I got this game a while back, while GOG was having that whole "buy any game and get The Witcher free" promo going (Alpha Centuari was on sale anyhow so I figured what the hey). Admittedly, it took me a while to try and get into this game, and also admittedly, once I had started playing it, I didn't end up going at it for terribly long. But there are a few reasons for this:

First of all, I find the combat to be utter garbage. And don't think that it's just because I don't enjoy CRPG combat or anything; I love how I get to go through a battle in, say, Fallout or Baldur's Gate. The difference is, in those games I feel as if my actual input is having some sort of effect on the outcome. In The Witcher, despite it supposedly being an "action RPG," it seems to me that all battles boil down to is "click on things and they'll die, click in rhythm and they'll die faster." And there's hardly anything to master about this, either, if you have the slightest sense of how to time clicking on things. As of now, absolutely nothing has posed the slightest threat to me, and frankly given the mechanics already established, I find it difficult to understand how anything could feasibly manage to. So where exactly is this "fascinating combat system" that gets continually raved about in all these golden reviews that are posted? Because quite honestly, if it's even remotely related to the system that I'm seeing now, I'm not sure I can see it.

Second, just how long does it take for the story in this to pick up? What I continually hear about this game is that it's supposed to be a "mature" and "dark" fantasy story, but all I see to actually acknowledge this is a childish understanding of swears, sex, and racism. There's little here that actually feels "new," and I simply want to know if I can expect to find actual novelty beyond the mere resemblance of such in a Tolkien-esque setting just acting a little cruder than we're used to.

So, that all being said, is there really a certain point where these issues cease to be the case? I want to see this gem of a CRPG that everybody else seems to be finding in this game, but I can't help but wonder if it simply isn't for me if my initial impressions are this critical.

The combat system is always about rhythmic clicking, but when you level up some more and unlock more styles, the fighting at least starts to LOOK much cooler. Also, if you play the game on the hardest difficulty setting, you will have to partake of alchemy a lot more. What this means is that the combat itself will still be much the same, but you will have to make a lot of preparations beforehand, mixing up and drinking the correct potions and applying appropriate oils to your sword. On lower difficulty settings these aren't really necessary, but on the hardest you will need to do them. So this adds a little bit of strategy to the fights. Also, using signs can make combat more interesting. But the core of combat remains the "timed clicking" system, so you will probably not find that combat improves too much.

On the hardest difficulty setting, the boss fight at the end of Chapter 1 is actually quite hard. So you will find a challenge eventually. After this, there are only a few fights that are actually tough, though. Things really pick up in Chapter 2, when you enter the city of Vizima. Most players think the first Chapter is not that great, but things get better later. The main thing I found interesting about The Witcher is how the story is much more localized. Everything takes place in and around Vizima, and Geralt spends time interviewing people, solving mysteries, and otherwise helping certain small communities deal with problems. It's definitely NOT a huge, world-spanning story of huge armies clashing like many fantasy tales are. There's more intrigue and politics. This may not appeal to everyone, but I found it to be a nice change from the majority of RPGs.' I guess the summary is: combat won't get much better (although at higher levels it's SLIGHTLY more interesting), but playing on the hardest difficulty can make it more challenging and forces you to use the alchemy system. The story picks up in Chapter 2, so I would at least try to reach that and see if you like where it's going. You'll also start to see some of the consequences of choices you've made at that point... the game actually changes a lot based on what you choose to do. So if you can manage to get a little ways into Chapter 2, you should. If you're still not enjoying it, then the game might not be for you.

If by "interesting" you mean that it can cause enemies to become susceptible to instant kill moves that make the combat end that much faster, maybe. As for the story, it is true that local politics are the focus and that this might put some people off, but I doubt this is the cause of OP's disconnect; I love breaking away from the cliche "save the world" line that most RPGs run off of and love fantasy stories that focus on local intrigue (reading the Planescape setting material for a campaign practically had me in ecstasy), but the theme of institutionalized racism is nothing that hasn't been seen before and better in more stories than I can begin to list, and the fact that it's all being conveyed by characters needlessly cursing with every alternative word makes the whole thing feel like it was written by a teenager trying to sound "mature". That's not even starting on the questionable at best and abhorrent at worst way the game treats women both by portraying them almost universally as either being walking Realdolls that are designed to be as sexualized as possible for the sole purpose of titillation of the player or withered old crones with almost no middle ground. You have discovered several fundamental flaws in the game, as you have just mentioned; having played as far as Chapter 2, when the plot supposedly "gets better", I can personally assure you that none of those flaws go away or diminish by that point. If you have reached the point where you need someone to try and convince you that the game isn't all that bad in order to keep playing it, I think throwing in the towel is probably your best option.

I forgot to mention the most important piece of advice... play with Polish voices, and English (or whatever language one is most comfortable with) subtitles. Sadly, this is pretty accurate, although I will say that the Witcher 2 was improved in this regard. Romancing women in the Witcher is entirely optional, but it's still there and it's not in particularly good taste.

If you're not sold by the end of Ch. 1 the game is not for you.

I don't think you need us to sell the game. Let me make a "flowchart" for you:

Do you like the game? Yes: Play it. | No: Keep reading.

Do you want to try it a little more and see if you like it better? Yes: Play it | No: Keep reading.

Does the game bore you, no matter what you try? Yes: Dump it. | No: Play it.

I tried this as well, but I don't think it has any impact on what dialogue is represented in the subtitles, which doesn't address the issue of needless swearing. It's not that I'm some sort of fuckmothering prude, but the way that the game tosses out choice four letter words doesn't feel natural at all, and makes it feel like the game is trying way too hard to come across as edgy. I wasn't even going to touch the whole "romance" thing, but... fuck me, that made absolutely no sense. From the little I understand of the series, Triss is in a monogamous relationship with Geralt, so the idea that she wouldn't tell him anything about their relationship after she learned he had amnesia was just baffling. Personally, I'd be worried about my partner contracting some sort of horrible disease, but Geralt's immunity to all disease, including VD, eliminates that fear and simultaneously makes him look suspiciously like some kind of Gary Stu (this is further compounded by his infertility, which in conjunction with anything else means that bareback sex is entirely risk free).

Then there's the actual "romance" itself. I get that CDPR didn't want to render long scenes of lovemaking for a variety of reasons, but I fail to understand how that necessitated giving the player a collectible postcard as a result. Once I caught on that I was going to get one of these for every person I banged, my first two thought from the OCD section of my brain was "gotta fuck 'em all!" The second thought that followed close behind was "what the hell is wrong with me?! I am old enough to know better, and here I am anticipating having sex with women not because I give two shits about them, but because I want to 'score'." Thinking about having sex with women as some sort of minigame is the kind of deplorable crap that I had hoped that I had escaped being surrounded by in college, but here it is being simulated in a computer game, emulating that same thought pattern in the mind of a character who is supposed to be the protagonist.

Actually, I believe that's incorrect... my understanding is that there's something of a love triangle between Geralt, Yennefer (she's not mentioned in the first game, but is brought up in the second), and Triss, and that Geralt was not actually in a full relationship with either of them. But I have only read some of the short stories, not the novels, so I'm not sure of the final status of things before the game begins. In fact, Yennefer appears in the stories but Triss does not, so I have no idea what the situation is with her. I agree with you here; I'm not trying to defend the "sex cards" at all. Fortunately, pursuing them is optional.

I get what you are saying, I only brought it up because you mentioned it in response to my criticism of how the character models are portrayed generally.

As for Yennefer, I had hoped after reading The Last Wish that she didn't show up again. I tried reading the series in its entirety to see if there was something I was missing, but that character, both on her own and as a representative of Sorceresses, convinced me that the misogyny was going to be just as bad in the source material as it was in the game.

I wasn't that impressed with that story either. But I don't know how things play out in the novels. And I had less of a problem with the other female characters in the short stories.

Yennefer shows true character in Blood of Elves. It's worth it to keep reading the series.

The Yennefer I know of was a member of a group of magic users who had to, by virtue of their position, alter their looks to be more attractive because "the prestige of their profession demanded it". Never mind that male wizards weren't required to do any such thing. The in-universe explanation was that only unattractive women were allowed by their families to practice the Art since it would be more productive to marry them off, which is horrible, but is in character for the semi-historical nature of the setting being used to examine fairy tales against the backdrop of the society that spawned them. That said, demale magic users could just as easily kicked that social norm in the head and garnered respect for the fact that they wielded the power cosmic. But no, they need to look pretty because the writer willed it.

All of that is somewhat suspect, but arguably not entirely conclusive that the author has a problem with women. Then Yennefer comes along, uses her good looks to make Geralt think with the brain between his legs, manipulates him into a trap which renders him helpless, then places him under her thrall to do her will (punishing her enemies in town) by kissing him, then testing the enchantment by having him kneel and kiss her hand. The way the author links female sexuality to manipulation and control is utterly disgusting, and reeks of sexism. I tried to play devil's advocate after finishing the story and argued to myself that she was representing the femme fatale trope we see in a lot of fiction, but then I remembered that not once did Irene Adler try to flash her vagina at Holmes to redirect blood to his dick in order to slow his mental faculties down.

Well, all I can say is that she takes a very different role in later books, and grows a lot as a character. I can't really disagree with your assesment of Yennefer in The Last Wish except for the intensity of your disbelief/disgust at the link between female sexuality and manipulation. This is not a jaw-dropping trope to me.

The femme fatale trope has always unfortunately been linked to it to a certain (albeit slim, at least in my experience) degree, so it's not entirely new, but the magnitude of this was way higher than any other instance of it I can recall, to the point that it was actively offensive. Compounding matters was the way that male sexuality was treated in comparison, as a fantasy of completely consequence free shagging with no concern expressed over the lack of care given to the partner (hell, in that story, Geralt and Dandilion were running out of town because Dandilion had gotten someone pregnant). Given the cartoonish way the author had her use her sexuality as a weapon, I wouldn't have been surprised if she had started trying to eat people with her vagina; that I might have been more ok with, because then I'd at least know the author was trying to piss me off.

I considered reading more after that, but the hack translation and uneven quality of the stories really put a damper on that one real quickly. That, and I'm terrified of what I might find after finishing The Last Wish and wrestling with The Witcher; I've already heard something about sorceresses turning incoming arrows into butterflies in defense and using their good looks to help make people more pliable to their suggestions, so I'm really not savoring the notion.

"Would somebody please sell me on this game?"

If the self-righteous critics can't, then nobody can.