This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

The Witcher 2 vs. Kingdoms of Amalur

#1Koala262Posted 12/6/2012 10:59:15 PM
Just picked up both of these for a great price because I was in the mood to play an RPG. Which should I tackle first? Just a quick comparison of the pros and cons of each would be great.
---
----
---
#2SomnambulisticPosted 12/6/2012 11:01:31 PM(edited)
Honestly...play Kingdoms first. It's got some pretty great combat and some unique enemies/situations and some cool areas, but that's about it. The Witcher 2, on the other hand...

...well, let's just say this is a very extreme case of saving the best for last.

Edit: Where'd you manage to get a good deal on TW2?
---
Ab-so-lutely.
#3doctorchimpPosted 12/6/2012 11:01:59 PM
I would say play through Witcher 2 first and then kingdoms of amalur and then do another playthrough of witcher 2 if you wanted.

Witcher 2 is a super polished game and shouldn't take as long as Kingdom of Amalur.

Witcher 2 has a lot in common with Mass Effect 2, KoA is more of an Elder Scrolls meets Fable combat.
#4DarkSymbiotePosted 12/6/2012 11:04:39 PM
I enjoyed both. But honestly TW2 is the superior game. So I would recommend playing Amalur first. Have a nice day.
---
My Resident Evil 6 Review| My XCOM: Enemy Unknown Review
http://bitly.com/Z2CT6n | http://bit.ly/RJGjrn
#5SlimeSwayzePosted 12/6/2012 11:07:53 PM
I'd play The Witcher 2 first. It's the better game. The atmosphere and setting is far more compelling, the story and characters and far more interesting, and the gameplay is solid enough to keep you going.

I liked the action and combat in KoA, at least for the first 12-15 hours. Unfortunately, the game gets unbearably repetitive, and after a while each new area you enter just feels like a palette swap of where you just were. The story and characters are among the dullest I've experienced in years, and the combat and enemies just aren't varied enough to keep things moving. It's colorful and the music is decent, but the presentation wears thing too quickly.

The Witcher 2 is simply the far more rewarding game. Play it first, and then move on to KoA with tempered expectations. And if you have the means, play the original Witcher on PC. It's better than either of those other games.
---
Currently Playing: Too many to report.
#6Mogga123_5Posted 12/6/2012 11:14:48 PM
I hope this turns into the usual

1 "The Witcher 2 is a poor game"
2 "It's so mature though! I bet the combat was just too hard for you...."
1 "No, I just didn't like it"
2 "Clearly you have **** taste in games"
1 "Whatever"
2 "Noob"


Anyways, I've never played KoA but what I did play of TW2 inbetween bouts of crashing was good stuff, it did have a slight learning curve to it, but it didn't take long to get use to it and thankfully you don't need to know much of TW to get to grasp with whats happening, my only complaint would be I found it pretty linear, but I didn't really get that far before returning it, been on my list to buy again for a while now.
---
The mast is broken, hull is splitting, dear God the ****in' ship is sinking
#7Perfect LightPosted 12/6/2012 11:16:44 PM
The Witcher 2 is FAR superior so you'll want to play the lesser one first. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed Amalur for what it was but it didn't set my world on fire.
---
youtube.com/sciencebytes, learn something new
#8XplodnPnguins92Posted 12/6/2012 11:22:11 PM
witcher 2 is a good game. amalur isn't.
---
http://www.sdtekken.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/TTT2.png