Riffing on the previous /c/gaming Witcher post I’m curious as to what people think is the better experience.

  • chaNcharge@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    HoS better story and villain, BaW better gameplay and setting.

    HoS has my favorite villain of all time with a really interesting story, while BaW felt like a whole new game. Hard to say which one is objectively better.

  • Th4tGuyII@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    HoS had a much more streamlined story, and GoD is a really good villain.
    Having said that, it’s hard deny how good BaW was - it was basically a whole other game in a very beautiful settting. Both are good DLCs in their own way

    • Kaldo@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I always say HoS is a better story but B&W is a better conclusion to the franchise. Both are special in their own way.

  • Contortion@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I loved BaW, it was a great breath of fresh air after the dark and oppressive atmosphere of the main game.

  • elroon@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    HoS feels as if written by Sapkowski himself, it’s a brilliant, focused short story with a haunting atmosphere.

    BaW feels in its grander scale more like the base game and is a perfect ending with its lighter tones and more whimsical area.

  • ed@battleangels.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    @_ed@sopuli.xyz @gaming@beehaw.org I initially enjoyed Blood and Wine more for the change of setting - it wasn’t just overlaying a story on the existing map which I was a bit over by that point. But yeah the story on Heart of Stone just eclipses it. From the foreboding beginning to the tragic ending, with probably on of the most hilarious Geralt quests inbetween it’s fantastic.