy do I sure get pulled out of a quest pretty quickly when the same person I saw 5 minutes ago who was a noble is now a bandit

...

Count how many times this exchange happens:

Geralt: Are you going to *insert a reasonable guess*?

Character: No, I'm going to *insert absurd sarcastic response*.

...

making it linear sure would would fix those games am i right, antisandboxfags are goddamn retards, end yourself

There was a lot of filler to flesh out the huge open world, but it was all optional. Most of it was pretty high quality, though. Even minor, somewhat hidden side quests had pretty solid writing and dialogue.

THANK FUCK FOR THAT, those fucking elves whining all day.

Spent an extra year downgrading the pc graphics after being bribed by microshit.

is "antisandbox" a thing now?
anyways, was witcher 1 a linear game?
no it was not.
was witcher 1 a sandbox?
no it wasnt that either.
weird how that works.

the side quests were all very well written, they blow anything from bioware or bethesda out of the water without trouble.
my problem is that the world itself is boring. it looks great, but its empty of meaningfull content., since everything is already marked down on your map and even if you go there to "explore" the loot is shit you dont need.

this was the first game I played when I bought my 970. it was jaw dropping. can't say I agree if by console graphics you mean bad graphics.

I know what you mean when you say that world itself is boring. There were no real events besides the Wild Hunt shit.
There was real opportunity to have factions fighting each other all the time. There could have been several plots going on, given all the different groups.

You bought a 970, you're a console pleb at your core.

I gave it a second chance and it's pretty fucking great tbh

Controls and gameplay are fucking atrocious.

Also imagine how much better 80% of the quests would be if there was no red glow or different font color in the dialogues. It would be much more immersive, almost as easy as it is now (literally five blue shields on a black, burned battlefield or black steps on sand) and wouldn't feel like some braindead shit like Assassin's Creed.

I don't know y it gets so much hate. but yes, I was had a pc when i was a kid, then switched when ps2 came out. stayed through ps3 then jumped back to pc like 2 years ago. I bought an 8350 because I couldn't believe Intel was better. I'm an old man now.

to add, when I say I switched to ps2, I kept playing anything I could get to play on my pc, I just didn't keep up with graphics at all. Before I built my new pc, the last time I remembered buying parts was 2 sticks of 8MB RAM. and it helped a great deal.

you wouldn't be able to do a lot of shit without the glow. following those long trails by "scent" comes to mind.

Even at release and believing the specs published it was an awful purchase for the money, the 0.5GB scam only made it worse.
Same with the retards buying the 1070 now when a cheaper and -likely- better card is days away from being released.
I'm not a fan of either brands, even though I think Nvidia is more kike-like, I'd still buy one of their cards if it offers a better deal for the price. The 1080 will keep on being the best card on the price range in the near future, I wouldn't put so much money on a GPU now a days, but if you have the budget, I'd advise a 1080. If you want to stay bellow the 400-300 mark, AMD will likely offer a better deal.

Because they did not try, I remember a friend of mine fantasizing about legit tracking monsters in forest, but that would mean making the quests while having it in mind which they clearly did not do. What makes it even more obvious when you're right in front of an item you have to interact with for a quest and you can't until you use the witcher senses. It's disapointing as fuck.
It's like those faggots telling you that you don't have to follow quest waypoints in games if you don't want to, as if it was just a choice and not something the devs had to plan for. Think Morrowind's quest design vs modern quest design. I've been going through Divinity Original Sin lately and they did a decent job at that, even if it could be better here and there.

Yeah it would be pretty cool if they removed a lot of quest markers and instead had you operate by quest descriptions, like Morrowind.

Still though, it wasn't overbearing like a lot of games are. And you could turn most of it off.

I got around to downloading the 8GB of patches that piled up over my downtime and played the game for 2 days straight last week.

It's pretty comfy and can really suck you in. It's one of the very few RPGs where i never skip dialog. I like the graphics, atmosphere, themes, dialogue, voiceacting and general production quality. The main story is captivating but its also fun to just sail to whatever shitty little island in skellige and work through sidequests.

But the game has a lot of flaws

The unresponsive movement and the camera are terrible, they rip you out of the game. In cutscenes and dialogue, the world feels very grounded and heavy, but once you regain control it's floaty and weightless. The game would gain a lot from a 1:1 analog stick to movement translation with strict player physics like in good ARPGs.

Still a fun game.

300 US dollars and a free game. can't remember the game. the one I bought is even cheaper now with a rebate. I only have a 144 1080 monitor and this thing gives me everything on ultra with no problem. and I have a 8350 so my processor isn't even the "best". more games than you would think use all 8 cores despite what the quad core cocksuckers spouts all the time. that being said… I am happy with the purchase. I think if I had to do it over I would probably do the same thing. especially since it's now only 269 after rebate. that ain't much unless you're pretty low income. not even being glib.
newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA1YH3GG0500&cm_re=asus_turbo_970-_-14-121-926-_-Product

I agree about the sucking you in part. I got it halfway through October and I played it until about mid November. it was fucking magical.

...

I dunno, how about all of the best RPGs ever made?

As for boring gameplay, Morrowind and any IE game worth their salt have interesting tactical combat and builds (other than Planescape), and the souls games have both good builds and good action combat.

Severance BoD and Dragon's Dogma

kys smh fam

That's because the game is shit. In a real open world RPG, you navigate your way through with clues from the environment and instructions given by NPCs. An example would be an NPC in Morrowind or Gothic telling you to "follow a road north until you see a diagonal tree above the path, when you reach it turn left and…"

This would force you to actually pay attention to the environment and NPC dialogue rather than staring at a glowy marker for 10 minutes holding W.

I agree with everything you said but this. This doesn't make the game shit. Weren't the treasure hunts set up the way you describe? didn't you have to follow directions? I honestly can't remember.

They were and I liked them a lot, same goes for the similarly set up ones in Red Dead Redemption and Skyrim. But the vast majority of your exploration is going to be on quests that aren't like this.

And no, those don't make the game shit. They just make the exploration shit. What makes the rest of the game shit is the fact that it's an RPG with no builds and a defined, voiced protagonist, limited dialogue options (see: voiced protagonist), relatively generic fantasy setting outside of some neat celtic stuff, and most of all the combat is Arkhamclone shit where you press the attack button in no particular direction or distance from the enemy, and your character leaps towards them and strikes meaning your positioning, aiming, and timing don't really matter compared to what you see in good action games.

The writing is pretty solid though, it looks pretty good, and the music is superb, but while good writing, visuals, and music might make for a good movie they don't necessarily make for a good game alone.

Shitty game. The CDPR shills defending its terrible gameplay are as annoying as the valvedrones that keep making shill threads for steam.

Witcher set texture is a bit good though

Its the only triple A game i've enjoyed in 5 years

They went out of their way to hide nudity and it's really jarring sometimes
There's only so many conveniently placed obstacles, "tasteful" camera angles, or characters wearing underwear at strange times that I can handle
Bruxas and Alps are the only enemies in the game with obnoxiously noticeable death animations precisely for that purpose

Also, in-engine cutscenes have weird issues with object interaction, if someone is in physical contact with something you can see, they're always either floating in midair, or in the case of geralt's swords, constantly clipping into his hands
I don't get how they have such issues with that when the animation quality is otherwise so good

yea, that could have been a thing, but its not even what i meant.
my problem with the world is that all the locations you can discover, like castleruins, caves, banditcamps and so on are ruined by two things. first of, you dont get anything from exploring them, exploration is mechanicly pointless. secondly everywhere you go there are little contrived notes that spell out the exact backstory of the place. thats alright in some places, but most of the time, not having the backstory for the smallest banditcamp spelled out would make the world feel much more real. a location needs a backstory, but it should be told through the location itself.
i remember a beautifull location, some sunken ruins of an old castle you could dive to. well designed, beautifully realized and then it all gets ruined by a note that sais "oh look you found me, the next treasure in this series of treasure hunts(tm) is right over here, let me place a map marker". i guess my point is that sometimes less can be more, especialy when the "more" compeltely ruins the immersion of the player and the feeling of the world.
the best open world ive ever played was gothic/gothic 2, because there exploration was risky, rewarding and somewhat mysterious, because you never knew what you would find. i expected alot when the lead designer of witcher 3 stated in an interview that they took inspiration from the gothic series on how to make an open world. but while the writing is great, the world just drags the game down.

That's what bothered me too, not so much that it broke an immersion though, you I just hid POI and minimap.

Yeah nothing comes close to it, I still don't understand what they did to make it so fun and interesting to play. All I know is that nothing like it will come anytime soon.

ebin meme

Combat is everything.
That alone is enough reason not to play it.

Kek, are you sure you're talking about the Witcher?

Radovid's character and motivations were butchered. Still let him live since all elves were unsympathetic cunts.

you weebs overrated that game, its unfinished and pretty casual too, there is nothing special or deep about the combat even on the bullshit mode where you get one hit killed by anything

so i take you never play any "rpg"

I play ones with good combat.

What exactly do you think makes this setting not generic? Yes there is some cool celtic stuff that you don't see in a lot of media, but overall it's pretty derivative.

I'm saying this in comparison to a setting like Morrowind or Bloodborne

That's the one thing that really disappointed me personally. The way they lessened the nudity. Considering the first Witcher had entirely nude Dryads walking around and 2 didn't shy away from hinting at pubes 3 was just full of these retarded panties. I was really looking forward to some 1080 sexiness.

Haven't played Blood & Wine, what the fuck did they do to the Bruxae and Alps?

Yea hiding the minimap is basicly mandatory in this game. it makes things better, but its still not great.

im still replaying gothic 1 and 2 every few years, waiting for better times. maybe piraniah bytes wont fuck their new ip up. they probably will though.

skellige is scandinavia, novigrad is based on amsterdam and velen are mudfarming peasants, which arent exclusive to england. and most of the monsters and lore are based on slavic stuff.
you have a point though, witcher 3 felt way less unique than witcher 1 did.

tfw there is no qwent version with the nude cards from witcher 1.
apart from that i realy dont understand why people like sex scenes in video games. just watch some sfm shit. at least thats well animated.

...

The shitty "open world" Far Cry 3 camp world.
And those 3 things are just about everything you should care about in a game. Gameplay and level design. It sucks ass in both.

imb4 bitching about typos.

Bad performance, nvidia gasworks and consolitus are the main problems.

Imagine if it got an optimised Linux release and never went to consoles. Would be easily one of the greatest games of the decade.

But they fuck it up as usual. Made me sick seeing YouTube ads for the expansions knowing they were spending yet even more money on marketing instead of Linux, optimisation etc.

How often do you see either of those in RPGs nowadays? And that's ignoring the fact that you're wrong. If there's one thing the Witcher does that is amazing, it's the unique monster designs and how you don't go about any monster the same way.
The most "Generic" ones you see anyway are ones you see the least often. Like the High Vampire.

cuck tier story and protagonist

shallow combat.

Every time you kill one, they do a long and drawn out animation where they flip onto their stomach(so that nobody can get a good look at the goods) and crawl away from you for a bit
After the first time you see it, it ends up like watching one of those stereotypical cheesy comedy deaths, minus the fake pained screams and squirting ketchup bottle hidden under the armpit

Also, one "tasteful" bestiary pic is understandable, but when we get to like three or four different entries each with the exact same slightly crossed legs and arms/hair over the breasts, it's incredibly obnoxious

I'm guessing stuff like that was because of the same kind of shit that caused them to lower the graphics. To cater to outside opinion.

I know this is bait, but you reminded me that there are people that use cuck for literally everything in this same kind of way. 7/10

...

Monsters and the whole environment in Velen is heavily based on Slavic mythology, Leshen and Bruxa for example, so are a lot of quests, the characters in them and most of the soundtrack there. There's over a hundred different monsters in the Witcher universe, most of them are far from being generic.
Skellige is some sort of Scandinavian mix with a little bit of Irish admixture.

That would be Scoia'tael, most elves live in the city slums.

Absolutely not, Novigrad is based on Amsterdam by design as already pointed out. Villages are very much inspired by medieval Eastern Europe, so are the beliefs of the villagers in the supernatural and their rituals.

What exactly in Witcher 3 is "cool Celtic stuff" besides a few things in Skellige and a small portion of the soundtrack? Even the stones you use to augment your gear are named after Slavic deities. Expansions have little to nothing to do with Celtic stuff as well.
Hearts of Stone is heavily influenced by Polish literature and culture, the whole story is actually. Toussaint is the only place inspired by medieval Western and Mediterranean Europe, maybe its that what you meant by cool Celtic stuff?

You didn't even play the game faggot.

After the graphics downgrade that they swore would not happen those lying retards and their game can fuck off, just like you shills.
Pirated it and it was boring, open world did not benefit the game one single fucking drop since the leveled enemies still acted like a more or less of a corridor to move encourage you to move through the map in a certain path. That and the tedious quests in the towns got repetitive and boring real fast.

Why anyone fucking likes Yenneffer is beyond me. Such a shit character. Face is ugly to boot.

And I don't understand why everyone wants to choose either Yenneffer or Triss, why not fuck both of them? Who cares. You're a sterile mutant with a huge lifespan anyway.

Simple, ones and ugly hateful sarcastic bitch, the other is a redhead that doesnt constantly treat geralt like shit.

1- the main story is "lets save the world" cliche the good story and quests mostly comes from the sidequstes
2- the combat doesn't feel "witchery" at all it feels something outside of the main game "see witcher 1 for reference "
3- the RPG elements are very light and shallow
4-the hand holding "witcher vision"

and sorry form my bad english

Hi, Triss.

Anyway, Triss is the real shit character here. She's nothing but a boring 'STRONK WOMAN' stereotype. There's a reason Geralt left her as soon as he remembered Yenn.
Though if you ask me, Keira Metz best gurl.

If you want to go lore heavy, Triss is a bigger bitch though, she uses magic on Geralt to get him in love with her. She's also far from being helpful and caring unlike Yenneffer. But yeah, in games they made Yen a huge bitch in comparison to Triss.

Looks like Injustice: Gods Among Us character.

Exactly, I hated how she was so hyped up in the second on to realise what a fucking bitch she was.

all sorceresses are cunts, no exceptions.
lonely geralt is best geralt.

...

Calm down, don't get so bootyblustered.

They're all hideous as fuck too. The Crones are basically what sorceresses look like if you peel away the magic. (Okay, huge exaggeration, but the general point stands.)

Go back and play it without nostigia goggles and it is gutter tier trash. This meme that Morrowind is good needs to die.

...

Morrowind > fallout 1 tbh

It is indeed very sad how being able to put a hat on your character and doing something normal like customizing his fighting gear counts as being role-playing.

I played morrowind for the first time two years ago just to spite faggots like you

Agreed.

Also, witcher is trash.

The only thing that ever stood out in that game is how it doesnt hold your hand. Everythingelse was shit even back in 2003.

guess he got triggered this forum isn't a circlejerk over a shitty game like his witcher forum is

Horseshit.
Being so poorly developed that it drops to 15FPS is an objective flaw.
Having an immersion-breaking control scheme so unintuitive that no commercially available keyboard or controller can make the game playable for humans is an objective flaw.
Having graphics five years behind the times is an objective flaw.
A mechanic that allows players to become gamebreakingly strong in under an hour is an objective flaw.
And thankfully none of these faults apply to TW3.

Pretty sure he means 'the graphics engine was gimped for console hardware, and nowhere near as much effort was put into making the game look gorgeous as was in TW2'. I vaguely remember Wojcik having to convince his interviewers that what they were seeing was unaltered, in-game screenshots of a DX9 game.

Oh, really?
I do like the game, but some of the side quests were straight outta Bethesda/Bioware's printing press.

The Crones aren't human. Hell, they aren't even nonhumans. Their species is in the same category as relicts like godlings. It's implied their monstrous appearances are the result of them practising their fucked up hoodoo shit for millennia, and having monstrous natures to begin with.
Sorceresses would look like normal humans without their magical cosmetic surgery (hunchbacked humans in Yen's case). Their ageless appearances are the result of somatic changes, and not illusions, since just making yourself appear young won't let you live for hundreds of years. Following from that, their artificial beauty must also be the result of changes at the cellular level.