I'm in Chapter 2 now in the Witcher 2. While I do enjoy the game... I have to say, it's hilarious looking way back at when people criticized The Witcher's timed click-based combat. I honestly would consider Witcher 1's combat superior. I've been extremely patient with Witcher 2's combat and really wanted to dismiss my negative first impression upon playing for 1-2 hours when I started the game.

1 on 1, combat makes sense. The pacing, the speed, the RESPONSIVENESS of animations are the most appropriate for just fighting 1 enemy. But even then, in some cases, like the fight with Letho - which I restarted probably about 50 times - it isn't fast enough. Which leads me to my main point that I make for The Witcher 2's combat. The Witcher 2 is a perfect qualifier for an analogy i've used to describe games that are air quotes difficult. Games that don't actually require a high level of skill on part of the player in order to be played properly. Someone giving you a taser and saying "Hey, can you take down those two alligators in that pool over there." perfectly summarizes this type of game design. Or rather incomplete or outright broken game design.

Witcher 2 has some of the most atrocious collision detection i've seen in all my years of gaming. And the responsiveness in the combat - animations and overall control - simply deny any logic and don't reciprocate other design choices with the combat system. There is absolutely no mutuality in any way, shape or form with some things in Witcher 2's combat system. The responsiveness i've mentioned a couple of times so far being one of the main problems. Want to block as soon as you hit that block button? Nope. Think again. And when facing multiple enemies, this would only make sense. Want to start swinging that sword at your enemy and perform an attack reasonably soon after parrying an attack? No. The unresponsiveness doesn't allow you to.

And ultimately. I thought to myself: "Alright, i'll be patient, i'll perhaps watch some videos on how it's done correctly."

I watch a video of someone playing the Henselt Assassins boss fight. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOQvQohZp00

It only further proves that any game mechanics put into place for the combat were never even fully realized, thought-out or even tested for that matter. In such circumstances, I question if games are sometimes even play-tested. In the video, you can see the player basically relying on what I can only call gimmicks to fight "properly" because I can't come up with any term to logically encapsulate what that play style would be called. Rolling around, constantly. I can roll around in Witcher 2 all the time like a mongoloid, but it breaks the flow of combat. Rolling around should be something done to avoid attacks here and there. But every couple of seconds? And casting the Quen sign? I honestly only ever see any use in signs as tools to be used. Usually against monsters. And talk about REDUNDANT! Oh, my! I have to force myself to roll every couple of seconds and constantly cast Quen in order to be able to offset a combat system which was CLEARLY not designed around fighting multiple enemies? Really, really bad game design if I've ever seen any. I beat the first game, loved it, and I am EXTREMELY excited to get to The Witcher 3. But I hope by then the combat system has come a long way.

Games from generations past, from many years ago have far superior combat that is above and beyond that of The Witcher 2's.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcxG-EYBiD8

I'm in Chapter 2 now in the Witcher 2. While I do enjoy the game... I have to say, it's hilarious looking way back at when people criticized The Witcher's timed click-based combat. I honestly would consider Witcher 1's combat superior. I've been extremely patient with Witcher 2's combat and really wanted to dismiss my negative first impression upon playing for 1-2 hours when I started the game.

1 on 1, combat makes sense. The pacing, the speed, the RESPONSIVENESS of animations are the most appropriate for just fighting 1 enemy. But even then, in some cases, like the fight with Letho - which I restarted probably about 50 times - it isn't fast enough. Which leads me to my main point that I make for The Witcher 2's combat. The Witcher 2 is a perfect qualifier for an analogy i've used to describe games that are air quotes difficult. Games that don't actually require a high level of skill on part of the player in order to be played properly. Someone giving you a taser and saying "Hey, can you take down those two alligators in that pool over there." perfectly summarizes this type of game design. Or rather incomplete or outright broken game design.

Witcher 2 has some of the most atrocious collision detection i've seen in all my years of gaming. And the responsiveness in the combat - animations and overall control - simply deny any logic and don't reciprocate other design choices with the combat system. There is absolutely no mutuality in any way, shape or form with some things in Witcher 2's combat system. The responsiveness i've mentioned a couple of times so far being one of the main problems. Want to block as soon as you hit that block button? Nope. Think again. And when facing multiple enemies, this would only make sense. Want to start swinging that sword at your enemy and perform an attack reasonably soon after parrying an attack? No. The unresponsiveness doesn't allow you to.

And ultimately. I thought to myself: "Alright, i'll be patient, i'll perhaps watch some videos on how it's done correctly."

I watch a video of someone playing the Henselt Assassins boss fight. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOQvQohZp00

It only further proves that any game mechanics put into place for the combat were never even fully realized, thought-out or even tested for that matter. In such circumstances, I question if games are sometimes even play-tested. In the video, you can see the player basically relying on what I can only call gimmicks to fight "properly" because I can't come up with any term to logically encapsulate what that play style would be called. Rolling around, constantly. I can roll around in Witcher 2 all the time like a mongoloid, but it breaks the flow of combat. Rolling around should be something done to avoid attacks here and there. But every couple of seconds? And casting the Quen sign? I honestly only ever see any use in signs as tools to be used. Usually against monsters. And talk about REDUNDANT! Oh, my! I have to force myself to roll every couple of seconds and constantly cast Quen in order to be able to offset a combat system which was CLEARLY not designed around fighting multiple enemies? Really, really bad game design if I've ever seen any. I beat the first game, loved it, and I am EXTREMELY excited to get to The Witcher 3. But I hope by then the combat system has come a long way.

Games from generations past, from many years ago have far superior combat that is above and beyond that of The Witcher 2's. Some of which are not for the faint of heart. Games such as Devil May Cry are extremely demanding of the player on high difficulty levels. But it's just not broken game design at the end of the day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcxG-EYBiD8

Sorry CDPR, but at this point, it's almost painful to play at times.

The Witcher 1 combat superior? You must be kidding.

Both games have bad combat but the first one is way worse. Witcher 1 combat is mostly based on stats and items, not on skill. Game 2 improves on this by giving the ability to roll, riposte, etc. I've recently replayed all games and this summarizes the combat for each game:

Witcher 1: very unresponsive, casting signs during combat often fails for some obscure reason. You are mostly unable to influence hit, block or avoid chances during a fight. It has some of the worst combat mechanics, like the pain effect which is basically a cheap stunlock. The combat is static and all the different group styles make combat more tedious instead of better.

Witcher 2: combat is mostly based on pattern recognition. The first boss is very difficult, until you figure out the attack pattern. After that I was able to kill it on dark mode, without potions, rolling or blocking. The combat is cheap because it requires you to figure out which moves an enemy is going to make. This is badly implemented because each enemy and each encounter has the exact same attack sequences. Once you figure these ouf the game becomes easy, for example the first fight with Letho is a pain in the ass, until you realize his steps and attack patters are always the same during a fight.

Don't worry though, the combat in Witcher 3 is mostly great. It's fast paced, much more responsive and fights (and losses) feel fair. Although it's a bit too easy after a while.

I've just started the game and already decided to skip it and go to TW3 instead. Sad but I am not very good and I don't have the patience to learn how to maneuver just to stay alive. I already know that TW3 is much better in this regard. Oh well. I just finished the first Witcher just for the save transfer, which is now worthless.

Don't worry about that. When you start your first TW3-playthrough select the simulation option. Let Letho be alive - if you hated him or not ... The combat systems in TW1/2/3 are different, but there are a lot of common elements. Take your time, try to learn, and you will enjoy the next 100 or 200 hours much more. Good luck!

Can't say the combat was one of my favorite parts. There was too much roling and running around in circles, and the boss fights were frustrating. But by Chapter 2 I wasn't afraid anymore of dying at every corner, and in Chapter 3 I actually enjoyed the fights. Getting talents and upgrading Geralt's gear helped a lot.