Angry Joe's review on The Witcher 3
Great review as usual from AngryJoe.
Yeah he's spot on with it. Witcher 3s one of the best games I've ever played. Ive put so many hours into it and I still feel like I've got a lot more ahead of me.
Yeah, funny guy and pretty thorough with his reviews. Doesn't always get them right but generally pretty spot on and entertaining. I am loving The Witcher 3 too. Huge misstep in not playing/reviewing Bloodborne though. He doesn't realise what he is missing.
Yeah, that is actually pretty sad. I reckon he would love it as much as Witcher 3. If not even more.
I really enjoy watching his reviews.
I think he is great yeah. I just wish he would make more reviews though lol and less playthroughs.
Gonna pick this up tomorrow.
I was on vacation til Monday. It's finally the weekend and I can put some time in. Just finished prologue. You will NOT be disappointed!!!
9/10 on consoles!
*on consoles He clarifies that at the end, probably due to technical performance issues.
Which is funny because he acknowledges the technical issues and bugs on the PC version, but decides to still give it a 10 wheras console version gets a 9. Must be the 60fps that justifies the perfect score for him, because gameplay/content wise (things he praised the whole time) both versions are identical.
I've got the PC version and have technicle issues, so 9/10 for PC on my machine.
@Fry Maybe. He could be going on the framerate issues brought in other reviews for the console versions. Can't say for sure what he's experienced between them.
I've got the PC version and have NO technical issues, so 10/10 for PC on my machine.
I think its because of the graphics and higher fps is why he gave it a 10 on pc 60fps just feels a whole lot better no matter what game you play, obviously its not essential for a game like this but its very good to have it anyway.
you cant be serious
it really is a 10/10. im 50 hours in and still farting around in the woods, at level 9. it never gets old. im going to be sad when it finally ends.
Yep... i finished it and felt terribly sad eventhough i still have a tone of contracts and sidequests to do... i wanna play it all again to see all other endings and stuff <3
Wait why a different score on consoles? it still look prett damn close to pc and really doesn't have any major performance issues.
This is his opinion, don't let others convince you otherwise if you think the game on consoles is a 10/10 then nobody can tell you otherwise. The reason he gave the pc version a higher score was because it has the better visuals, you can play at a much higher resolution if you've got the power and you have the option to play at a much higher fps than 30fps which the consoles are locked at.
Well i really don't care about scores or some fanboy ego, just seems odd given that this is actually one of the rare times the console version is pretty dam close to PC version without the game being technologically dated to begin wih. Ionno Joe seems a tad anti-console in this video which IMO seems a bit out of character especially seeing as how he didn't even bother explaining the score difference which he always does. The marginal differences don't seem like enough to hurt the game imo. Ionno like i said, just seems out of character for joe to me
V-Sync: On Resolution: 1920x1080 Nvidia Hairworks: Off Number of Background Characters: Low (console actually seems lower than this) Shadow Quality: Medium Terrain Quality: Medium Water Quality: High Grass Density: Medium Texture Quality: Ultra Foliage Visibility Range: Medium Detail Level: Medium Ambient Occlusion: SSAO That's the PS4 version for you. On PC you can crank most of those settings to Ultra and play on 60fps if your PC manages it. You can also turn on hairworks, and what I like with the PC version is that you can crank up the number of backround characters to Ultra, which makes towns and villages feel more alive and not ghost towns. So the differences are huge, you are just not informed.
So it's 10/10 on HIS machine.. Of course he's going to have all the settings on ultra, hairworks etc. since he has a machine that's probably 10x more expensive than the PS4. Anyway, I wouldn't give the 9/10 because of the framerate but because it has a massive amount of bugs and few broken quests. It's still the best game of this generation but everyday there seems to be a new bug. The latest patch made every man carrying those crates walk on invisible stairs.. it looks hilarious but breaks the immersion at the same time.
I have level 10 just and about 50h . I can say witcher 3 is best game I ever played. 10/10 GOTY.
WTF. Where does these 10/10s and 100/100s come frm for this game? Yeah sure it's pretty good, but that's it. No way it's better than GTA V, for the budget itself at least, you can feel while playing this game it was much much cheaper game than GTA 5. I hate when everyone jumps on the bandwagon of praising games, just because everyone else does so too. As i said, this game is good, but it's nowhere near 100/100. It has too much problems.
It's called taste, either you love it or hate. And why does the budget matter?
Of course, n4g people had to show their fanboyism and had to disagree with my comment, while it's 100% true. This game hs problems, and these are facts, it's not my opinion. I'm talking about framerate, bugs, terrible controls (especially swimming underwater, GOD i hated it, it's superman 64 bad), pretty small world, it's smaller than oblivion and skyrim I think, and shitty inventory system, that takes a lot of effort to get to the menu.
People disagreed with your comment because they don't agree with you. The game does have slight frame rate issues, but he was playing on a beefy pc so I'm sure he was running at a solid 60 fps the entire time. He gave consoles a 9/10, most likely for this reason exactly. I play it on ps4, but havnt really cared about the frame rate personally, its in no way game breaking or makes it any where near unplayable. Controls just take getting used to, after an hour or so I didn't even notice them. Combat is great, maybe you're not good at it, but I really enjoy it. You have to be patient while fighting or you'll get destroyed. Small world? haha, this comment alone makes me think you havnt even played. It's 3.5 times bigger than skyrim and probably the biggest game I've ever played . http://www.eteknix.com/witc... Idk what you're talking about with the inventory system. You mustve read that online somewhere and ran with it to go along with your small world complaint. The side quest, story, graphics are all amazing to go along with it which is why you're seeing so many 10/10. It's literally one of the best games I've ever played. I find it funny that you get so worked up about ppl not sharing the same opinion as you. @master I'd get this and wait for the complete addition of batman so you can get all the stuff you'll miss out on due to so many preorder bonuses
@marlinfan10 Oh, here goes the "you are not right because I am right" arguments. Like the one with controls - "you are wrong because I played it for a hour and I got used to it". It's the same thinking as "Shit doesn't really taste that bad, I ate it for an hour and I got used to it". Argument about controlls is as valid as it could be, a LOT of people complained about it, and for me after playing godly awesome games with awesome controls like GTA, this game is really stiff when it comes to movement and combat system. One RPG game had perfect control system and it was Kingdom's of amalur: reckoning. 10/10 controls! And that's like a 2011 game! I don't get that thing that you posted, this link. How the F* does it show that the world is bigger than oblivion? Not only that, it bases their maths on gossip and fairytales like here " For those that need numbers, 1 “massive” is around 136km2, but that only accounts for the Novegrad, No Man’s Land and Skellige Islands, there are 4-6 more regions beyond that of unknown size, but we do know that they’re also on a grand scale." There are NOT that many regions that' s first of all, 2nd is that one region is just a fucking inside of a castle... Anyway I wonder where they got this 136km2, because I smell bullshit. Anyway, even if the whole game is that big, it's pretty empty. I won't even compare it to the GTA V map, which had life in every cm2 of it, not to mention the whole LS city area. Villages in Witcher 3 are a little small, like 6-7 buildings, the same few npcs and that's it. Outside of them, there is life too of course, but mostly there is boredom. You don't have to believe me, that I played this game. I did, and I sold it after 3 days, it was that bad for me. I could understand it's an awesome game for some or hell even most people, but it NO WAY should get 10/10. Period.
I'm going to wait until Batman comes out then I'll decide between the two. Its going to be a really difficult decision though but I'll probably go with the one that runs best on my PS4. Very good review from Joe although it got disturbing when you see his face on that women's breasts.
Well it's pretty obvious that Angry Joe isn't so angry (especially when it comes to the Witcher). I'm really looking forward to playing this after I finish up with Bloodbourne eventually. ; )
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.