The Witcher or Fallout 3?

Ok so here's my situation. I'm about to finish Far Cry 2 and want to pick up a new RPG. I can't figure out if I should get the Witcher or Fallout 3. I'm kinda leaning towards The Witcher, cause it's cheaper and one of my housemates just bought Fallout 3 for his 360, although I eventually want to get Fallout 3 for PC. Which do you guys suggest and why?The Witcher or Fallout 3?
I haven't played either much, but I'd go with Fallout 3.The Witcher or Fallout 3?
I've only played like two hours on each, and so far, I have to say that The Witcher is a thousand times better than Fallout 3. Fallout 3 has ass combat and terrible writing and fugly graphics; it does give you many meaningful choices to make, but I don't think that's enough to make it a good role-playing game. After all, choices don't make a GOOD role-playing game; they just make it a role-playing game. If the writing sucks, there's not much that can save it from being terrible except the combat, and, as I mentioned, the combat in Fallout 3 is terrible. The Witcher, on the other hand, seems to have at least better combat, and I hear that the writing has been polished for the enhanced version (though I can't attest to this personally). I'd definitely go with The Witcher, though I'm sure many people will disagree with my opinions on Fallout 3.
Hmmm it is a rather tough decision.... If you ever played Oblivion then thats what you should except from Fallout 3. The world is big, theres plenty of things to do, and you can kill most people you encounter. I have the witcher but I have not downloaded the new enhanced version of it but from what I've played, the characters seemed to be a bit shallow and the fighting was meh at best. Since your friend already has Fallout and if money is an issue I'd say get the Witcher.
[QUOTE=''succulent_toes'']I've only played like two hours on each, and so far, I have to say that The Witcher is a thousand times better than Fallout 3. Fallout 3 has ass combat and terrible writing and fugly graphics; it does give you many meaningful choices to make, but I don't think that's enough to make it a good role-playing game. After all, choices don't make a GOOD role-playing game; they just make it a role-playing game. If the writing sucks, there's not much that can save it from being terrible except the combat, and, as I mentioned, the combat in Fallout 3 is terrible. The Witcher, on the other hand, seems to have at least better combat, and I hear that the writing has been polished for the enhanced version (though I can't attest to this personally). I'd definitely go with The Witcher, though I'm sure many people will disagree with my opinions on Fallout 3.[/QUOTE] Did you just say clicking on a target over and over again is better combat than a decent shooter/melee game?The Witcher has sorry voice overs, is loaded with simple fetch quests...the best thing about the game is the decisions have consequences no one can predict and often occur much later in the game.
Well I REALLY like what I've seen so far from Fallout 3, but I've heard a lot of people say that The Witcher was one of the best RPG's they've ever played. So yeah I'm pretty split between them. I'll probably make my final choice once I finish Far Cry 2.
[QUOTE=''smerlus''][QUOTE=''succulent_toes'']I've only played like two hours on each, and so far, I have to say that The Witcher is a thousand times better than Fallout 3. Fallout 3 has ass combat and terrible writing and fugly graphics; it does give you many meaningful choices to make, but I don't think that's enough to make it a good role-playing game. After all, choices don't make a GOOD role-playing game; they just make it a role-playing game. If the writing sucks, there's not much that can save it from being terrible except the combat, and, as I mentioned, the combat in Fallout 3 is terrible. The Witcher, on the other hand, seems to have at least better combat, and I hear that the writing has been polished for the enhanced version (though I can't attest to this personally). I'd definitely go with The Witcher, though I'm sure many people will disagree with my opinions on Fallout 3.[/QUOTE] Did you just say clicking on a target over and over again is better combat than a decent shooter/melee game?The Witcher has sorry voice overs, is loaded with simple fetch quests...the best thing about the game is the decisions have consequences no one can predict and often occur much later in the game.[/QUOTE] I don't think the shooting/melee combat in Fallout 3 is decent at all. And I don't think clicking on a target over and over again has to be boring. Diablo II is one of my favorite games, because I found the combat and character customization to be very exciting.
[QUOTE=''chesterocks7'']Well I REALLY like what I've seen so far from Fallout 3, but I've heard a lot of people say that The Witcher was one of the best RPG's they've ever played. So yeah I'm pretty split between them. I'll probably make my final choice once I finish Far Cry 2.[/QUOTE] the Witcher was one of the better RPG's that had come out in a while. However the combat is one of the worst aspects of the game second only to the voice acting (they said that was fixed up in the EE version) the thing is does the best is that the decisions you make aren't the typical good/evil choices. you're often presented with a problem that seems rather evenly two sided but which ever side you pick has far reaching consequences that are hard to predict and often happen so far later in the game that it's too difficult to just reload and try another route.Then depending on what difficulty you put it on, the alchemy portion is either useless or key to survival. Most of the quests involve killing a certain number of creatures, finding certain plants and junk like that.Fallout 3 suffers from something totally different. You have people that hated Oblivion and fans of Fallout 1 and 2 saying the game was crap since it was announced a few years back. Now that the game has turned out fine in many people's eyes and is actually a better RPG than even Morrowind, these naysayer's egos won't let them say anything good about the game and often times you'll get posts like the one above saying the combat sucks.I'm sorry about choosing between a silver sword or another weapon and 3 of the same combat styles for each then clicking on a character to a timed pattern is not better than scavenging for items to repair your many types of guns, explosives and melee weapons and fighting in real time or VATS. Many reviews both professional and user say The Witcher's combat is dull and tedious.
i dont agree. combat is great in witcher. it takes a bit a to understand it but after that witcher's dance is fun to watch. especially when you are fighting against multiple opponents and finish them with cool styles.
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
combat in fallout 3 is definatly less good than the witcher. Feel like a half-baked fps and the vats is really annoying to use since it lag and the camera is horrible at showing you your kill. Witcher is probably more interesting story-wise also. ''Fallout 3 suffers from something totally different''I lol'ed at that. I dunno how a grey/brownish open-ended rpg game with gun is totally different than what I've seen before. The problem with fallout 3 is that it try to be too many things at the same time.
[QUOTE=''succulent_toes''][QUOTE=''smerlus''] [QUOTE=''succulent_toes'']I've only played like two hours on each, and so far, I have to say that The Witcher is a thousand times better than Fallout 3. Fallout 3 has ass combat and terrible writing and fugly graphics; it does give you many meaningful choices to make, but I don't think that's enough to make it a good role-playing game. After all, choices don't make a GOOD role-playing game; they just make it a role-playing game. If the writing sucks, there's not much that can save it from being terrible except the combat, and, as I mentioned, the combat in Fallout 3 is terrible. The Witcher, on the other hand, seems to have at least better combat, and I hear that the writing has been polished for the enhanced version (though I can't attest to this personally). I'd definitely go with The Witcher, though I'm sure many people will disagree with my opinions on Fallout 3.[/QUOTE] Did you just say clicking on a target over and over again is better combat than a decent shooter/melee game?The Witcher has sorry voice overs, is loaded with simple fetch quests...the best thing about the game is the decisions have consequences no one can predict and often occur much later in the game.[/QUOTE] I don't think the shooting/melee combat in Fallout 3 is decent at all. And I don't think clicking on a target over and over again has to be boring. Diablo II is one of my favorite games, because I found the combat and character customization to be very exciting. [/QUOTE] The addictiveness in Diablo's combat came from the skills and the fact the game is mostly killing and trying to collect rare loot.Most of The Witcher's skills either combine with the magic, are automatic and not nearly as flashy as Diablo's and there's no good loot to collect. Just animal parts for potions or the million ''get me X number of this animal parts'' quests.Fallout 3's combat fixes a lot of the issues with the original Fallout's combat. No longer do i have to wait through a long drawn on turn based system when my level 15 guy with a rocket launcher comes across a bunch of Raiders with 10mm handguns.Now if I want to stick to melee weapons, I can actually stalk and lure people over to me so I can cut them in half with the ripper, knock them to bits with the super sledge or punch thier faces off with the power fist.Fact is you said you played 2 hours of Fallout and the combat is going to suck. Your guy sin't that skilled with anything and you probably don't have things repaired to high levels. When you're using a scoped .44 magnum almost fully repaired so the damage it does is in the high 30's, you have the Bloody Mess perk, 95 in hand guns and you're sneaking up on a Super Mutant Master, getting them in your scope and taking their heads off clean with one shot, the game is amazing.Even if you're spotted and you're chased after, when you switch to a combat shotgun, go to VATS and unload 3 shells point blank into a guys face of legs and watch in slow mo as the spread rips off the guys face or arms... that's more than decent and a lot better than just pointing and clicking.
both are great...but fallout seems to have more things to do.....
[QUOTE=''smerlus''][QUOTE=''succulent_toes''][QUOTE=''smerlus''] [QUOTE=''succulent_toes'']I've only played like two hours on each, and so far, I have to say that The Witcher is a thousand times better than Fallout 3. Fallout 3 has ass combat and terrible writing and fugly graphics; it does give you many meaningful choices to make, but I don't think that's enough to make it a good role-playing game. After all, choices don't make a GOOD role-playing game; they just make it a role-playing game. If the writing sucks, there's not much that can save it from being terrible except the combat, and, as I mentioned, the combat in Fallout 3 is terrible. The Witcher, on the other hand, seems to have at least better combat, and I hear that the writing has been polished for the enhanced version (though I can't attest to this personally). I'd definitely go with The Witcher, though I'm sure many people will disagree with my opinions on Fallout 3.[/QUOTE] Did you just say clicking on a target over and over again is better combat than a decent shooter/melee game?The Witcher has sorry voice overs, is loaded with simple fetch quests...the best thing about the game is the decisions have consequences no one can predict and often occur much later in the game.[/QUOTE] I don't think the shooting/melee combat in Fallout 3 is decent at all. And I don't think clicking on a target over and over again has to be boring. Diablo II is one of my favorite games, because I found the combat and character customization to be very exciting. [/QUOTE] The addictiveness in Diablo's combat came from the skills and the fact the game is mostly killing and trying to collect rare loot.Most of The Witcher's skills either combine with the magic, are automatic and not nearly as flashy as Diablo's and there's no good loot to collect. Just animal parts for potions or the million ''get me X number of this animal parts'' quests.Fallout 3's combat fixes a lot of the issues with the original Fallout's combat. No longer do i have to wait through a long drawn on turn based system when my level 15 guy with a rocket launcher comes across a bunch of Raiders with 10mm handguns.Now if I want to stick to melee weapons, I can actually stalk and lure people over to me so I can cut them in half with the ripper, knock them to bits with the super sledge or punch thier faces off with the power fist.Fact is you said you played 2 hours of Fallout and the combat is going to suck. Your guy sin't that skilled with anything and you probably don't have things repaired to high levels. When you're using a scoped .44 magnum almost fully repaired so the damage it does is in the high 30's, you have the Bloody Mess perk, 95 in hand guns and you're sneaking up on a Super Mutant Master, getting them in your scope and taking their heads off clean with one shot, the game is amazing.Even if you're spotted and you're chased after, when you switch to a combat shotgun, go to VATS and unload 3 shells point blank into a guys face of legs and watch in slow mo as the spread rips off the guys face or arms... that's more than decent and a lot better than just pointing and clicking.[/QUOTE] Wow, look at all this text that I won't be reading. I form my opinions based on what I play. If the game doesn't convince me after two hours of playing (which neither of them did), I won't be playing it much thereafter, but I will give it a try every now and then in hopes of experiencing something that will convince me otherwise. I don't care about your opinion on the game or your generalization regarding people who don't like Fallout 3 or the opinions of professional reviewers that you seem to like quoting. I just care about the experience I get out of games and discussing them with people whose opinions I respect. You are not one of those people, so write away all you want, but they're falling on deaf ears. And it's not because I'm stubborn; it's because my experience tells me otherwise.
The Witcher.
I have not played either myself but my friends say fallout 3 is the stuff dreams are made of!
My friend said FO 3 was real good on 360, and alot of people say Thw Witcher is really good RPGing. I haven't played either but I think both are real good choices.
[QUOTE=''succulent_toes''][QUOTE=''smerlus''][QUOTE=''succulent_toes''][QUOTE=''smerlus''] [QUOTE=''succulent_toes'']I've only played like two hours on each, and so far, I have to say that The Witcher is a thousand times better than Fallout 3. Fallout 3 has ass combat and terrible writing and fugly graphics; it does give you many meaningful choices to make, but I don't think that's enough to make it a good role-playing game. After all, choices don't make a GOOD role-playing game; they just make it a role-playing game. If the writing sucks, there's not much that can save it from being terrible except the combat, and, as I mentioned, the combat in Fallout 3 is terrible. The Witcher, on the other hand, seems to have at least better combat, and I hear that the writing has been polished for the enhanced version (though I can't attest to this personally). I'd definitely go with The Witcher, though I'm sure many people will disagree with my opinions on Fallout 3.[/QUOTE] Did you just say clicking on a target over and over again is better combat than a decent shooter/melee game?The Witcher has sorry voice overs, is loaded with simple fetch quests...the best thing about the game is the decisions have consequences no one can predict and often occur much later in the game.[/QUOTE] I don't think the shooting/melee combat in Fallout 3 is decent at all. And I don't think clicking on a target over and over again has to be boring. Diablo II is one of my favorite games, because I found the combat and character customization to be very exciting. [/QUOTE] The addictiveness in Diablo's combat came from the skills and the fact the game is mostly killing and trying to collect rare loot.Most of The Witcher's skills either combine with the magic, are automatic and not nearly as flashy as Diablo's and there's no good loot to collect. Just animal parts for potions or the million ''get me X number of this animal parts'' quests.Fallout 3's combat fixes a lot of the issues with the original Fallout's combat. No longer do i have to wait through a long drawn on turn based system when my level 15 guy with a rocket launcher comes across a bunch of Raiders with 10mm handguns.Now if I want to stick to melee weapons, I can actually stalk and lure people over to me so I can cut them in half with the ripper, knock them to bits with the super sledge or punch thier faces off with the power fist.Fact is you said you played 2 hours of Fallout and the combat is going to suck. Your guy sin't that skilled with anything and you probably don't have things repaired to high levels. When you're using a scoped .44 magnum almost fully repaired so the damage it does is in the high 30's, you have the Bloody Mess perk, 95 in hand guns and you're sneaking up on a Super Mutant Master, getting them in your scope and taking their heads off clean with one shot, the game is amazing.Even if you're spotted and you're chased after, when you switch to a combat shotgun, go to VATS and unload 3 shells point blank into a guys face of legs and watch in slow mo as the spread rips off the guys face or arms... that's more than decent and a lot better than just pointing and clicking.[/QUOTE] Wow, look at all this text that I won't be reading. I form my opinions based on what I play. If the game doesn't convince me after two hours of playing (which neither of them did), I won't be playing it much thereafter, but I will give it a try every now and then in hopes of experiencing something that will convince me otherwise. I don't care about your opinion on the game or your generalization regarding people who don't like Fallout 3 or the opinions of professional reviewers that you seem to like quoting. I just care about the experience I get out of games and discussing them with people whose opinions I respect. You are not one of those people, so write away all you want, but they're falling on deaf ears. And it's not because I'm stubborn; it's because my experience tells me otherwise. [/QUOTE]Well I'm actually the one looking for suggestions.
[QUOTE=''chesterocks7'']Well I'm actually the one looking for suggestions.[/QUOTE]I understand that, and he's of course welcome to suggest away. But he's responding to me, and I'm telling him to stop responding to me, since I won't be reading his **** anyway. Next time he wants to give suggestions to you, I think it would go over much more smoothly if he simply responded to your post, instead of mine. Otherwise, it's going to get catty. :DI hope you find his comments helpful in deciding which game to get. :) If you haven't tried Mass Effect, I suggest that one over the two you're looking at. :P
[QUOTE=''succulent_toes'']all this text that I won't be reading. I form my opinions based on what I play. If the game doesn't convince me after two hours of playing (which neither of them did), I won't be playing it much thereafter, but I will give it a try every now and then in hopes of experiencing something that will convince me otherwise. I don't care about your opinion on the game or your generalization regarding people who don't like Fallout 3 or the opinions of professional reviewers that you seem to like quoting. I just care about the experience I get out of games and discussing them with people whose opinions I respect. You are not one of those people, so write away all you want, but they're falling on deaf ears. And it's not because I'm stubborn; it's because my experience tells me otherwise. [/QUOTE] And my experience tells me that someone's who has played 2 hours of a 40 plus hour game has an opinion that is next to useless.Just like I wouldn't listen to someone that watched 10 minutes of The Godfather and said it was boring. I'm glad you're willing to share your so limited amount of experience on the topic with us so we can readily dismiss your claims. Thank you for not wasting anymore of our time.I'll equally be looking for your 30 minute mark Dragon Age review in fact I think you're onto something here. You should start a website where you review demo portions of games. You'd have the only website that does that and you'd be the first with many reviews