Riffing on the previous /c/gaming Witcher post I’m curious as to what people think is the better experience.
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 wayI always say HoS is a better story but B&W is a better conclusion to the franchise. Both are special in their own way.
HoS is the better story, BaW is the cooler setting.
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.
Personally I think the soundtrack for HoS was better too. GoD’s theme is a banger of a song, and I love the etherealness of the soundtrack
100% this. Couldn’t say it better by myself.
@_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.
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.
I loved both. The transition from dark and intense HoS to the colourful BaW was great to experience. No reason not to enjoy both.
I loved BaW, it was a great breath of fresh air after the dark and oppressive atmosphere of the main game.
