Unfortunately, a great story fails to float an overly mechanical gameplay expirience that totally lacks immersion.
Dated November 27th 2007
As gamers, we tend to look at certain games, and stand in awe of their power, sometimes even before they reach the shelves. This is because, as gamers, these days we're often liable to providing for a game, a single, generally awe-inspiring attribute. An attribute, in fact, that we feel justifies the game, or is the defining reason behind owning that game. For many, this often takes the form of a graphics engine, wherein many gamers tout that graphically powerful game as a 'must own'. However, as we often seem to find out, a single attribute cannot make a game great.
"Lair", for instance, was loved well prior to its release, for its 'beauty'; and I'm certain many gamers pre-ordered it, because that single, solitary attribute of beauty, as we often think, must also translate into a great game. Well, in Lair's case, that didn't seem to happen. I admittedly fell into that trap myself with the woeful yet beautiful title that was Madden '07 for the Xbox 360. I was wowed by the graphics...by their 'innovation' that I was blinded to the truth, purchased it, and found its gameplay to be sorely lacking; the worst of any experience of football I've had in a long while. The point here is that no single attribute can make a game, just as no single word, makes an argument, and no single point, and makes a good essay. The truth is, games are based upon a plethora of attributes; much like a movie, much like a book. Although games have to run far deeper. Not only must they provide an engaging form of entertainment, they must also prove to be somewhat intellectually stimulating, easy to pick up and play (for the most part), challenging, visually decent, as well as, at the very least, decently pleasing to the ear. Truth be told then, games are nothing like books, which may be able to rely on plot alone, even if the style is lacking, nor are they similar to movies, which may rake in the cash for stunning CG animation, or a high amount of gore, or scare factor, without owning up to much else. No, in my view, the best games must run the table of the senses of entertainment in EVERY way, to be successful; and the biggest part of that success (although ALL must be held in high regard, [such being the quandary of a video game,]) is Gameplay.
With that said, and you'll forgive my digression, I hope, The Witcher has been touted as a game with a tremendously engrossing story… and I'll give it its due, but as I have found in so many other cases:
The Witcher, in spite of its credentials, misses the most important mark to be successful… Gameplay
Indeed, inserting the game into my machine, and pressing play, I was greeted by a tremendous, almost film-worthy opening movie that seemed to last a stunning ten minutes of beautifully rendered computer graphics animation, and a budding musical score, and though the movie lacked the same clout in its off-ish voice over; I was still in awe.
Upon getting into the game however, I cannot express how disappointed I was… and believe me, I really, really sought out to like this game (citing that it was on my Christmas list this year before I even played it, as the details of a tremendously engaging 40-60 hour, top-notch dark medieval RPG caused me to salivate greatly) but in areas of controlling the character, in voice-over work, in system demands, and yes, and even in combat…Yes, all told, in gameplay, The Witcher fails mightily.
In fact, I can scarcely say that I have been privy to play a game which held such an undesirable control scheme. When using WASD to run, and the mouse to turn Geralt, I have never felt more disconnected to what was happening on the screen. Because, as said, one must move the mouse to turn, while holding W almost exclusively, in addition to the fact that Geralt always runs, I felt that I was more trying to successfully navigate hallways without bumping into things, than I was a enjoying a medieval world, supposedly teeming with realism.
What's more, considering that the controls are certainly lack-lustre, one may think that combat would suffer, and it does as a result, but upon its own systematic demerits, it also fails to deliver. The system of combat, in fact, just like the player control, also 'succeeds' in ruining ones immersion. To sum it up in brief, one must navigate the game in say, an over the shoulder perspective, run towards a prospective enemy, highlight them with the mouse and click. Having clicked, Geralt will step forward, and enter a swinging animation, which seems to always be repeated the same way; a swing to the head, and a swing to the body; the difference here than with other games, is that after the first hit and while ending the second, the player must attempt to click their left-mouse button in a timely manner as indicated by a flaming sword (or, on hard, which I played, an orange swathe of light), to engage in an even deadlier combo, likely killing the enemy outright. Granted, this combat style is a nice thought, but it didn't work for me, because in my attempts to land the perfectly timed combination blow (which I rarely did) I lost my immersion into the game. Instead of a vast medieval world, teeming with life, I reduced it to staring at the sword, and waiting for that perfect click, that perfect attack. For me, the combat became so mechanical, that nothing else could save it.
The beautiful graphics and amazing story that the Witcher provides, fail to resurrect a game for which I had high-hopes, that manages a less engaging combat than Baldur's Gate, or Neverwinter Nights… and that's saying something…something that isn't a compliment.
Indeed, from shoddy voice work, to a mechanical movement AND combat control scheme, in a game which is Justas much about exploring and battling as it is about the narrative; The Witcher falls flat… and I mean flat, on its face.
Thus, as further proof that no game can stand upon one leg and be great, the story of the Witcher fails to save its horribly robotic combat, and inhuman movement….
In that vein, I am unfortunately unable to recommend The Witcher as a must own, or must play title. What it holds in an engaging narrative on paper set in a dark and dreary, chilling-to-the-bone and fresh-to the senses world, fails to make a great video game. A game, in fact, that is marred by an a terribly systematic series of clicks and timing, a horribly unnatural set of 'running' controls (I can't call it movement, because all that Geralt does is run –there seems to be no option here), and graphics which are muddled by steep system requirements and somewhat longer load times, I cannot give it more than a 6.0 out of 10.
For what it's worth, as a lover of narrative, it has a great story, and further, I have no doubt that it would make a great movie, or a great book (as they already exist)… It's just too bad that CD Project Red didn't originate the concept, or they'd at least earn SOME of the little praise that is to go around for this overly mechanical and derivative gaming experience.
6.0/10 – Disappointing.
- Alexander "Desalbert" Jackson