When 8 is the "worst" rating I've seen yet for this game, I'm quite happy to have it currently preloading on GoG Galaxy. I can't wait for next week!

I'm actually surprised Dtoid among other sites have been reviewing the game on PS4 rather than say the XB1 to which MS had the marketing rights for along with PC since the franchise came from there.

Probably because it performs better on the PS4 =P

Nah PC will be the best performance and glitter, GTA V has already proven that along with others =P.

That, of course, depends on your PC. If you have a budget PC or even a laptop (which most people have), the PS4 version seems like the best option.

What's with the dismissive attitude about laptops? :P My 970m can run anything (I mean it) on at least 1080p on max settings, and moderate aa with 30 FPS in any situation in any game (Project cars, ACU, Crysis 3, Arma 3, Total War Attila etc.) with a little overclock. The 980m does even better. And then there's sli laptops but at that point, but those are hardly for top of the lap use lol.

Well it's a good thing I'm not sporting either of those.

Me too. But don't expect every human being to have the same situation as you and don't resent them for it. I'm not saying you do, I'm just as a PC gamer really tired of the "Master PC Race" formulation used by so many. It makes the PC community seem elitist and uninviting which is bad for all PC gamers.

Yeah but it's not like console gamers are entirely innocent either, the "but PC gamed do it more" doesn't apply either.

I don't resent people for having less hardware, i resent devs for not taking advantage of higher available hardware so those like me who upgrade can actually have their hardware used to it's potential rather than half a decade later when the next upgrades are around the corner.

Never forget that over 50% of Steam users have VERY modest computers.

http://store.steampowered.c...

There is a very sound business reason to not spend lots of money and time on monster PC riggs. Add to that there is a not ignorable part of PC users that pirate games. Even gamers who buy CD-keys on low priced stores like Green Man Gaming aren't contributing to developers bottom line.

https://www.youtube.com/wat...

Wait, how is Green Man Gaming not contributing to dev's? They don't get the CD Key's for free do they?

You do realsie the pirates can't play the game yet because it doesn't include the exe right?.

Also SH survey doesn't account for people outside of Steam like the rest of the world that doesn't just game on Steam, I use Steam and I opted out of the hardware survey and I know I'm not the only one.

There's games like Crysis and Star Citizen that are finding it sound business to push high end graphics because for starters the guys behind Crysis were all about the technical aspect that PC's could output vs consoles and then we now have Star Citizen funded by actual gamers who have decent rigs and will be building towards the games release and so far it;s the highest KS funded in gaming so far with the hgiehst amount of backers, I'd hardly call high or decent end rig users a small number, it's definitely growing by the weeks months and years for sure and not simply standing still or dwindling and that's why those "sound business" practices are slowly becoming dated the more the gap between consoles and PC widens and it's already getting wider.

It's just up to a company making games whether or not they want to abandon their faithful userbase on PC for people that don't care about graphics on consoles and once they do they won't be able to simple come back to the party they left, it;s not like all PC users have magically forgiven the likes of EA, Activision and Ubisoft, the same goes for anyone else who abandones them and I can see why.

if you're only in it for the money and not about making a great game people will enjoy and praise you for along with it standing as an artform them maybe you're in the wrong business, or at least you're thinking much more like bobby over at Activision who only cares about more money and doesn't give a fuck about games.

No doubt about that!

I think the review copies were PS4. I looked up the review embargo end date the other day, and one site said that the first reviews would be for PS4.

yeah, that's the disappointing part.

I think it's safe to say the PC version will be great, considering the studio. Even though I own a PS4 and will be buying that version, I do wish, for the sake of the XB1-only owners, they'd made both versions available. I'm sure it will be fine, but those guys are going to be flying in blind.

I honestly hope it's going to be good but I;ve had my hopes dashed so many times for years that I just can't be bothered raising them again and just expect the worst, at least then when good things actually do happen I can adjust my expectations by then.

Having a really early release embargo for reviews, giving reviewers the time to play through the game, flying out youtubers to see and discuss/preview your game at an event, taking off the price if you own one or two of the previous games, allowing redemption of a game bought on steam on GOG to get said discount, and having said big budget game be DRM free off of your own site and possibly allowing preloading? Damn CD projekt red, fucking stars acrosss the board. I dont preorder often, but in this case its justified. Glad to see my faith wasnt misplaced.

I agree with the early review being quite nice and very welcome nowadays, but I don't really like the flying youtubers around.

Edit- I guess its a good way to let some nonpress related people to play your game who might not otherwise have access to whatever event.

Yeah, I can understand the concern. I think its smart PR, and gives youtubers the chance to show off and try out this new game, but it could color the way they look at the game and CDPR. Both sides have valid points, b8but I guess it also relates to whether or not you alao have problems with press events. Thorny issues.

Downgradegate, lack of real 4K textures and wanting to make the console experience as similar as possible to PC despite the original two being primarily PC games lose them a couple of stars in my book. I know this game is supposed to look gorgeous but damn how much better it could have looked if peasants were left out.

Open world games require much more overhead to create. This is by far the best looking and most comprehensive one to date.

Pour some ale for this fine man!
Downgradegate is a fact for sure, but i hope that Enhanced Edition or some big ass patches will rescue the day.

Meh, its still going to be amazing on PC. I've not heard of this degradtion thing, but next to noone has 4k monitors or the rig to run such things so cest la vie

I honestly never understood the complaints about the Witcher 2s combat. It was challenging and fun for me.

My friends who complained about it never used alchemy and once I told them that alchemy is essential, all their complaints vanished.

On Normal in The Witcher 3, you don't even need to dip into or even look at the alchemy tree. Hence the Assassin's Creed comparison where swordplay alone can be effective. It is a much more accessible game.

I didn't mind the alchemy learning curve in 2 at all though as a fan of the first. What I minded is that combat in general felt slow and clunky -- like it was going for a faster-paced shift but failed.

The Witcher 3 fixes that, and you'll be able to explore a tad more depth on higher difficulties -- but not nearly as much as the first two games. But that's totally ok, since it more than makes up for it in nearly every other aspect.

I've never bothered with Normal for Witcher games so I suppose that's where the disconnect begins for me.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. The combat system felt fluid and deliberate to me, not clunky. It discouraged spamming. If you only use just swordplay however... I could definitely understand where you're coming from.

The combat only truly shone at higher difficulties where you needed to use all the tools in a Witchers arsenal.

personally I found the witcher 2 to get remarkably easier as the game went on, was playing it on normal though, definitely going for hard for this one.

Well, the problem is that the magic tree is so overwhelmingly powerful, there's almost no use for anything else by then. I beat the game on the hardest difficulty and magic definitely is insanely overpowered.

"Hilariously enough, there is one point that feels like it's the end, to the point where the game even warns you that you should save and that you cannot turn back after entering the area. After I finished that sequence, it turned out that I had at least another 10 hours to go."

It's like Dragon Quest VIII and Okami all over again!

I fucking love Okami, but that false end was bullshit.

That game felt like it could end three times, so annoying... But the actual end was really awesome, at least.

i loved it! Game kept going and it was still super good. Beautiful new areas and sincere climax too.

"A lot of you out there will probably be disappointed to learn that combat is now essentiallyAssassin's Creed" ....

OK that's a no go for me....

I don't know. I've played alot of Assassin's Creed, and the combat in the gameplay footage of TW3 does not look like Assassin's Creed combat.

H8/10!
Just teasing love you Chris.
I should really finish the Witcher 1 and 2 but the mechanics didn't mesh with me.
May chance they will this time.

"but the mechanics didn't mesh with me"

Yeah I have both but could never even get into W1. From the review, "combat is now essentially Assassin's Creed" seems like a step up, since all I remember is "click once, then maybe click again". I really want to play this game but everytime I try I end up snoring before I get anywhere. How far does one have to play before it "gets good"?

I fucking hate AC's combat. It's basically broken. I might actually like the series if it wasn't for that.

Yeah I wish it was more like an enhanced PoP:Sands of Time or something. I remember that combat being fun. Also if the stealth were like SC:Chaos Theory. And if the story and characters were like something else good. So basically if they replaced everything, they'd have a good game. ;)

One thing about online reviews. They generally are biased especially since he is a pc guy. I for one don't take online reviews serious at all. I listen to what hardcore gamers say when they do to an event and play. These review people are paid off by companies to either hate on a game or like it all the way. The review people raved about watch dogs and that game was complete bs. Pure garbage.

Okay, but how was that relevant to my comment?

If you're referring to Unity, regardless of what you think of it, its combat was a step up from the others in the series.

Didn't play unity, but I've played 3 and 4 a good chunk. And neither really had great combat. I did like 3 better than 4 from what I played, but still, nothing that justifies an annual sequel.

That is your opinion though. You prefer certain games as I love the assassin series. I think it is good. People like Halo and I only loved 1 and 2. The rest were garbage and I think the series of Halo is dead but that is my opinion.

Yeah, I picked up Unity after most of the bugs were fixed, and it was actually a pretty good game. Still not great, but I didn't regret the purchase.

I got it about a month after release, I got 0 game breaking glitches whatsoever.

Yeah, that was around the time I bought the PS4 version, as well. If I'd known I'd be buying the XB1 bundle with the AC games included 3 weeks later, I would have waited. Wound up giving the XB1 code to my buddy's nephew.

I feel like a variation of it can work in a game like this where you have magic to spice up the simple nature of the swordplay.

I used to really enjoy Assassin's Creed's combat, but I think it piqued with Brotherhood.

The combat in W1 is really quite bad, it is much better in the second, but still the weak point imo.