[jfprovata]

Emberstrife said:

The concept of an ARPG where combat actually requires thought had been long forgotten on PC - in most RPGs released in recent years (Witcher 1 included), the only "difficult" fights were ones you went into without the right gear or stats, rather than without player skill. Suddenly, here it is - CDPR boldly discarded Witcher 1's dice-driven combat and handed over complete control, and responsibility, to the player.

I found it to be brutally unfair and unforgiving at first - the first fights the game thrust me in (the tower battle and ballista brawl), my ass was handed back to me on a platter on Normal at least a dozen times. Then I learned that I could - and was expected to - dodge attacks and circle enemies to stab them in the back. That I could drink potions to improve my chances, use Yrden and Axii for crowd control, use Quen to safely land risky attacks, and so on. Soon enough I found myself completing the prologue and the entire game on Hard, then completing it twice on Dark Mode (without upgrading Quen), and enjoying every second of what I previously thought were grossly unbalanced fights.

The game has been made easier since I first played. You can now parry without Vigor, interrupt queued attack combos, enjoy more responsive controls and in general easier combat. However even back then, people figured out how to survive the game's biggest brawls and hardest bossfights, stringing chains of kills without taking any damage.

Witcher 2's combat is hard, but it is fair. It has a clean set of rules to learn and follow, and many ways to approach most fights. Once you spend some time learning the game's mechanics, even Dark Mode will not pose you with real difficulty. If learning is not your thing and you want to enjoy an easy, challenge-free experience - by all means, that's what Easy mode was made for. ›››

This, ah to play TW 2 for the first time again. I remember the first time I won the ballista brawl. After getting my butt kicked many times by mindlessly charging I did something that I hadn't done in a video game for years. I stopped, evaluated my enemies and their position, thought out a tactic using the various signs, went in with a plan, and won!

[tonnactus]

dragonbird said:

I remember it taking 30, 40 minutes to kill the dragon in DA:O the first time, and that was with a full team and a lot of NPC helpers, and a LOT more restrictions on how you could attack it at the various points in the fight. The same in the late unlamented DA2 - a long, slow battle of attrition taking it down one HP at a time, with periods when it was totally impossible to hit with any weapon, but could still attack you.

›››

The archdemon was damagable the whole fight(i suppose that is the Dragon you meant). And i am sure everyone here agree that similarities with the Dragon Age 2 combat arent a good thing.
And regarding Skyrim,not even the endboss was really invulnerable.

[Dragon'sDream]

tonnactus said:

The archdemon was damagable the whole fight(i suppose that is the Dragon you meant). And i am sure everyone here agree that similarities with the Dragon Age 2 combat arent a good thing.
And regarding Skyrim,not even the endboss was really invulnerable. ›››

Well...there are a lot of dragons in DAO, and since she said the "first time" I would think it's either

Flemeth (incredibly tough if you aren't prepared) or the high dragon in frostback mountains (urn of sacred ashes).

[dragonbird]

No, I meant the archdemon
Damagable, yes, but there is a section where you can't use melee attacks, which can be a pretty heavy restriction on a first playthrough.

[steelbom]

*Tommy* said:

Granted but you don`t draw flies with vinegar . ›››

But you can kill them with it

/Joke xD

[tonnactus]

dragonbird said:

No, I meant the archdemon
Damagable, yes, but there is a section where you can't use melee attacks, which can be a pretty heavy restriction on a first playthrough. ›››

Well, in most cases you had either Leliana or Morrigan,who could attack this enemy with spells,the bow and the staff.
Or you are a mage or archer yourself.

[Hyrenapth]

I just loved the fighting system... and also everything inside the game.

[dragonbird]

tonnactus said:

Well, in most cases you had either Leliana or Morrigan,who could attack this enemy with spells,the bow and the staff.
Or you are a mage or archer yourself. ›››

I think we're getting sidetracked.
The point is that there are constraints, and that it isn't unusual for a boss fight to have constraints on what you can do when. If it's a first playthrough, a player may not know what these constraints are, so the player may not be adequately prepared for the fight, and may lose. That doesn't make it a bad game, either in DA:O or TW2.

[steelbom]

dragonbird said:

I think we're getting sidetracked.
The point is that there are constraints, and that it isn't unusual for a boss fight to have constraints on what you can do when. If it's a first playthrough, a player may not know what these constraints are, so the player may not be adequately prepared for the fight, and may lose. That doesn't make it a bad game, either in DA:O or TW2. ›››

This. When I first fought the Kayran it took me a couple of hours I think to figure out "what to do", I got stuck when it started throwing rocks at me. Wasn't sure where to run, tried to explore, kept dying lol.

Now I know, it's easy. (After a few warm ups xD)

[clumsynynja]

*Tommy* said:

Granted but you don`t draw flies with vinegar . ›››

No one wants flies.

[FoggyFishburne]

Could you do us a favor and learn just a little more English? I could barely understand anything and on top of that, your opinion seems rather stupid.

If it's not to your liking, that's fine. I for one, love the combat. It's one of the most deep and engaging combat systems I have ever experienced in my gaming life. It's truly spectacular and I can't wait to see how they refine it in TW3.

Lightice said:

The game is an action RPG, and is advertised as such. This means active player participation in the combat. It's a matter of taste whether you like action RPGs or not, but don't call the game "bullshit" simply because it belongs to a genre that you don't appreciate. ›››

Oh and this.

[green_abobo]

in terms of combat, & what it will be in the 3rd installment, id like to see more of a hybrid of the first two games.

they gotta bring back the group style. not just make it a possibility by selecting a random ability on the character progression chart. it would definitely help in the arena.

the arena's cool even though i always get killed in the battle with the bruxae, wraiths, & shadow knights. i try to use axii but theres just too many of them to balance it with quen, & still have enough vigor to do any damage.

i havent tried it on easy. cant bring myself to do it. almost better off playing it on hard or dark for the points anyway. not that its a walk in the park or anything. lol.

id like to see them take the concept of the arena & expound upon it. not necesarily a mp mode, but just make it deeper in general.

[Greed1914]

Kindo said:

Yeah, it's funny. "Hard" is like the old "normal" in most games, these days, but here CDPR makes an attempt to restore a truly hard difficulty, and it takes people by surprise, I guess. ›››

That's true. Most of the time, I just switch to a higher difficulty even when playing a game for the first time because I know it's the only way to make it challenging. That didn't work out so great with TW2, and I appreciate the use of Normal as a truly baseline experience. Unfortunately, many developers scale back the difficulty because people get stuck and give up easily, meaning they might trade in the game or not buy DLC. It's also why the puzzles in a lot of games are not very challenging.

[green_abobo]

i can totally understand why they revamped combat from the first game. one of the main reasons being to attack from behind.

almost all 1 on 1 encounters in the first game, it was virtually impossible to attack from behind, let alone having sufficient damage, reflected in the case of an enemie's unprotected area. even if one double tapped the arrow forward, to dodge in behind, the enemy automaticallty adjusts to "about face" its attacker.

its true that in a group of enemies one could breifly attack from behind. but in all other instances this wasnt the case.

the real trick in this game is using fast attacks to quickly cover ground. especially useful against rotfiends that explode.

you have to master riposte too. the timing of it more specifically, especially against enemies using shields because those types of enemies attacks have to be parried or dodged, or their special attacks may potentially leave geralt in a very vulnerable predicament.

practicing arena, on progressively more difficult settings, can be a handy way to master the combat featured in AoK.
not to mention you get more points that way so its actually encouraged for you to try at least.

even though you may not be able to get passed a certain wave, if you can at least get there, on a higher difficulty, chances are youll be rewarded with more points for your efforts.

[VFNNJ]

I think this game is much more difficult than most RPGs I've played. There's several reasons for this, among which is the fragility of the hero. (I suppose this is why before they weakened it quen was apparently a super power.) Due to it's relative difficulty frustration is bound to set in. You can lower the setting but most people won't because it feels like a lesser and cheaper experience: Games aren't designed to be played on easy and easy is usually too so. People say, and it's here in this thread many times, that if you stay with it you'll get better. That's true, but there can be a hollowness to this because you know what's coming if you have to replay areas.

I think a legitimate criticism of the 360/PS3 era of games is that they're too easy. I know that in previous eras you expected to fail, to die to lose. Dead Souls says "Prepare to Die" on it's box. In previous eras people would've wondered why.

I think the OP's frustration is understandable and probably pretty common.

[AnthonyF1227]

I think people are just whinny when they complain that they can't beat a game easily. Boo freakin hoo. I remember growing up most games that I owned on Nintendo were never beat because they were so damn hard. You had a finite amount of lives and you could be far in the game, screw up, and unless the game has pass codes you had to start all over. You could spend years trying to beat a game, playing it over and over again getting better and better until you finally one day did it. It was quite the accomplishment. Today's games are a joke in comparison. People are so used to having everything handed to them these days. What a joke.

I'm glad that TW2 was a real challenge to learn and beat. Even still because of the fact that you have infinite lives it's still pretty easy. I wish there was something in between insane and dark mode where you only get like 10 lives to beat the game. That'd be fun.