Witcher = Neutrality = Good?
Like many of the games that get released today, The Witcher is something of a diamond in the rough. Whether you're willing to put up with the flaws or wait for someone else to come along and polish it is up to the individual. Perhaps like the protagonist, the game is neither strictly good nor bad, but instead takes the neutral path. Depending on your own inclinations, neutrality may be just what the doctor ordered. Certainly, this isn't a game for everyone, and I imagine there are some people out there that absolutely despise it. Those people probably also hate games like Oblivion, Fallout, Baldur's Gate, Planescape: Torment, Ultima Underworld, and a number of other games that I absolutely loved.
 Druids would be proud. |
If you liked any of the titles I just listed, chances are you will enjoy The Witcher, warts and all. The combat system is a refreshing change of pace, keeping things from getting bogged down in the turn-based world of Dungeons & Dragons without becoming completely twitch-based. The story is definitely compelling, and while the choices you make might not ultimately have a huge impact on the ending, I at least was left wanting more. The graphics and sound are good if not great, helping to draw the player into the rich world of Andrzej Sapkowski. In fact, after playing the game, I'm one of likely many people that will now go out and pick up his books, just to experience more of the world of Temeria and its denizens.
 Look - depth of field effect (which is only in cut scenes). |
The Witcher ranks as the best PC role-playing game I've played since Oblivion. Then again, outside of Neverwinter Nights 2, there haven't been all that many RPGs in the past two years for PCs. If you're willing to stretch the definition of RPG a bit, games like STALKER and Bioshock enter the picture, both of which I would rate above The Witcher. However, the game is a lot closer to Oblivion than it is to STALKER, so that's probably not a fair comparison. If you're like me — an RPG fan that detests MMORPGs and is eagerly waiting on Bethesda to finish up Fallout 3 — there simply aren't that many other options out there right now. Lucky for us, we have The Witcher to help tide us over. We may be left wondering how or why Geralt came back from the dead, but you certainly won't find me complaining about his reappearance.
| The Witcher Official Requirements | ||
| Required | Recommended | |
| CPU | Pentium 4 2.8GHz+ or Athon* 64 2800+ | Pentium 4 3.0GHz or Athlon* 64 3000+ |
| RAM | 1GB | 2GB |
| Storage | 8.5GB free HDD space, DVD-ROM** | 8.5GB free HDD space, DVD-ROM** |
| GPU | GeForce 6600 or Radeon 9800 | GeForce 7800 GTX or Radeon X1950 XT |
| DirectX | DirectX 9.0c | DirectX 9.0c |
| OS | Windows XP/Vista | Windows XP/Vista |
*: Athlon
XP series is not (officially) supported.
**: Direct2Drive version available.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
39 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Thursday, January 24, 2008 - link
I believe I covered that on page 6:[quote]Then there are the mini-games: drinking, gambling, and womanizing. Okay, the last one doesn't really count as a "mini-game", but the presentation does make one wonder if the developers/writers behind The Witcher aren't a bunch of misogynistic — or at least sexually repressed — men.[/quote]
Amazingly enough, I don't encourage young children to play 17+ rated games, and I wouldn't suggest parents buy this game for their pre-teen kids.
Foxy1 - Thursday, January 24, 2008 - link
I’ll make myself clearer, as you missed the obvious intent of my question: In your opinion,1) Does The Witcher portray women as vile temptresses, witches and whores?
2) Are women treated reprehensibly by all the male characters in The Witcher?
3) Is the underlying theme of The Witcher the sexual conquest of women?
4) As a father of a young daughter, were you offended by the objectification of women in The Witcher?
And regarding your comment: “I wouldn’t suggest parents buy this game for their pre-teen kids.” – what about teenagers (ages 13-17)?
JarredWalton - Thursday, January 24, 2008 - link
1) Yes. It also portrays men as depraved, evil, murdering jerks; other women are nurses, concerned mothers, peasants, old women, etc.2) Hardly.
3) If you're hard up, maybe? I can think of better ways to get my jollies than playing an 80 hour game just so I can see a few PG-13 rated scenes and cards.
4) Nope, because it didn't exist any more than it does in the real world. There are women that have sex for money, sex for pleasure, or hate men - all of these are present in The Witcher.
Perhaps you should notify people like Jack Thompson about this game; at least he would care enough to be outraged.
chizow - Thursday, January 24, 2008 - link
Lighten up guy, you're 700 years early on the topic of suffrage and equal rights in a fantasy world. Its a video game, squarely marketed towards the 18-35 male demographic that dominates the industry (and most others too). The game is rated 17-18+ in Europe and M (18+) in the US, so be a good parent and don't buy it for your 13-17 year old kids if you don't want them playing it.homercles337 - Thursday, January 24, 2008 - link
Why was there no time spent discussing the flawed DRM? Many people with this game have serious, game stopping issues with the DRM--FOR NO REASON. There is a 20 page thread at The Witcher Forums discussing this with no resolution.Overall though, i was happy to see a Witcher review right here at AT. :)
nHeat - Thursday, January 24, 2008 - link
Without a doubt, that was the most idiotic introduction ever written on a Witcher review. Anyone else agree?vijay333 - Thursday, January 24, 2008 - link
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/edit...">http://www.escapistmagazine.com/article...tion/283...JarredWalton - Friday, January 25, 2008 - link
You might notice that this link is already in the article, on the last page. Thanks for reading. ;)chizow - Thursday, January 24, 2008 - link
Nice review Jarred, I certainly agree with many of the points you've covered. I also wanted to give a BIG thumbs-up on incorporating some of the hardware/performance aspects of the game into the review to give it that techy edge. HardOCP has also done some featured game/patch performance reviews. I'd like to see more reviews of this type that bridge the gap between game reviews and bar graphs and help the end-user understand how they can improve their gaming experience.As for the game itself, I also found it very enjoyable. There's certainly some annoyances, many of which you covered in your review. My main gripe is with looting, how you can't loot while aggro'd and even something as simple as a "Loot All" bind key or making it closer to the center of the screen would cut down on the annoyance that is looting corpses. Some things I'd add to help new players or potential players is:
1) Books: Always buy Monster books for Bestiary entries ASAP. This will help advance some secondary/bounty quests and cut down on some of the running back and forth or frustrations with limited spawn monsters. Look for the Antiquary or Book vendors in new areas first.
2) Looting corpses: for Junk mobs, don't bother looting all of them all the time. Best way is to just find 1 readily available alchemy ingredient for each component and stick to only looting that (6 items). For advanced players, you can do this for each sub component too (18-24 items).
3) Gathering Herbs: same as above, only focus on the ones you need for specific alchemical values, ignore the rest. When buying books buy monster books first, then Plants if you have the extra scratch.
4) Sell everything unless you're sure you'll need it (meteorite, runes, potion alcohol, key alchemy ingredients), you can usually buy it back later and anything essential goes to quest items.
5) Food is pretty much useless, sell it off and keep only 1-2 stacks to help free up inventory.
Interesting comments about performance, glad you were able to compare on multiple systems. I ran the game with Vista 64 and 8GB from the start and found it very stable even before the 1.2 patch, but saw many others complaining about crashes in the forums. At first I wasn't sure if the game was /largeaddressaware but as soon as I got to Chapter 2/3 I saw the game would certainly take advantage of extra RAM and a 64-bit OS with all the zoning and transitioning. I've seen Witcher commit hit 2.85GB (~4GB system total) with another 4GB cached in Vista 64 but I'm sure they can improve load times even more.
I also found the game to be very CPU intensive. On a C2D E6400 @ 3.1GHz, the system would use 80-85% with CPU 0 pegged at 100% and CPU 1 fluctuating between 60-80%. Didn't really seem to impact performance until I ran FRAPs, at which point both cores would be pegged at 100% (similar experience with other games with FRAPs in Vista) and I would see a negative impact on performance with choppy gameplay. Upgrading to a C2Q @ 3.5GHz smoothed things out a bit, especially with FRAPs running. Only 25-30% (max 80% on Core 0) instead of 80% on a slower C2D. With FRAPs recording utilization hits 50-60% and gameplay is noticeably smoother with the Quad core. The Quad didn't address the brief slowdown I experience when zoning from indoor to outdoor in Chapter 3 (Trade Quarters) during the day. Figured this was a memory management issue and part of the reason transitions took so long, as the game is loading up all of the dynamic objects and NPCs.
Oh btw, when are we going to see that Vista 64 vs Vista 32/XP comparison? I know Derek was out sick for awhile so maybe that slowed things down, but we're starting to see more and more games that perform better/worst on 32 or 64-bit even if it doesn't show up on an FPS graph.
ghoti - Thursday, January 24, 2008 - link
Thanks for the comprehensive game review, Jarred.