The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Review

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Review

Geralt of Rivia is one badass motherf'er.

Read Full Article
 

Keava

New member
Mar 1, 2010
2,010
0
0
*cough*
Greg Tito said:
This review is based on the Xbox 360 version of the game.
How..where... It doesn't even exist!

To add something more relevant to actual review, i agree on the house looting, it just makes me laugh in an odd way, i wish that cRPGs would generally cut a little on the whole looting spree and make obtaining items more logical than "Oh hai, im in ur house browsing through your underwear in search of coins"
 

RivFader86

New member
Jul 3, 2009
396
0
0
Really excited about the game, i have it but didn't play it much (to the point where you get out of the siege tower...so kinda 5 mins into the game ;P) because it's fixed to 16:9 ratio so i have black bars on the top and bottom of my screen which is really annoying hope they patch that soon
 

Baneat

New member
Jul 18, 2008
2,762
0
0
I had the same issues with the games, even posted on this forum and got dismissed as rtfml2pconsolescrub

People are unerringly blind to things if they choose to be.

But, cheers for the spoiler in the middle of the video!
 

auronvi

New member
Jul 10, 2009
447
0
0
Oh, I would like to add. "And there are hot naked girls!" to the end of the review...

Yay digital naked girls!
 

bootz

New member
Feb 28, 2011
366
0
0
its a really good game. The prologue didn't bug me. Fire = bad is obvious(if you played wow or mario).

Its so pretty. I starred at things for a while and my jaw dropped.

And it didn't have you go the same spot over and over like da2

I think maybe once I had to go somewhere twice.
 

Theotherguy

New member
Mar 15, 2011
33
0
0
I read the whole review, than said to myself without checking the mark: "This is a 7 from a lotr/dragon age fanboy". And than I smiled.

Yes the ui is kinda bad, but the rest of the stuff like "I died there, I died here" is just funny. I can understand Dragon Age 2 dragging ou by the hand with it's pathetic difficulty level, but come on! How lazy can You get?

And You didn't mention so many things in the review, which are good sides of The Witcher 2. Dude, being objective is a must for a reviever, the game is a 9 not a 7.
 

Sartan0

New member
Apr 5, 2010
538
0
0
I am enjoying the game but I fully admit that what others consider flaws did not bother me much. Then again I did play the first one so I at least was familiar with the potions and signs already.

I will still say that the Witcher 2 is in many ways a refreshing breeze for gaming and I have no doubt CD Project Red will continue to refine their game making. This is, after all, only their second game.
 

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
Theotherguy said:
I read the whole review, than said to myself without checking the mark: "This is a 7 from a lotr/dragon age fanboy". And than I smiled.

Yes the ui is kinda bad, but the rest of the stuff like "I died there, I died here" is just funny. I can understand Dragon Age 2 dragging ou by the hand with it's pathetic difficulty level, but come on! How lazy can You get?

And You didn't mention so many things in the review, which are good sides of The Witcher 2. Dude, being objective is a must for a reviever, the game is a 9 not a 7.
For a reviewer, you really can't get any more objective than "I found that core mechanics of the game were poorly designed."
 

Mangue Surfer

New member
May 29, 2010
364
0
0
Baneat said:
I had the same issues with the games, even posted on this forum and got dismissed as rtfml2pconsolescrub

People are unerringly blind to things if they choose to be.

But, cheers for the spoiler in the middle of the video!
But you basically are doing the same.

I'm blind? No! I just play games that challenging their audience much more than the Witcher 2. The castlevanias games for example (not the last one). You can acuse the developers to make nostalgics choices but call everyone that can play without problem blind?!
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
Theotherguy said:
I read the whole review, than said to myself without checking the mark: "This is a 7 from a lotr/dragon age fanboy". And than I smiled.

Yes the ui is kinda bad, but the rest of the stuff like "I died there, I died here" is just funny. I can understand Dragon Age 2 dragging ou by the hand with it's pathetic difficulty level, but come on! How lazy can You get?

And You didn't mention so many things in the review, which are good sides of The Witcher 2. Dude, being objective is a must for a reviever, the game is a 9 not a 7.
The game is a 'whatever the reviewer thinks it deserves' not a '9 because haters can't stop talking about DA2 every bloody chance they get'
 

stiffy

New member
Mar 23, 2010
73
0
0
Is this a review of the full game or the first couple of hours? I've heard a lot of reviews talk about the HUGE difficulty curve that flips towards the end. Greg doesn't mention this at all in this review. I'm only at the en of the first chapter, but it seem like he only played a few quests of chapter 1 and filled in the rest. I would think a review this critical would point out the disparity in the ending's difficulty.

I don't believe it has bearing on the accuracy of his review, but a simple "review in progress" indicator might help.
 

Sartan0

New member
Apr 5, 2010
538
0
0
Mangue Surfer said:
Baneat said:
I had the same issues with the games, even posted on this forum and got dismissed as rtfml2pconsolescrub

People are unerringly blind to things if they choose to be.

But, cheers for the spoiler in the middle of the video!
But you basically are doing the same.

I'm blind? No! I just play games that challenging their audience much more than the Witcher 2. The castlevanias games for example (not the last one). You can acuse the developers to make nostalgics choices but call everyone that can play without problem blind?!
I think that comes down to a matter of taste. I enjoy the fact that the Witcher 2 is hard. I fully accept that others might not, however. Both view points are valid for the given person. IE: subjective. Now they could have done a better job with the crafting menus in my opinion. Particularly the unsorted riot of patterns but that certainly did not effect combat.
 

linwolf

New member
Jan 9, 2010
1,227
0
0
Well I disagree with most of the stuff in the that review. This game is easily my GotY and on the short list of new games that doesn't tread me like an idiot.
 

1337mokro

New member
Dec 24, 2008
1,503
0
0
I actually liked searching the map for nests and the likes. I am most likely in the massive minority but putting a big glowing quest marker over everything always annoyed me. What's the point in making me walk 4 miles if your gonna tell me the location? You could have spawned the thing right outside town and it wouldn't have made a difference.

In my eyes a Monster Hunter, which is the definition of a Witcher, has to go and do some actual hunting. Tracking the blood trails, finding the most likely areas, which again are described in books and conversations.

If you read books and talk to people you will know Exactly what equipment to use. I think Cedric blatantly tells you that you need GRAPESHOT bombs to destroy nests and that he is willing to sell you the diagram.

However I agree on the controls. They felt very clunky at the start and only after levelling some skills did the fluidity return. By taking potions away from the player and forcing us to consume them before battle they took away something vital from the first game. Which was to adapt to combat by drinking different potions.

For example you would drink a night vision potion and depending on what else you would encounter in a dark dank cave you would buff yourself accordingly. Having both blocking and magic tied to one bar it can get very confusing seeing how both are pretty much your only ways of breaking blocks, separating groups of enemies or protecting yourself.
 

9NineBreaker9

New member
Nov 1, 2007
389
0
0
A friend is lending me the game, so I'm looking forward to trying it out. I enjoyed the setting and theme of the first, but disliked the gameplay... doesn't seem like much has changed, but it'll be a nice diversion.

Also, doesn't awarding half a star kind of ruin the point of a 5-star system?
 
Mar 9, 2010
9
0
0
The games looks amazing, but its true I got burned by that frigging dragon at the beginning and died like 13 times because I didn't knew wth to do and the "tutorial" was just a few in game windows that appeared for like 2 seconds before banishing making me check my journal to read what they were trying to tell me. Its like they never play tested the damn thing.
 

Savber

New member
Feb 17, 2011
262
0
0
Theotherguy said:
I read the whole review, than said to myself without checking the mark: "This is a 7 from a lotr/dragon age fanboy". And than I smiled.

Yes the ui is kinda bad, but the rest of the stuff like "I died there, I died here" is just funny. I can understand Dragon Age 2 dragging ou by the hand with it's pathetic difficulty level, but come on! How lazy can You get?

And You didn't mention so many things in the review, which are good sides of The Witcher 2. Dude, being objective is a must for a reviever, the game is a 9 not a 7.
Lol, I find it hilarious how you say that a reviewer must be objective before offering your 'subjective' belief that the game should be objectively rated a 9.

It's an opinion, reviews are always going to be subjective, and everyone is different.
 

Mr. Omega

ANTI-LIFE JUSTIFIES MY HATE!
Jul 1, 2010
3,902
0
0
*Sees score* Prediction: People are going to blame the reviewer for the fact that it doesn't have a 5-star review...
There will be at least 3 Dragon Age 2 comparisons.
There will be one butthurt fanboy.

Reads comments: damn... just two comparisons. so close...

OT: Good Review. And enjoyed the video. Not much else to say.
 

Tigurus

New member
Apr 14, 2009
239
0
0
What is the song which is played at the beginning and the end with the women? It sounds so lovely.

On the review side:
I really want this game. While the interface wasn't the best in the first game (hence why I nearly never made potions and even bothered with it) it still sounds like one of the best games around this year.
Difficulty is fine by me :)
 

Keava

New member
Mar 1, 2010
2,010
0
0
Theotherguy said:
I read the whole review, than said to myself without checking the mark: "This is a 7 from a lotr/dragon age fanboy". And than I smiled.

Yes the ui is kinda bad, but the rest of the stuff like "I died there, I died here" is just funny. I can understand Dragon Age 2 dragging ou by the hand with it's pathetic difficulty level, but come on! How lazy can You get?

And You didn't mention so many things in the review, which are good sides of The Witcher 2. Dude, being objective is a must for a reviever, the game is a 9 not a 7.
Oh c'mon. Either don't troll, or don't be so obvious fanboi. Hell i'm on brink of fanboism towards CDP since they are my homies and i do rate Witcher 2 at an 8/10 due to all the meta stuff that get's in the way.

Like the fact that there is no way to save an ingredient setup for potion making, it was an issue in the first game, it's in second as well, each time you craft a potion/bomb it will revert to it's default set up, forcing you to repick each and every plant/monster part again if you want to save some of them for other purpose.
Or the completely unnecessary parts on the Character screen about monsters, when there are already entries in the journal? Yet to figure which type of bombs you need for the nekker nests you actually need to look in that obscure place - bad design decision.

Those are small things that don't ruin the experience for me, but things i would be much happier without for sure.
 

6FootImp

New member
Mar 31, 2011
5
0
0
While I completely understand the reasons for your problems with the game I think you have to consider that this game was made for a niche audience. At a time when every company out there is streamlining games so that every 6 year old can play them its extremely refreshing to see a company interested in complexity and sticking to the game world's concepts over marketability. if the games that my demographic are too complicated for the general gamer audience and every company tries to make games for everyone, there simply wont be any old school CRPG role playing games left. There are plenty of RPG games that are simplified for a general audience, and many of them are very good, but variety is needed.
 

Khada

Night Angel
Jan 8, 2009
331
0
0
It's true that there are a few aspects of the game that could use improving but I've been thoroughly enjoying Witcher 2. The combat is much, much better than the original, the story is engaging and brilliant and yes, it's hard at times and you will die... something that is sadly lost to most games today.

I would think that fans of the gothic series would likely enjoy this game, though it's not as open as the Gothic games.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
Greg Tito said:
The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Review

Geralt of Rivia is one badass motherf'er.

Read Full Article
Let me get this straight, actually having to craft spells breaks your immersion? Having to tactically utilize your potions breaks your immersion? The complex combat system breaks your immersion? I'm sorry this isn't Dragon Age 2. Go and pop that in for another ride if all you want is hours of mindless button mashing.
 

Zenphic

New member
Feb 2, 2009
12
0
0
Tigurus said:
What is the song which is played at the beginning and the end with the women? It sounds so lovely.
It's a remix of "Hedningarna - Vargtimmen"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1Zr1sEh1oE

Lovely music indeed.
 

Tigurus

New member
Apr 14, 2009
239
0
0
Zenphic said:
Tigurus said:
What is the song which is played at the beginning and the end with the women? It sounds so lovely.
It's a remix of "Hedningarna - Vargtimmen"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1Zr1sEh1oE

Lovely music indeed.
Thank you Very much :D
*glomps*
 

RhombusHatesYou

New member
Mar 21, 2010
5,800
0
0
Keava said:
Like the fact that there is no way to save an ingredient setup for potion making, it was an issue in the first game, it's in second as well, each time you craft a potion/bomb it will revert to it's default set up, forcing you to repick each and every plant/monster part again if you want to save some of them for other purpose.
Yes, I wasn't paying as close attention as I should have been to the alchemy screen and used a quest item to make a potion so off to the loading screen I went. *grumble*

Deflagging quest items after the quest has finished would also be nice...
 

Sartan0

New member
Apr 5, 2010
538
0
0
6FootImp said:
While I completely understand the reasons for your problems with the game I think you have to consider that this game was made for a niche audience. At a time when every company out there is streamlining games so that every 6 year old can play them its extremely refreshing to see a company interested in complexity and sticking to the game world's concepts over marketability. if the games that my demographic are too complicated for the general gamer audience and every company tries to make games for everyone, there simply wont be any old school CRPG role playing games left. There are plenty of RPG games that are simplified for a general audience, and many of them are very good, but variety is needed.
Agreed on the old school flavor and how I am happy to enjoy playing it. I am looking forward to what they do in the third one and I am happy to wait another four years for it. With luck we will not have to as I am sure part of that four year wait between 1 and 2 was developing the Red Engine. Now that is a nice piece of work! :) Love the esthetic in the game as well.
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
Grevensher said:
Let me get this straight, actually having to craft spells breaks your immersion? Having to tactically utilize your potions breaks your immersion? The complex combat system breaks your immersion? I'm sorry this isn't Dragon Age 2. Go and pop that in for another ride if all you want is hours of mindless button mashing.
He said dealing with a clunky interface was breaking his immersion. It calls attention to itself and reminds you that you're playing a game instead of a role in the world, hence immersion-breaking. Not being able to use potions in battle means that in cases like the quest he was describing, he wasn't able to properly buff for fights he was expecting (probably after being killed by surprise mechanics a few times). And what the hell is "complex" about TW2's combat? You click one button for small slash, another for big. Then you roll around and use the signs you have. It's definitely fun and challenging, but I wouldn't call it complex.

Go back to hating on DA2 for overblown reasons somewhere else.

edit: for the record, I'm loving TW2 in spite of the issues outlined in the review here
 

Baneat

New member
Jul 18, 2008
2,762
0
0
Mangue Surfer said:
Baneat said:
I had the same issues with the games, even posted on this forum and got dismissed as rtfml2pconsolescrub

People are unerringly blind to things if they choose to be.

But, cheers for the spoiler in the middle of the video!
But you basically are doing the same.

I'm blind? No! I just play games that challenging their audience much more than the Witcher 2. The castlevanias games for example (not the last one). You can acuse the developers to make nostalgics choices but call everyone that can play without problem blind?!
People that say that the problem doesn't exist are blind. People that force themselves past it anyway are people like me.
 

Veloxe

New member
Oct 5, 2010
491
0
0
Mr. Omega said:
*Sees score* Prediction: People are going to blame the reviewer for the fact that it doesn't have a 5-star review...
There will be at least 3 Dragon Age 2 comparisons.
There will be one butthurt fanboy.

Reads comments: damn... just two comparisons. so close...

OT: Good Review. And enjoyed the video. Not much else to say.
Gah! Had you waited 6 more minutes you would have managed to nab the 3rd one and you would have hit it out of the park! Alas, everything can't be perfect.

OT: Ya, I have been working through Witcher 1 and the inventory/menu system makes me want to punch something. Unfortunately it looks like that hasn't changed much (I'm all for complexity, just not complexity for complexities sake, which is what it seems to go far). At least the combat looks to be better then the first one was, so that's something to look forward to.

I figure I'll just sit back and wait till I can grab it on sale somewhere or borrow it from my buddy if he ever finishes with it.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
"The fundamental problem is that the game is terrible at teaching you how to enjoy it. I have no qualms with offering players a challenge, but too often I failed in the opening of The Witcher 2 because I simply didn't have the mechanics properly demonstrated to me, not because it was actually challenging. My experience with the prologue carried through the rest of the game."

I think that's a little unfair - it is very challenging given the skill set you have at the time anyway, and you can't really judge it all that well if you come back to it after playing 30 hours worth. Its a weird curve, but there's only so much you can do with training placards anyway - I'd much rather have the shit smacked out of me and just learn by doing instead of these bloody stop-and-start openings to every damn game, or the 15-hour-long tutorials (GTA IV).

But really, all you need to know for combat is to use absolutely everything to survive. I found I had the signs and general idea of the combat down within the first fight (that I died in several times over) - and it soon felt very rewarding. Its not like the design is particularly alien - you can't hit shielded/larger enemies head on, you'll need to dodge or block, etc.

There was only one point in the game, at the end of Chapter 1, where I thought there was a major flaw in the difficult curve - one that went through the bloody roof and didn't let you prepare for it either.

Also, the prologue thing is set in order of the day. I'm pretty sure that's fairly obviously sign-posted (I certainly remember just going through in order).

"After a quick, but still painful, QTE fist fight, you are let loose to explore the corrupt human settlement."

Painful? I don't really like them in there either but its about 3-button presses.

"It's a good thing the landscape looks so awesome, because you will be wandering around those woods for a long time. Finding quest-specific locations is usually easy, but simple navigation is tough because there is no indication of which direction is north."

Yes there is, there's an orange arrow on the circumference of the minimap.

"The main quests also have you going back and forth to the same location often which made me wonder why they spent so much time building the rest of the place."

Sidequests?

"Drinking potions gives you an edge in combat, at least I assume so because I never seemed to have drunk the right potions at the right time. You can't drink potions while you are engaged in a fight, which seems like a silly holdover from the meditation mechanic of the first game. There is a lot of granularity in the potion system, with most giving you both positive and negative effects. I thought that once I bought enough recipes, I'd be able to dovetail the effects of the three potions you can drink at a time for a net gain, but those recipes never materialized. I defaulted to only using the few potions that I couldn't do without, namely Cat, Swallow and Tawny Owl which let me see in the dark and regenerate health and vigor, respectively. Another opportunity missed"

What do you mean? The potions either help generally in battles or make up for various missing skills, or armour/weapon upgrades.

"The list interface screams for some way to sort, and there's absolutely no good reason for every recipe to clog up your inventory."

If you look at the potion list then it'll show you how many materials you need for a particular recipe.

"I fail to see why I can't easily see which recipes the merchant has that I don't already own,"

Your inventory lists are put side-by-side like every other game?

"One particular moment stuck out: when Geralt openly mocks the plot of The Lord of the Rings as a frivolous fairy tale, it feels like such parody is beneath the integrity the game achieves the rest of the time.

Yeah, that was... bizarre. Its essentially the only thing I felt probably got lost in translation it was so unsubtle.

Not being bitchy, I just haven't seen these complaints all that much - they certainly never occured to me (especially the inventory stuff). Even the combat difficulty seems to be accepted as something that's just better to learn-by-doing instead of being told on placards (I really cannot see that being helpful with such an in-depth system) or a bloody tutorial of today's standards.

You don't really cover the game's choices and consequences all that much either (like the two different second acts), or just how morally ambiguous everything is.

9NineBreaker9 said:
A friend is lending me the game, so I'm looking forward to trying it out. I enjoyed the setting and theme of the first, but disliked the gameplay... doesn't seem like much has changed, but it'll be a nice diversion.

Also, doesn't awarding half a star kind of ruin the point of a 5-star system?
Round it up to 4. Trust me.

Veloxe said:
Unfortunately it looks like that hasn't changed much (I'm all for complexity, just not complexity for complexities sake, which is what it seems to go far).
Its really not complex - most recently collected stuff is put at the top, and there's about 10 different categories to break everything up. If you need to check ingredients for a potion, you can look at what you're missing (and how much more of ingredient X you need) by clicking on the recipe, where a big diagram will show you.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
rsvp42 said:
Grevensher said:
Let me get this straight, actually having to craft spells breaks your immersion? Having to tactically utilize your potions breaks your immersion? The complex combat system breaks your immersion? I'm sorry this isn't Dragon Age 2. Go and pop that in for another ride if all you want is hours of mindless button mashing.
He said dealing with a clunky interface was breaking his immersion. It calls attention to itself and reminds you that you're playing a game instead of a role in the world, hence immersion-breaking. Not being able to use potions in battle means that in cases like the quest he was describing, we wasn't able to properly buff for fights he was expecting (probably after being killed by surprise mechanics a few times). And what the hell is "complex" about TW2's combat? You click one button for small slash, another for big. Then you roll around and use the signs you have. It's definitely fun and challenging, but I wouldn't call it complex.

Go back to hating on DA2 for overblown reasons somewhere else.
The combat is complex in that it is all about timing. If you time your attacks correctly you can get through any fight unscathed, as I started to do later in the game, especially with the annoying Letho confrontation. Utilizing your magic powers in combat will also pay off big time, especially if you can time your aard and ixii spells before your opponents are on top of you. Whenever one enters the non safe zones (ie: areas you cannot meditate) you should know to consume a swallow and a rook. Fairly easy to gather the resources to consume these all the time. You can make as many potions as you want at once, just keep hitting the enter key (want 6 potions? hit enter 6 times. Wow, so hard.)

[edit] DA2 was the biggest was to of 60 bucks I ever spent. If i want to spend 60 dollars for recycled material I would buy a valve collection. DA2 still owes me a full fledged campaign, not 3 expansion packs rolled into 15 maps. It's no better than brink.
 

abija

New member
Sep 7, 2008
66
0
0
The first sign of trouble was when I chose a dialogue option that sent me to battle a dragon with little preamble. As Geralt of Rivia I had to defeat three well-armed individuals without any knowledge of game mechanics or tactics all while dragon fire rained down around me. Windows popped up with the knowledge I needed to survive, but stopping to read them only resulted in a quick death. Geralt, the famous Witcher, died so easily and so many times in the first seconds of the game that I began to wonder if I was just an idiot. I was so frustrated and pissed that any fondness for the characters I'd met so far was completely erased.
All you need for that sequence is the mouse attacks, roll and maybe parry. You get all of them as tooltips when you start with that sequence. Also you might have the common sense to let the other npcs lead the fights since you just started the game and you're with a spook and a sorceress.

There is a lot of granularity in the potion system, with most giving you both positive and negative effects. I thought that once I bought enough recipes, I'd be able to dovetail the effects of the three potions you can drink at a time for a net gain, but those recipes never materialized. I defaulted to only using the few potions that I couldn't do without, namely Cat, Swallow and Tawny Owl which let me see in the dark and regenerate health and vigor, respectively. Another opportunity missed.
So you learn in prologue that Quen is your best friend. Yet you fail to see how a potion that decreases vitality and increases all damage like thunderbolt is good?

There's also just too much that's never explained in the game at all. I only knew that buying and reading a book about specific monsters let me loot more from the corpses of said monster from playing the first Witcher.
http://i.imgur.com/xttDa.png
It's also mentioned in plenty of conversations.

Btw, kudos, you delay the review to give us a through analyze of prologue and beginning of first act. I guess that's the problem when the game doesn't teach you how to use your head and how to enjoy it.
 

JerrytheBullfrog

New member
Dec 30, 2009
232
0
0
Grevensher said:
Greg Tito said:
The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Review

Geralt of Rivia is one badass motherf'er.

Read Full Article
Let me get this straight, actually having to craft spells breaks your immersion? Having to tactically utilize your potions breaks your immersion? The complex combat system breaks your immersion? I'm sorry this isn't Dragon Age 2. Go and pop that in for another ride if all you want is hours of mindless button mashing.
Typical fanboy whine.

There is no excuse whatsoever for the "can't drink potions in combat" mechanic. You get these interesting potions, combat relies heavily on you using them especially early on, but it asks you to be goddamn Nostradamus before you can ever use them.
 

Traun

New member
Jan 31, 2009
659
0
0
You know, I was about to pass this, but seriously?

Your problem with the game is that the game doesn't tell you how to beat enemies? You didn't infer from the fact that it's FIRE to stay away from it? You wanted a briefing before every battle on how not to die? Somehow having to prepare for battle, outside of battle, broke your immersion?

Play on easy, the fact that you aren't sufficiently skillful at the game shouldn't be an influence.
 

Denamic

New member
Aug 19, 2009
3,804
0
0
The only real grievances I have with the game is the overly consolified and obnoxious UI, and that the tutorial is so absurdly difficult, relatively speaking.
Also, that it takes so damn long to drink potions.
*slowly sitting down, then reaching out for a potion to drink, quaffing it, then tossing it. Then you can- no wait! Gotta wipe the sweat off of his brow.*
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
JerrytheBullfrog said:
Grevensher said:
Greg Tito said:
The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Review

Geralt of Rivia is one badass motherf'er.

Read Full Article
Let me get this straight, actually having to craft spells breaks your immersion? Having to tactically utilize your potions breaks your immersion? The complex combat system breaks your immersion? I'm sorry this isn't Dragon Age 2. Go and pop that in for another ride if all you want is hours of mindless button mashing.
Typical fanboy whine.

There is no excuse whatsoever for the "can't drink potions in combat" mechanic. You get these interesting potions, combat relies heavily on you using them especially early on, but it asks you to be goddamn Nostradamus before you can ever use them.
First off, not a fan boy. First time I played a witcher game. I used to be a DA2 fanboy. The potions last 10 minutes long each, and none provides instant health benefits. So it would not matter if you could drink them in game.

You know what really breaks immersion? Realizing your fat ass is sitting down on a couch pretending to be a quick moving Witcher. God forbid yu get to experience some of the difficulty of going out to prepare for a battle.
 

bob1052

New member
Oct 12, 2010
774
0
0
JerrytheBullfrog said:
Grevensher said:
Greg Tito said:
The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Review

Geralt of Rivia is one badass motherf'er.

Read Full Article
Let me get this straight, actually having to craft spells breaks your immersion? Having to tactically utilize your potions breaks your immersion? The complex combat system breaks your immersion? I'm sorry this isn't Dragon Age 2. Go and pop that in for another ride if all you want is hours of mindless button mashing.
Typical fanboy whine.

There is no excuse whatsoever for the "can't drink potions in combat" mechanic. You get these interesting potions, combat relies heavily on you using them especially early on, but it asks you to be goddamn Nostradamus before you can ever use them.
Putting your sword away and chugging potions when people rush at you with swords sounds like a pretty dumb idea.

Anyone who claims you need any kind of foresight in The Witcher 2 would claim they need foresight to predict if they need to eat food today. If you fill up your inventory as much as this review claims, you would have plenty materials to make sure you always have a potion active. Theres no need to guess and then cry when you guess wrong when you can easily have 100% uptime.

Also how can you complain about being stuck in the forests of Flotsam for too long when DA2, which you gave a perfect score, was about running around one city with every dungeon being a reused map.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
Denamic said:
The only real grievances I have with the game is the overly consolified and obnoxious UI, and that the tutorial is so absurdly difficult, relatively speaking.
Also, that it takes so damn long to drink potions.
*slowly sitting down, then reaching out for a potion to drink, quaffing it, then tossing it. Then you can- no wait! Gotta wipe the sweat off of his brow.*
Hey! A sweaty-brow is a ***** in a sword fight I'll have you know.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
To be fair, I just watched the video review rather than reading any of this. And I take offense to calling a game "flawed" just because it's more difficult and/or complex than most of the crap that passes for RPGs these days. You want a deep and meaningful experience? Well then Witcher 2 delivers. You want simplistic and easy yet deep and meaningful experience? Well, sorry, but those are ideas which are directly contradictory to one another. That's called trying to have your cake and eat it too. A fair, difficult game makes you feel like you've truly accomplished something after each and every battle. An easy game gives you very little satisfaction, even after having completed the entire thing.

And giving W2 a 3.5 when the Escapist gave DA2 a 5? Yeah, this site just lost a lot of credibility in my eyes in regards to reviews...
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
Traun said:
You know, I was about to pass this, but seriously?

Your problem with the game is that the game doesn't tell you how to beat enemies? You didn't infer from the fact that it's FIRE to stay away from it? You wanted a briefing before every battle on how not to die? Somehow having to prepare for battle, outside of battle, broke your immersion?

Play on easy, the fact that you aren't sufficiently skillful at the game shouldn't be an influence.
Crap RPG's that are DOA2 in drag have damage our once beloved RPG genre.
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
Grevensher said:
The combat is complex in that it is all about timing. If you time your attacks correctly you can get through any fight unscathed, as I started to do later in the game, especially with the annoying Letho confrontation. Utilizing your magic powers in combat will also pay off big time, especially if you can time your aard and ixii spells before your opponents are on top of you. Whenever one enters the non safe zones (ie: areas you cannot meditate) you should know to consume a swallow and a rook. Fairly easy to gather the resources to consume these all the time. You can make as many potions as you want at once, just keep hitting the enter key (want 6 potions? hit enter 6 times. Wow, so hard.)

[edit] DA2 was the biggest was to of 60 bucks I ever spent. If i want to spend 60 dollars for recycled material I would buy a valve collection. DA2 still owes me a full fledged campaign, not 3 expansion packs rolled into 15 maps. It's no better than brink.
We might be polar opposites because I like both DA2 and Brink, but it's because the flaws didn't impede my enjoyment of the good things.

Something to remember about the combat (if we're going to compare games) is that TW2 is about controlling one character. DA2 has you controlling four. I'm not going to say it's a better game (because TW2's art direction and graphics are phenomenal) but I think a lot of the complaints have been exaggerated. Except for the repeated environments thing, which is an issue of scope as well.

As for the interface, it's not just the multiple item thing, it's the clarity of certain information, the organization of acquired recipes, the fact that you have to constantly exit and re-enter the crafting to buy things from the crafter you're already talking to. There's general convenience features that could have made it all flow much better. Personally, I don't mind and I've figured almost everything out, but I can deny that certain aspects would benefit from some streamlining, I'm not even talking about combat here, this is just menu navigation stuff. And again, it hasn't impede my enjoyment, but I understand why it could hurt a review score, which is about considering the good with the bad.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
abija said:
There's also just too much that's never explained in the game at all. I only knew that buying and reading a book about specific monsters let me loot more from the corpses of said monster from playing the first Witcher.
http://i.imgur.com/xttDa.png
It's also mentioned in plenty of conversations.

Btw, kudos, you delay the review to give us a through analyze of prologue and beginning of first act. I guess that's the problem when the game doesn't teach you how to use your head and how to enjoy it.
You forget, this is a DA2 fanboy reviewing the witcher. There is no expectation of actually having to READ things to solve problems, just following the shiny arrow to the next destination on the GPS.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
Grevensher said:
abija said:
There's also just too much that's never explained in the game at all. I only knew that buying and reading a book about specific monsters let me loot more from the corpses of said monster from playing the first Witcher.
http://i.imgur.com/xttDa.png
It's also mentioned in plenty of conversations.

Btw, kudos, you delay the review to give us a through analyze of prologue and beginning of first act. I guess that's the problem when the game doesn't teach you how to use your head and how to enjoy it.
You forget, this is a DA2 fanboy reviewing the witcher. There is no expectation of actually having to READ things to solve problems, just following the shiny arrow to the next destination on the GPS.
Oh shit, this is the same guy that reviewed DA2, isn't it? All makes sense now.
 

JerrytheBullfrog

New member
Dec 30, 2009
232
0
0
Traun said:
You know, I was about to pass this, but seriously?

Your problem with the game is that the game doesn't tell you how to beat enemies? You didn't infer from the fact that it's FIRE to stay away from it? You wanted a briefing before every battle on how not to die? Somehow having to prepare for battle, outside of battle, broke your immersion?

Play on easy, the fact that you aren't sufficiently skillful at the game shouldn't be an influence.
L2Read. He never says that the fire was what killed him. It was the incredibly poorly explained fight against three guys in the middle of the fire that did.

bob1052 said:
JerrytheBullfrog said:
Grevensher said:
Greg Tito said:
The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Review

Geralt of Rivia is one badass motherf'er.

Read Full Article
Let me get this straight, actually having to craft spells breaks your immersion? Having to tactically utilize your potions breaks your immersion? The complex combat system breaks your immersion? I'm sorry this isn't Dragon Age 2. Go and pop that in for another ride if all you want is hours of mindless button mashing.
Typical fanboy whine.

There is no excuse whatsoever for the "can't drink potions in combat" mechanic. You get these interesting potions, combat relies heavily on you using them especially early on, but it asks you to be goddamn Nostradamus before you can ever use them.
Putting your sword away and chugging potions when people rush at you with swords sounds like a pretty dumb idea.

Anyone who claims you need any kind of foresight in The Witcher 2 would claim they need foresight to predict if they need to eat food today. If you fill up your inventory as much as this review claims, you would have plenty materials to make sure you always have a potion active. Theres no need to guess and then cry when you guess wrong when you can easily have 100% uptime.

Also how can you complain about being stuck in the forests of Flotsam for too long when DA2, which you gave a perfect score, was about running around one city with every dungeon being a reused map.
Oh, I'm so sorry. And here I thought that the almighty Geralt could maybe, I don't know, hang some on his belt, pop them with one hand and take a brief quaff in five seconds time.




Seriously, PC RPG fanboys are some of the most irritating people in the world. They were like this with Risen, too. A game may be the deepest in the world, but if half the people who pick it up cannot penetrate it far enough to get into any of that depth, it's a failure of a game.

Diehards will put up with hours of frustration, but a lot of people won't. Does that make them dirty casual gamers or noobs? No, it just means that they'd rather be spending their time doing something else than slogging through an unwieldy, unintuitive beginning to a game, no matter how tasty a reward was dangled in front of them.

Xzi said:
To be fair, I just watched the video review rather than reading any of this. And I take offense to calling a game "flawed" just because it's more difficult and/or complex than most of the crap that passes for RPGs these days. You want a deep and meaningful experience? Well then Witcher 2 delivers. You want simplistic and easy yet deep and meaningful experience? Well, sorry, but those are ideas which are directly contradictory to one another. That's called trying to have your cake and eat it too. A fair, difficult game makes you feel like you've truly accomplished something after each and every battle. An easy game gives you very little satisfaction, even after having completed the entire thing.

And giving W2 a 3.5 when the Escapist gave DA2 a 5? Yeah, this site just lost a lot of credibility in my eyes in regards to reviews...
Frankly, I'm glad to see a review that honestly discusses Witcher 2's flaws instead of just kneeling in front of Geralt and mindlessly going to town. I like the game, but it's arcane and impenetrable and its UI sucks.

Also, FFS people: A 3-and-1/2-stars score is *still an above average game.* He's not panning it.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
rsvp42 said:
Grevensher said:
The combat is complex in that it is all about timing. If you time your attacks correctly you can get through any fight unscathed, as I started to do later in the game, especially with the annoying Letho confrontation. Utilizing your magic powers in combat will also pay off big time, especially if you can time your aard and ixii spells before your opponents are on top of you. Whenever one enters the non safe zones (ie: areas you cannot meditate) you should know to consume a swallow and a rook. Fairly easy to gather the resources to consume these all the time. You can make as many potions as you want at once, just keep hitting the enter key (want 6 potions? hit enter 6 times. Wow, so hard.)

[edit] DA2 was the biggest was to of 60 bucks I ever spent. If i want to spend 60 dollars for recycled material I would buy a valve collection. DA2 still owes me a full fledged campaign, not 3 expansion packs rolled into 15 maps. It's no better than brink.
We might be polar opposites because I like both DA2 and Brink, but it's because the flaws didn't impede my enjoyment of the good things.

Something to remember about the combat (if we're going to compare games) is that TW2 is about controlling one character. DA2 has you controlling four. I'm not going to say it's a better game (because TW2's art direction and graphics are phenomenal) but I think a lot of the complaints have been exaggerated. Except for the repeated environments thing, which is an issue of scope as well.

As for the interface, it's not just the multiple item thing, it's the clarity of certain information, the organization of acquired recipes, the fact that you have to constantly exit and re-enter the crafting to buy things from the crafter you're already talking to. There's general convenience features that could have made it all flow much better. Personally, I don't mind and I've figured almost everything out, but I can deny that certain aspects would benefit from some streamlining, I'm not even talking about combat here, this is just menu navigation stuff. And again, it hasn't impede my enjoyment, but I understand why it could hurt a review score, which is about considering the good with the bad.
Brink I enjoy as a MP experience, but as a SP experience it falls flat. It didn't have a ending that made sense for gods sake. DA2 I enjoyed as a once through adventure game. As a re-playable RPG it failed because none of the RPG elements diverged from the central role.

As for W2, yes, the interface system is a bit window happy, but that is kind of minor and can be fixed in a future update if plenty of people have issue with it. Remember, this is the same studio that remade Witcher 1 to be even better than the original release. I really think this game should have gotten a 9, if only for the graphics, story and voice acting.
 

JerrytheBullfrog

New member
Dec 30, 2009
232
0
0
Grevensher said:
rsvp42 said:
Grevensher said:
The combat is complex in that it is all about timing. If you time your attacks correctly you can get through any fight unscathed, as I started to do later in the game, especially with the annoying Letho confrontation. Utilizing your magic powers in combat will also pay off big time, especially if you can time your aard and ixii spells before your opponents are on top of you. Whenever one enters the non safe zones (ie: areas you cannot meditate) you should know to consume a swallow and a rook. Fairly easy to gather the resources to consume these all the time. You can make as many potions as you want at once, just keep hitting the enter key (want 6 potions? hit enter 6 times. Wow, so hard.)

[edit] DA2 was the biggest was to of 60 bucks I ever spent. If i want to spend 60 dollars for recycled material I would buy a valve collection. DA2 still owes me a full fledged campaign, not 3 expansion packs rolled into 15 maps. It's no better than brink.
We might be polar opposites because I like both DA2 and Brink, but it's because the flaws didn't impede my enjoyment of the good things.

Something to remember about the combat (if we're going to compare games) is that TW2 is about controlling one character. DA2 has you controlling four. I'm not going to say it's a better game (because TW2's art direction and graphics are phenomenal) but I think a lot of the complaints have been exaggerated. Except for the repeated environments thing, which is an issue of scope as well.

As for the interface, it's not just the multiple item thing, it's the clarity of certain information, the organization of acquired recipes, the fact that you have to constantly exit and re-enter the crafting to buy things from the crafter you're already talking to. There's general convenience features that could have made it all flow much better. Personally, I don't mind and I've figured almost everything out, but I can deny that certain aspects would benefit from some streamlining, I'm not even talking about combat here, this is just menu navigation stuff. And again, it hasn't impede my enjoyment, but I understand why it could hurt a review score, which is about considering the good with the bad.
Brink I enjoy as a MP experience, but as a SP experience it falls flat. It didn't have a ending that made sense for gods sake. DA2 I enjoyed as a once through adventure game. As a re-playable RPG it failed because none of the RPG elements diverged from the central role.

As for W2, yes, the interface system is a bit window happy, but that is kind of minor and can be fixed in a future update if plenty of people have issue with it. Remember, this is the same studio that remade Witcher 1 to be even better than the original release. I really think this game should have gotten a 9, if only for the graphics, story and voice acting.
The voice acting? Graphics are great, story is pretty good, but the voice acting? I couldn't even take it seriously half the time.
 

MetallicaRulez0

New member
Aug 27, 2008
2,503
0
0
I agree with a lot of this review. The inventory and some of the menu screens are an absolute mess. It uses the ancient "you can only carry this much weight" system from RPGs that should have been replaced last decade. That problem is compounded by the fact that some of the crafting materials use up a lot of your weight (Ores and Leather especially). I found myself holding onto all those materials, and I just ended up having to dump inventory every half hour or so because of it.

Not being able to drink potions in combat is a huge hindrance. You really never know when you're about to enter combat, so you have 2 options: 1) waste a boatload of potions and keep them up every time you leave town, or 2) rarely use potions at all. It's also irritating that you have to enter meditation every time you want to drink or make a potion.

I'm still enjoying the game, mostly due to the unbelievable visuals and wonderful setting and story, but it will definitely frustrate most gamers with a multitude of small annoyances that really add up overall.
 

bob1052

New member
Oct 12, 2010
774
0
0
JerrytheBullfrog said:
Oh, I'm so sorry. And here I thought that the almighty Geralt could maybe, I don't know, hang some on his belt, pop them with one hand and take a brief quaff in five seconds time.

Seriously, PC RPG fanboys are some of the most irritating people in the world. They were like this with Risen, too. A game may be the deepest in the world, but if half the people who pick it up cannot penetrate it far enough to get into any of that depth, it's a failure of a game.

Diehards will put up with hours of frustration, but a lot of people won't. Does that make them dirty casual gamers or noobs? No, it just means that they'd rather be spending their time doing something else than slogging through an unwieldy, unintuitive beginning to a game, no matter how tasty a reward was dangled in front of them.
How is an easy to maintain 100% uptime unintuitive.

If someone's car runs out of gas on a weekly basis because they say that filling up gas is unintuitive and requires you "to be Nostradamus" to know when to refill, that doesn't make filling up gas unintuitive, it just makes you look stupid and look like you are trying to blame everything but yourself in some desperate attempt to deceive yourself from your own stupidity.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
JerrytheBullfrog said:
Frankly, I'm glad to see a review that honestly discusses Witcher 2's flaws instead of just kneeling in front of Geralt and mindlessly going to town. I like the game, but it's arcane and impenetrable and its UI sucks.
Arcane? Its not exactly old-school. Its just difficult. Turn it down to easy if you have to for the opening. It requires some perseverance, its not impenetrable (as shown by... yourself. You can't be enjoying something if you can't even get into it.)

MetallicaRulez0 said:
I agree with a lot of this review. The inventory and some of the menu screens are an absolute mess. It uses the ancient "you can only carry this much weight" system from RPGs that should have been replaced last decade. That problem is compounded by the fact that some of the crafting materials use up a lot of your weight (Ores and Leather especially). I found myself holding onto all those materials, and I just ended up having to dump inventory every half hour or so because of it.

Not being able to drink potions in combat is a huge hindrance. You really never know when you're about to enter combat, so you have 2 options: 1) waste a boatload of potions and keep them up every time you leave town, or 2) rarely use potions at all. It's also irritating that you have to enter meditation every time you want to drink or make a potion.

I'm still enjoying the game, mostly due to the unbelievable visuals and wonderful setting and story, but it will definitely frustrate most gamers with a multitude of small annoyances that really add up overall.
Dump all the leather, dump most of the iron ore, keep all the silver stuff. Honestly, if you need it, you can trip over it everywhere, or you can buy it. There's no need to pick it up.

Potions stick on for 10 minutes or so, you should be able to judge if you're going to run into enemies a lot of the time. Caves/mines? Enemies. Forest/woods? Enemies. Dirty great vibrating wolf necklace? Big fucking enemy!

As for the weight limit, only at the end game was I knocking against the it. If you have a bunch of swords and armour worse than what you're using, sell them.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
JerrytheBullfrog said:
Xzi said:
To be fair, I just watched the video review rather than reading any of this. And I take offense to calling a game "flawed" just because it's more difficult and/or complex than most of the crap that passes for RPGs these days. You want a deep and meaningful experience? Well then Witcher 2 delivers. You want simplistic and easy yet deep and meaningful experience? Well, sorry, but those are ideas which are directly contradictory to one another. That's called trying to have your cake and eat it too. A fair, difficult game makes you feel like you've truly accomplished something after each and every battle. An easy game gives you very little satisfaction, even after having completed the entire thing.

And giving W2 a 3.5 when the Escapist gave DA2 a 5? Yeah, this site just lost a lot of credibility in my eyes in regards to reviews...
Frankly, I'm glad to see a review that honestly discusses Witcher 2's flaws instead of just kneeling in front of Geralt and mindlessly going to town. I like the game, but it's arcane and impenetrable and its UI sucks.
The game has its flaws, but this review picked out few of the actual ones. There was a lot more nit-picking about difficulty and complexity than anything else, and these are not inherently bad things. When you give a game like DA2, in which you can literally auto-attack your way through every encounter on normal, a perfect score, it's pretty obvious what your preferred level of sophistication in games is.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
If you have the game accessible now, pop it in and walk around flotsum. Just turn the volume up, and just walk around and listen. You will see what I mean.
 

Keava

New member
Mar 1, 2010
2,010
0
0
JerrytheBullfrog said:
Oh, I'm so sorry. And here I thought that the almighty Geralt could maybe, I don't know, hang some on his belt, pop them with one hand and take a brief quaff in five seconds time.
Just because i actually know the novels. Impossible. The potions are meant to work like that and people who were familiar with the lore actually did complain shyly about it with the first game. The potions are highly toxic poisons that would kill any normal person, paralyse for rest of life at best case scenario, witcher can drink them thanks to their mutations but even then still the toxicity has effect on them in initial stage before the mutation filters it.
If the game was to be 100% like lore you would have drink potion then meditate for 8 hours (think AD&D spell system with need for sleep each time you expended your memorized spells) before you could actually benefit from them. The first witcher's intro cinematic portrayed it pretty well, mostly because it was from actual story by Sapkowski.
 

JerrytheBullfrog

New member
Dec 30, 2009
232
0
0
Xzi said:
JerrytheBullfrog said:
Xzi said:
To be fair, I just watched the video review rather than reading any of this. And I take offense to calling a game "flawed" just because it's more difficult and/or complex than most of the crap that passes for RPGs these days. You want a deep and meaningful experience? Well then Witcher 2 delivers. You want simplistic and easy yet deep and meaningful experience? Well, sorry, but those are ideas which are directly contradictory to one another. That's called trying to have your cake and eat it too. A fair, difficult game makes you feel like you've truly accomplished something after each and every battle. An easy game gives you very little satisfaction, even after having completed the entire thing.

And giving W2 a 3.5 when the Escapist gave DA2 a 5? Yeah, this site just lost a lot of credibility in my eyes in regards to reviews...
Frankly, I'm glad to see a review that honestly discusses Witcher 2's flaws instead of just kneeling in front of Geralt and mindlessly going to town. I like the game, but it's arcane and impenetrable and its UI sucks.
The game has its flaws, but this review picked out few of the actual ones. There was a lot more nit-picking about difficulty and complexity than anything else, and these are not bad things. When you give a game like DA2, in which you can literally auto-attack your way through every encounter on normal, a 5/5, it's pretty obvious what your preferred level of sophistication in games is.
I didn't play DA2. I don't have all that much time for games these days, and I never played DA1, so I wasn't interested.

But I'm having a ton of trouble getting through the obtuse interface and bizarre design choices to enjoy the meat of the game. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that people who aren't die-hard old-school RPG fans will do the same, and a review that honestly tells them that is a good thing.
 

Casimir_Effect

New member
Aug 26, 2010
418
0
0
It's a shame that there is so little place left for a complex RPG which asks that you put something into it so that you can get a lot out, rather than most RPG games these days which are so scared of you losing interest they throw godly powers at you right from the start and never let you fail a quest.

I hate unfairly hard games, games which could be called Nintenhard. But I love the combat in TW2, because upon figuring out that it's all about patience it becomes a lot of fun to play. Switching between signs - like Yrden to stun and Igni to damage - then throwing a few bombs before darting in to slash someone, retreating when the enemy recovers. Or later on when you unlock the riposte ability you can try to sit back and counter - but not permanent blocking like is allowed in an Assassins Creed game. You can take a few blows but after that your block is down, so you make that first chance to riposte or you dodge away and change tactic. This game rewards thinking and planning, which is so rare right now.

I don't even need to mention the graphics and art direction of the entire game, which make running around even the same environment always interesting. That forest: I loved every second going through it.
DA also wishes it could match the tone of this game; rather than advertising itself with Marilyn Manson and revelling in having blood splatter your armour, then having an underwear sex-scene and people speaking ye olde english.
[I do actually like DA, but there's so much wrong with it that The Witcher (both games) have done better, especially in terms of maturity (discounting the fuck-cards)]

Finally, the complete lack of good, evil or morality-based choices at all is fantastic. Everything is about the personality of the Geralt you are playing, rather than "Am I going to play light side, dark side, or impotently neutral?". Can't wait to go back and replay the game going a seperate path than that I took. Not to mention all the other replays I can do which involve crafting a different skill path and changing some of the smaller choices I made.

The game isn't perfect but then nothing has been yet, objectively speaking. If I had to attach a number (which I hate doing) I'd give it a 9/10. Small interface complaints are about all I've got really. And the map. The map does kind of suck.
 

Ligisttomten

New member
Sep 20, 2004
120
0
0
I agree on the interface problems, it gets quite annoying. Cut-scenes and conversations however was something I enjoyed immensely! Especially the part where the gang sits down at the tavern in Flotsam to catch up.
 

Mangue Surfer

New member
May 29, 2010
364
0
0
Baneat said:
Mangue Surfer said:
Baneat said:
I had the same issues with the games, even posted on this forum and got dismissed as rtfml2pconsolescrub

People are unerringly blind to things if they choose to be.

But, cheers for the spoiler in the middle of the video!
But you basically are doing the same.

I'm blind? No! I just play games that challenging their audience much more than the Witcher 2. The castlevanias games for example (not the last one). You can acuse the developers to make nostalgics choices but call everyone that can play without problem blind?!
People that say that the problem doesn't exist are blind. People that force themselves past it anyway are people like me.
LOL.I probably invented this "Castlevania" thing in my process of deny. Such a crazy name anyway
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
Xzi said:
The game has its flaws, but this review picked out few of the actual ones. There was a lot more nit-picking about difficulty and complexity than anything else, and these are not inherently bad things. When you give a game like DA2, in which you can literally auto-attack your way through every encounter on normal, a perfect score, it's pretty obvious what your preferred level of sophistication in games is.
Then don't play DA2 on normal. There are two levels above that and it's adjustable at any time.
 

Baneat

New member
Jul 18, 2008
2,762
0
0
Mangue Surfer said:
Baneat said:
Mangue Surfer said:
Baneat said:
I had the same issues with the games, even posted on this forum and got dismissed as rtfml2pconsolescrub

People are unerringly blind to things if they choose to be.

But, cheers for the spoiler in the middle of the video!
But you basically are doing the same.

I'm blind? No! I just play games that challenging their audience much more than the Witcher 2. The castlevanias games for example (not the last one). You can acuse the developers to make nostalgics choices but call everyone that can play without problem blind?!
People that say that the problem doesn't exist are blind. People that force themselves past it anyway are people like me.
LOL.I probably invented this "Castlevania" thing in my process of deny. Such a crazy name anyway
The real problem is that the elements reintroduced are in there for the wrong reasons. Rose tinted glasses make you think that everything from earlier games was a good thing, and you bring back the good, with the utter shit. Lives are shit. cryptic quests are shit (We had to walk up and down ironforge with just one Alterac Cheese AND WE WERE THANKFUL), unfair difficulty is shit. Poor explanation is shit.

They brought it with all the good elements, when there was no reason for it.
 

bob1052

New member
Oct 12, 2010
774
0
0
rsvp42 said:
Xzi said:
The game has its flaws, but this review picked out few of the actual ones. There was a lot more nit-picking about difficulty and complexity than anything else, and these are not inherently bad things. When you give a game like DA2, in which you can literally auto-attack your way through every encounter on normal, a perfect score, it's pretty obvious what your preferred level of sophistication in games is.
Then don't play DA2 on normal. There are two levels above that and it's adjustable at any time.
Then don't complain about difficulty of TW2 on hard. There are two levels below that and it's adjustable at any time.
 

sunburst

Media Snob
Mar 19, 2010
666
0
0
The fans of this series are way too defensive. Tons of people are all having the same problems but it can't possibly be an issue with the game. Nope, they must all be thickies who don't know how to read and probably couldn't tie their own shoes without a 2-hour tutorial.

Granted, I'd rather get thrown into battle without a clue than get stuck with the training wheels for 20 hours but that doesn't make it good design. The Witcher 2 is a great game despite its terrible decisions, not because the detractors are too stupid to understand the awesomeness.

And it's definitely better than Dragon Age 2 but that's hardly an accomplishment. DA2 is just bad.
 

Mangue Surfer

New member
May 29, 2010
364
0
0
Just saying. People complain about difficult, refuse to read manuals and now we have 20 hours tutorials, 20 HOURS! We have 4 hours games that crabs your hand for 40 minutes. For me, this is frustrating.

TWENTY HOURS!!!

20 hoooooouuuurssssssss!!!!!
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
bob1052 said:
rsvp42 said:
Xzi said:
The game has its flaws, but this review picked out few of the actual ones. There was a lot more nit-picking about difficulty and complexity than anything else, and these are not inherently bad things. When you give a game like DA2, in which you can literally auto-attack your way through every encounter on normal, a perfect score, it's pretty obvious what your preferred level of sophistication in games is.
Then don't play DA2 on normal. There are two levels above that and it's adjustable at any time.
Then don't complain about difficulty of TW2 on hard. There are two levels below that and it's adjustable at any time.
Touche. However, that means we can't assume how sophisticated someone likes their games based on that. The two simply have different definitions of "normal."

That being said, normal in TW2 isn't hard, but those first scenarios were the hardest normal I think I've ever played. You can't take many hits and the flow of combat should have been introduced in a better way. Heck, even a short separate tutorial would have been nice, something to explain the signs at least. I realize that figuring out fight mechanics isn't that hard, but many games do a great job of teaching how to play them by integrating it into an easier intro. This is a mixed criticism for me because on the one hand I like figuring out these things, but on the other I feel like I could have been prepared better and saved myself some time. No matter how you slice it, it's a tough intro for someone like me coming into the series fresh.
 

Canadish

New member
Jul 15, 2010
675
0
0
Dragon Age 2 - 5 Stars
The Witcher 2 - 3 1/2 Stars?

Yeah okay, cool story bro.

Mr. Tito is obviously a VERY different kind of gamer then myself.
 

JerrytheBullfrog

New member
Dec 30, 2009
232
0
0
rsvp42 said:
bob1052 said:
rsvp42 said:
Xzi said:
The game has its flaws, but this review picked out few of the actual ones. There was a lot more nit-picking about difficulty and complexity than anything else, and these are not inherently bad things. When you give a game like DA2, in which you can literally auto-attack your way through every encounter on normal, a perfect score, it's pretty obvious what your preferred level of sophistication in games is.
Then don't play DA2 on normal. There are two levels above that and it's adjustable at any time.
Then don't complain about difficulty of TW2 on hard. There are two levels below that and it's adjustable at any time.
Touche. However, that means we can't assume how sophisticated someone likes their games based on that. The two simply have different definitions of "normal."

That being said, normal in TW2 isn't hard, but those first scenarios were the hardest normal I think I've ever played. You can't take many hits and the flow of combat should have been introduced in a better way. Heck, even a short separate tutorial would have been nice, something to explain the signs at least. I realize that figuring out fight mechanics isn't that hard, but many games do a great job of teaching how to play them by integrating it into an easier intro. This is a mixed criticism for me because on the one hand I like figuring out these things, but on the other I feel like I could have been prepared better and saved myself some time. No matter how you slice it, it's a tough intro for someone like me coming into the series fresh.
Someone pointed out that it would be out of character for this badass Warmaster to have to go through a "and here's how you block" tutorial, so I was thinking - wouldn't it be cool if you started the game as some sort of neophyte recruit who was being GIVEN a lesson by *the* Geralt himself? That'd preserve Geralt as a wise experienced warrior while still introduce newbies to the game.

And then maybe the recruit gets killed and Geralt takes over, providing the player with an immediate emotional attachment to the game. I think it would have been a cool idea.
 

tetron

New member
Dec 9, 2009
584
0
0
I pretty much agree with what he said about it. The game is really good and fun but combat is so painfully annoying. Overall the controls are clunky, you're likely to set off a trap by accidentally walking onto it when trying to disarm it. Not to mention that guarding and spells pulling from the same resource makes guarding all but useless, especially when fighting groups of enemies because you can't afford to just stand there. I've heard riposte is good but I went magic so idk.

The ability to lock on to an enemy would have improved the combat drastically, because it's really annoying to roll away from an attack and then try to turn and strike back only to have your character leap towards the guy at the back of a cluster of enemies, pretty much autodeath unless you do same fancy rolling.

That said the actual battles only get hard when some mechanic screws me over, such as I hit someone with the aard and it sends them flying towards me instead of away and once they collide with me they immediately start swinging. That said, fighting a group of enemies is the hardest part about this game, and it's mostly just kiting around hitting them with aard and one shotting whoever gets stunned, your flavor may differ since you can use bombs and stuff but still lots of kiting. 1on1 boss fights, that don't have something special you have to do, are as simple as spamming throwing daggers.

Overall the game has a weird difficulty. I can sense that it's trying to do it so you have to actually be tactical and fight like someone who isn't god of all creation, but the combat system just doesn't have the fluidity and precision to accommodate that.

That's not to say the game isn't amazing, and to me it's only a lock-on system and some combat balancing away from being perfect. Contrary to what this reviewer says, everyone seems to be more badass than Geralt. They just don't have spells and potions.

Edit: I guess I should note that I play this game with a 360 controller. Idk how targeting goes with mouse/keyboard but it shouldn't matter since it has in game support for the gamepad.
 

bob1052

New member
Oct 12, 2010
774
0
0
rsvp42 said:
bob1052 said:
rsvp42 said:
Xzi said:
The game has its flaws, but this review picked out few of the actual ones. There was a lot more nit-picking about difficulty and complexity than anything else, and these are not inherently bad things. When you give a game like DA2, in which you can literally auto-attack your way through every encounter on normal, a perfect score, it's pretty obvious what your preferred level of sophistication in games is.
Then don't play DA2 on normal. There are two levels above that and it's adjustable at any time.
Then don't complain about difficulty of TW2 on hard. There are two levels below that and it's adjustable at any time.
Touche. However, that means we can't assume how sophisticated someone likes their games based on that. The two simply have different definitions of "normal."

That being said, normal in TW2 isn't hard, but those first scenarios were the hardest normal I think I've ever played. You can't take many hits and the flow of combat should have been introduced in a better way. Heck, even a short separate tutorial would have been nice, something to explain the signs at least. I realize that figuring out fight mechanics isn't that hard, but many games do a great job of teaching how to play them by integrating it into an easier intro. This is a mixed criticism for me because on the one hand I like figuring out these things, but on the other I feel like I could have been prepared better and saved myself some time. No matter how you slice it, it's a tough intro for someone like me coming into the series fresh.
If you look at the four dialog options at the very start of the game you get:

"The morning, the king summoned me."
"The assault."
"What ultimately happened to the dragon?"
"We split up at the monastery."

If you look at them it is immediately obvious that the first one starts at the beginning, and the next three all refer to things you have no idea about.

What assault is happening? What dragon is involved? When did we go to a monastery?

Choosing the morning, which part of the impossible to see through deception is listed as the first option, defines the assault and provides tidbits on the dragon, leaving you at the top of a siege tower awaiting the assault to begin.

That leads you to the next logical, chronological, and amazingly, the second choice on the list: "The assault". The first battle you get in is a skirmish in which you walk around with no enemies swinging at you, instead they are all preoccupied with other combatants and you, along with the tool tips that, according to the review you die if you even glance at them, but really you have as long as you need with them in this no danger situation, can practice all you want chopping enemies down from behind. You then go through progressively increased difficulty fights, starting with two enemies as soon as you drop off the wall. Then you face an knight in full plate and a guard with a shield and eventually you reach the so man in charge.

Although you don't need to kill him depending on your choices, he is still a good challenge. Combat training if you choose, or the first real opportunity to let loose the dialog choice option in full

After completing the assault you have the few tidbits about the dragon you picked up earlier, but no clue about any monastery, so the next logical choice appears to be the dragon. This ends at the monastery and guess which choice you have left.

The idea that this prologue is cryptic and in need of Dan Brown (note: he doesn't actually write good mysteries, he just makes them so incoherent and twisting needlessly and endlessly but still) to properly decode and that it doesn't serve as a proper tutorial is bullocks.
 

Mr. Socky

New member
Apr 22, 2009
408
0
0
I honestly thought thought that The Witcher 2 was an amazing, but incredibly flawed title. The story was amazing, but the ending was possibly the worst I've ever seen in any form of media with a story. The preparation before combat was a cool idea, but the crafting and alchemy systems were... iffy, at best. The combat was great, but a lot of the complexity isn't explained to you towards the start of the game, and towards the end you're so powerful it doesn't matter even on hard. On the other hand, there's something that The Witcher 2 just gets right. Even if the combat ranges from ridiculously hard to insanely easy, it remains reasonably fun throughout. And the atmosphere is amazing.
I'll admit, I love both Dragon Age games as well. Dragon Age 2 was a good game that had some serious, serious problems. The Witcher 2 is similar in this respect, in my opinion. It has a lot of brilliant points, and some terrible ones. However, I would also say that the Witcher 2's main issues could probably be patched out with a bunch of balance tweaks and making sure that crafting items don't have weight or something to fix inventory space problems.
tetron said:
That's not to say the game isn't amazing, and to me it's only a lock-on system and some combat balancing away from being perfect. Contrary to what this reviewer says, everyone seems to be more badass than Geralt. They just don't have spells and potions.
The lock on is left Alt. It's pretty buggy, but hopefully that helps. I believe they do tell you that in-game, but it's another one of the tutorial messages that pops up in the middle of a fight. It's surprisingly hard to read and swordfight at the same time.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
rsvp42 said:
Xzi said:
The game has its flaws, but this review picked out few of the actual ones. There was a lot more nit-picking about difficulty and complexity than anything else, and these are not inherently bad things. When you give a game like DA2, in which you can literally auto-attack your way through every encounter on normal, a perfect score, it's pretty obvious what your preferred level of sophistication in games is.
Then don't play DA2 on normal. There are two levels above that and it's adjustable at any time.
I played it on hard and never had to use anything but a couple of AoE attacks per encounter. Regardless of the difficulty setting, DA2 was not built to be game of strategy, nor one that requires much thought at all. It's an action game at its heart, and doesn't live up to DA:O in regards to smart game design. That being the case, obviously it doesn't live up to the Witcher 2, either.
 

bob1052

New member
Oct 12, 2010
774
0
0
JerrytheBullfrog said:
Someone pointed out that it would be out of character for this badass Warmaster to have to go through a "and here's how you block" tutorial, so I was thinking - wouldn't it be cool if you started the game as some sort of neophyte recruit who was being GIVEN a lesson by *the* Geralt himself? That'd preserve Geralt as a wise experienced warrior while still introduce newbies to the game.

And then maybe the recruit gets killed and Geralt takes over, providing the player with an immediate emotional attachment to the game. I think it would have been a cool idea.
Based off the ending of the first, and Geralt's current situation in the second, that really isn't possible.

He helped King Foltest many, many times. Saving his daughter from the curse of the Striga in the intro cinematic to the first game, helping him many times throughout the first game, and at the start of the second Geralt is essentially Foltest's personal body guard. Geralt even says that Foltest thinks him his "good luck charm".

He doesn't really have any time to be training a recruit
 

NLS

Norwegian Llama Stylist
Jan 7, 2010
1,594
0
0
Haven't tried the game and not sure if I'll ever have the time and money to get my hands on it, but DAMN those combat animations looked nice!
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
JerrytheBullfrog said:
Someone pointed out that it would be out of character for this badass Warmaster to have to go through a "and here's how you block" tutorial, so I was thinking - wouldn't it be cool if you started the game as some sort of neophyte recruit who was being GIVEN a lesson by *the* Geralt himself? That'd preserve Geralt as a wise experienced warrior while still introduce newbies to the game.

And then maybe the recruit gets killed and Geralt takes over, providing the player with an immediate emotional attachment to the game. I think it would have been a cool idea.
That's why I figure it should be optional if it were just a regular tutorial. And if not that, then just scale the fight difficulty down in the beginning. It's just getting easier so far and I know it's simply because I didn't know how to fight in the beginning. To me, the idea that some badass Witcher is getting killed over and can barely handle a few hits is worse than the prospect of a tutorial. I just wanted to get up to speed without having to see that damn 'load from last save' screen so many times.
 

DannibalG36

New member
Mar 29, 2010
347
0
0
Let me say this: the Witcher 2 was this year's juicy bone thrown to hardcore RPG enthusiasts. Some Escapists might call me an elitist, but I am glad that this game does not pull any punches with difficulty.

Perhaps I should also note that the portion of the game after the prologue isn't easier than the prologue itself - it just seems that way because the prologue really, really unforgiving. The difficulty curve isn't fucked - it just sets the bar really high to begin with.

Also, I now think that Tito is a wuss.
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
bob1052 said:
I did play them in that order, but there's no reason to be able to do them out of order except for the token sense of choice it gives, which is ultimately meaningless. Why did we need choice there? But since I was never told what the signs did or what their significance was in a fight and I knew they shared vigor with blocking, I never did the solo fights properly. The very first solo fight against the guys at the ballista was really tough because I was just using Igni and Aard. It was possible to get attacked by way more guys than I knew how to handle at once (and no those first fights at the wall teach you nothing but how to right and left click). Now I feel stupid for not using other signs, but I had to learn all that through sheer attrition. It wasn't until I was being killed repeatedly by Scoia'tel during that one quest outside Flotsam that I finally learned how to handle 3-4 attackers at once.

It's not a game-ruiner in the slightest, but it could have been balanced a lot better. The problem was not the difficulty level, it was that I didn't know what to do.

Here's something DA2 did really well, actually. The idea of giving a short tutorial in the beginning and making it part of Varric's exaggerated storytelling was a really clever way to handle introducing the combat.
 

Akihiko

Raincoat Killer
Aug 21, 2008
952
0
0
Oh the joys of the wars over witcher 2's difficulty. Never gets tiring.

My problem with the game wasn't the lack of tutorial really, as Demon's Souls also threw you in without much to go on. I think what annoyed me most was, unlike Demon's Souls(Which I really enjoyed the combat for, by the way, so it isn't about not liking difficulty), roll and guard feel so unresponsive at the start of the game. Admittedly they do improve with talents, but it wasn't necessary to nerf roll and guard so much for the beginning so that talents could improve it. Demon's Souls managed to be genuinly challenging with a working roll and guard.

Other than that I'm genuinly enjoying the game so far. Don't mind the UI, other than the fact it's awfully slow, though todays patch did improve it slightly. That said todays patch also broke the analog sticks slightly, now they can't be used in menu's. Just hope thats fixed in the next patch. The story and characters are interesting, the locations are amazing, and overall I'm loving it, despite the minor annoyance at the start of the game.
 

Omnific One

New member
Apr 3, 2010
935
0
0
Ah the Escapist... Bioware fanboys to the end... even the editors.

Dragon Age II- Escapist: 100% Metacritic: 79%
Witcher 2- Escapist: 70% Metacritic: 89%

BW gets a +21% over Meta, CPR gets a -21%.

Jesus Christ, you guys really need to get those freaking nostalgia glasses off.

As Skyrim isn't made by BW, I'm calling the Escapist giving it between a 60 and 80%.

The Rasmussen of RPG reviews. Congrats on the title.
 

Moffman

New member
May 21, 2009
113
0
0
Review seems even handed to me. I got the Witcher I and wasn't a fan, not because it was hard (I in fact found it very easy) but was just boring. I'm well aware this game is probably different but if the first game in a series doesn't grab me, I'm done :) I think that's fair.
 

JohnnyDelRay

New member
Jul 29, 2010
1,323
0
0
bob1052 said:
JerrytheBullfrog said:
Someone pointed out that it would be out of character for this badass Warmaster to have to go through a "and here's how you block" tutorial, so I was thinking - wouldn't it be cool if you started the game as some sort of neophyte recruit who was being GIVEN a lesson by *the* Geralt himself? That'd preserve Geralt as a wise experienced warrior while still introduce newbies to the game.

And then maybe the recruit gets killed and Geralt takes over, providing the player with an immediate emotional attachment to the game. I think it would have been a cool idea.
Based off the ending of the first, and Geralt's current situation in the second, that really isn't possible.

He helped King Foltest many, many times. Saving his daughter from the curse of the Striga in the intro cinematic to the first game, helping him many times throughout the first game, and at the start of the second Geralt is essentially Foltest's personal body guard. Geralt even says that Foltest thinks him his "good luck charm".

He doesn't really have any time to be training a recruit
Well, in regards to training a recruit, a large part of the 2nd English book written by Andrzej is about Geralt training a protege...however I think this precedes the Witcher saga and the game. But that would be cool if it could be used as a tutorial.
 

Mangue Surfer

New member
May 29, 2010
364
0
0
Maybe we guys that like challenging are getting too rough. But try understanding how frustating this day and age are for us.
 

ElectroJosh

New member
Aug 27, 2009
372
0
0
I love the game and, to be honest, thought that the complaint about the steep learning curve were exagerrated. This review changed my mind on the issue a bit. After reading this I realise that I happened to play the prologue in the "correct" sequence - so the mechanics were explained as I needed to know them. I now realise that I was lucky to have done it this way as the game allows you to play them in whatever order you choose (which would be quite hard).

Fair point but I still love it. I thinks its fantastic but could not unequivocally recommend it to everybody and anybody.
 

Waaghpowa

Needs more Dakka
Apr 13, 2010
3,073
0
0
Omnific One said:
Ah the Escapist... Bioware fanboys to the end... even the editors.

Dragon Age II- Escapist: 100% Metacritic: 79%
Witcher 2- Escapist: 70% Metacritic: 89%

Jesus Christ, you guys really need to get those freaking nostalgia glasses off.

As Skyrim isn't made by BW, I'm calling the Escapist giving it between a 60 and 80%.

The Rasmussen of RPG reviews. Congrats on the title.
Before anyone goes crazy about the use of metacritic in this comment, that score is actually based on critic reviews, not user. Even IGN, one of the most Xbox fanboy heavy sites I've seen, gave it a 9. Just sayin.
 

Chase Yojimbo

The Samurai Sage
Sep 1, 2009
782
0
0
Agreed Greg. Story, Plot, and Characters were fantastically done, but gameplay and anything involving such sucked the fun of the story out. I haven't even finished it yet because I just got so damn bored of it.
 

JohnnyDelRay

New member
Jul 29, 2010
1,323
0
0
I'm a BIG fan of the game...and even bought both editions of the first game and played it in different languages.

But I'm also one of the guys who went and jumped in the Dragon part of the prologue first, and yeah it was frustrating as hell. Yes, I know, duh, FIRE, but even when I skipped through the gap unscathed suddenly he was on fire for no reason, and yeah I did it many times again and again. And the whole damn place was on fire, I couldn't tell whether I was flaming because the dragon breathed on me or because somethings were falling apart and I was too slow.

The rest of the fighting so far seems ok, a little clunky, but maybe just because I don't have the timing down so well yet. Because there are moments of pure sword ballet if you get it just right, leaping from one enemy to the next when they are open. So I'm looking forward to some of the fluidity coming back upon levelling up, which is what many say is what happens later.

The other issue I had with it was inventory, but only because there wasn't a box storage system. I wouldn't care actually, I'm not one for lugging and hoarding stuff anyways, but it's a little difficult to tell what will be crucial later and what won't be, so I just kinda sell "common" stuff and hold onto the "rare".
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
Really?!?! The same reviewer who gave Auto-attack Age 2 a 5/5 gave The Witcher 2 only 3.5 stars? Really?! Wow. I mean wow. Just wow. Greg what were you smoking when you wrote these reviews? Because I want some of that.
 

Throwitawaynow

New member
Aug 29, 2010
759
0
0
Omnific One said:
Ah the Escapist... Bioware fanboys to the end... even the editors.

Dragon Age II- Escapist: 100% Metacritic: 79%
Witcher 2- Escapist: 70% Metacritic: 89%

Jesus Christ, you guys really need to get those freaking nostalgia glasses off.

As Skyrim isn't made by BW, I'm calling the Escapist giving it between a 60 and 80%.

The Rasmussen of RPG reviews. Congrats on the title.
Metacritic can be trusted. Also witcher 2 has less than 1/2 the reviews that dragon age 2 does. I disagree with Tito too, the game is perfect and just isn't for the casuals. PC is the bestest of all the consoles EVAR! It has no bugs, it doesn't re-use anything, and the inventory is easy to manage if you're not a noob. That light attack, heavy attack sword system is too deep for people.

WaaghPowa said:
Before anyone goes crazy about the use of metacritic in this comment, that score is actually based on critic reviews, not user. Even IGN, one of the most Xbox fanboy heavy sites I've seen, gave it a 9. Just sayin.
IGN isn't xbox fanboy heavy, it's fanboy heavy. Anything with a lot of fanboys gets pandered too. Look at the comments so far.

I summed up what I had problems with in an earlier post.

Rationalization said:
The game has some serious issues, I'm glad that you think it's a perfect game that can't be critisized. Game killing bugs, I'm experiencing one now. All of my controls are locked up and after reloading my character it is stuck. Once you're in a town you can't leave until the next part of the story happens. It's very close to what DA2 did, you know how everyone loved that. Despite having an inventory maximum, there is no sorting. I keep going over the weight limit but I can't sort by weight to see what is dragging me down. There are junk items, but no junk folder. You have to search through each item individually to find it. The camera sucks, if a loot bag and a torch are next to it, one of them is going to be overriden. The auto-save system doesn't always save, and your saves sometimes overide each other making a huge messs and not knowing where you want to load from. The journal is extremely lacking, and often won't tell you what you need to know to play the game.

The sword combat consists of light attack, and heavy attack, with no discernable combos. You can only cast 2 signs at a time(spells) and it takes a while before you can cast another. Trying to throw things is annoying and will sometimes just not work. The game also won't tell you when you're out of ammo. Input lag will kill you, and input lag does happen. There is only 2 systems of sound, music and everything else. Want to turn down the extremely loud wind that is drowning out the dialogue? Good luck because it's on the same level as the dialogue. Some of these things could be adjusted by going through the files of the game, but arn't fixable easily.


Edit: @bob1052 Pointed out that I had missed the flat boosts, and was going in to regeneration.
 

sta697

New member
Mar 31, 2011
42
0
0
after giving da2 5 stars with the one location boring characters and no story how can you give this 3.this just doesnt add up.
 

Soviet Heavy

New member
Jan 22, 2010
12,218
0
0
I'm glad that there is a game out there that says "fuck you figure it out for yourself", instead of the hand holding that has become so commonplace. There is a reason Dwarf Fortress is so appealing, some people love the challenge of discovering things on their own.

I don't see that as shoddy design, just an old school choice.
 

Furin

New member
May 20, 2011
3
0
0
What puzzles me is that in the whole (video) review is not a single word about the choice system in Witcher2, which does not give you an illusion of choice but rather manifests many decisions of the player in the real game, and not just in different dialogue options but rather in game content, either immidiatly or later on. I would call it a "horizontal" game design, which does indeed shorten the lenght of the individual playthrough, thinking of the player manouvering through the game from bottom to top, but on the opposite side does provide replay value. The developer is taking a risk here, as people will maybe say the game is too short. I would have liked to see that aspect being discussed.

I think the other points depend on personal taste. Do you like the game to hand you everything on a plate or do you like to explore and learn from failure. Do you like apples or oranges. Do you like to have convenience food in a restaurant or do you prefer to cook for yourself. Both is good and whatever floats your boat is great (as long as noone forces the other to eat oranges when they want apples).

Edit: And since the game genre has become an industry with profit in mind, catering to the majority for maximum revenue, I had my fair share of oranges tbh.
 

MatsVS

Tea & Grief
Nov 9, 2009
423
0
0
Reading this review was like reading a review of a Bergman or Tarkovsky film, where the reviewer was lamenting that the work of art was not more like another standard superhero film. Sad indeed.

Besides, reading the manual was not even necessary to adjust to the fantastic combat system. Some quick trial and error, and voilà. As for the "poorly explained side quests", you ought try reading the in-game journal with the relevant monster information. It is spelled out which bomb you need. Honestly...

The developer said in an interview that they had been inspired by Demon's Souls, and it shows. This is a work of art of nearly the same lofty heights, and that's not something I say lightly. Geralt is exactly as responsive as he is supposed to be, which makes him feel like a real person rather than a floating, fire-spewing camera with swooshing swords attached to him. You need to pay careful attention to your position, vigour, an health, making combat an exciting exercise in tactics and skill.

There is a few mechanical shortcomings, granted, such as the doors in the game, but that is nit-picking, really. Hopefully, no one has been dissuaded from purchasing this game because of this strange review. And The LotR pun was painful, aye...

EDIT: As for the potions, it seems to me that taking the time to unscrew an chug a potion during the middle of a frantic sword fight. A holdover from the meditation system? Please... If anything, it seems much more in line with the source material, which focused a lot on the importance of proper metabolism in regards to potions.
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
Although I support your desire to quell egregious fanboyism, I feel like I should point out a couple things:

Rationalization said:
You can only cast 2 signs at a time(spells) and it takes a while before you can cast another.
If you're referring to the vigor bar, it only has two notches in the beginning, hence two casts. You get a third soon after (and I assume even more later), as well as abilities that refill it faster both in and out of combat.

Rationalization said:
Want to turn down the extremely loud wind that is drowning out the dialogue? Good luck because it's on the same level as the dialogue.
So far, I've only seen this happen once. It made me leave on subtitles because I have no way of knowing when it will happen again, but I wouldn't blow that issue out of proportion.
 

bob1052

New member
Oct 12, 2010
774
0
0
MatsVS said:
There is a few mechanical shortcomings, granted, such as the doors in the game, but that is nit-picking, really. Hopefully, no one has been dissuaded from purchasing this game because of this strange review.
The doors are actually something I was really impressed by.

It is tough to notice but right after going through a door (it also happens in certain hallways and cave entrances that are shrouded by vines in the forest surrounding Flotsam) but for the first split second all textures are incredibly low resolution.

You probably notice that the game is graphically intense on your system. That door that you need to awkwardly, and they do get pretty awkward, actually blocks your view, allowing them to downgrade all the textures and not lock your frames at 15 or force you to drop your settings any lower.

You might have also noticed how you can sometimes get a quarter second loading screen when going through a door or one of these cave entrances, thats the game prepping the area ahead, it normally can keep up with you changing in real time but sometimes it needs to load for a moment. If they didn't use those doors it would be much less pretty and much less fluid when travelling from one side of a region to another.
 

Zhukov

The Laughing Arsehole
Dec 29, 2009
13,768
0
0
*sigh*

This review sure has the fanatics crawling out of the woodwork like rats.

Anyway, I'm not finding the game all that difficult. Except for the dragon part. Not gonna lie, that was utter balls.
 

Aethren

New member
Jun 6, 2009
1,063
0
0
I'm loving this game, it's refreshing to have a challenge.

That said, I am absolutely loathing those damn Endrega Queens. I killed the farther one first, and now I'm trying to kill the one next to town but I can't seem to manage it.
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
sta697 said:
after giving da2 5 stars with the one location boring characters and no story how can you give this 3.this just doesnt add up.
In DA2's defense, the characters were the highlight. Really unique and had some great banter. It also had many locations, they were simply reused too many times, which is the main issue with the game. Well, that and the exploding bodies. And it had a story, it was just episodic instead of being one long epic.
 

MatsVS

Tea & Grief
Nov 9, 2009
423
0
0
bob1052 said:
The doors are actually something I was really impressed by.

It is tough to notice but right after going through a door (it also happens in certain hallways and cave entrances that are shrouded by vines in the forest surrounding Flotsam) but for the first split second all textures are incredibly low resolution.

You probably notice that the game is graphically intense on your system. That door that you need to awkwardly, and they do get pretty awkward, actually blocks your view, allowing them to downgrade all the textures and not lock your frames at 15 or force you to drop your settings any lower.

You might have also noticed how you can sometimes get a quarter second loading screen when going through a door or one of these cave entrances, thats the game prepping the area ahead, it normally can keep up with you changing in real time but sometimes it needs to load for a moment. If they didn't use those doors it would be much less pretty and much less fluid when travelling from one side of a region to another.
Aye, all you say is true, but I was rather thinking about how only one person could pass through a door each time it was opened. It made for an awkward fight or two. But yes, concessions in game design such as these are to be expected on graphic-heavy releases, so I don't count it a genuine flaw.
 

Bors Mistral

New member
Mar 27, 2009
61
0
0
Frankly, I'm one of the people on the "The same reviewer who gave DA2 a 5/5, gave The Witcher 2 a mark of 3.5?!?" opinion, but I'll skip that.

All I need to say is, that for the last few days I've been enjoying the game immensely. Awesome setting and visuals aside, I'm really glad the game offers some challenge. It's one of the few games doing that lately, a very unfortunate tendency.
 

kasperbbs

New member
Dec 27, 2009
1,855
0
0
sta697 said:
after giving da2 5 stars with the one location boring characters and no story how can you give this 3.this just doesnt add up.
It's a matter of taste i guess. I never took his reviews seriously, because most of the time i had different opinions, but this one is just bad.
 

Avatar Roku

New member
Jul 9, 2008
6,169
0
0
Omnific One said:
Ah the Escapist... Bioware fanboys to the end... even the editors.

Dragon Age II- Escapist: 100% Metacritic: 79%
Witcher 2- Escapist: 70% Metacritic: 89%

BW gets a +21% over Meta, CPR gets a -21%.

Jesus Christ, you guys really need to get those freaking nostalgia glasses off.

As Skyrim isn't made by BW, I'm calling the Escapist giving it between a 60 and 80%.

The Rasmussen of RPG reviews. Congrats on the title.
I just want to point out, comparing a 5-star system to a percentage system is kind of disingenuous. This system was created so that 3 stars would be average, whereas 60% on Metacritic is seen as god awful. Adam Sessler from Xplay (which uses the same 5-star system) has actually fought to have his reviews removed from Metacritic for this reason.

Not to say that you're wrong, just be careful with those cross-review-system comparisons. It's deceptive.

OT: I haven't played W2 yet for want of money, but it really, really intrigues me. Can't wait to give it a shot.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
After the amount of hate Sterling got for his review of the Witcher I'm surprised it didn't fair much better here. The amount of people calling him a troll for only giving it 6 out of 10 made me think the game was the second coming of christ considering how vehemently people jumped to it's defense. Thanks to Greg and everyone who can't understand that this is just his opinion of the game for reassuring me once again that the internet is just full of complaining dipshits.

If it does end up on xbox I'll probably get it then. Then again I'm one of those people who actually realises a 6 or a 7 isn't actually a bad score. Just not great.

Another thing people seem to miss that metacritic is an average. Meaning that plenty of reviewers would have given it less than the average.

Here I know he pisses you off and now he can piss you off and tell you why you're wrong for attacking reviewers for having a fucking opinion.

 

Throwitawaynow

New member
Aug 29, 2010
759
0
0
rsvp42 said:
If you're referring to the vigor bar, it's only has two notches in the beginning, hence two casts. You get a third soon after (and I assume even more later), as well as abilities that refill it faster both in and out of combat.

So far, I've only seen this happen once. It made me leave on subtitles because I have no way of knowing when it will happen again, but I wouldn't blow that issue out of proportion.
I've slotted vigor for armor, and put points in vigor for character, I've worked my way to the last point in signs. Pretty sure I've also mutated to get more in signs, but that may have been dmg or range. I've done all I could to increase vigor, but still only 2 bars lol.
Edit: @bob1052 Pointed out that I had missed the flat boosts, and was going in to regeneration.

The wind happens everytime I'm outside in part 2 with dialogue. Especially when talking to the Palpatine looking mage. I always play with subtitles because I like to run my own music in the background, I usually just want dialogue sound to stay on. It also happened in flotsam I think with the background chatter. It's as loud as the person talking for some reason. I have to turn off my own music, max out regular sound and just deal with the ridiculous wind. I havn't gotten past the part after you cross through the fog, becuase the combat freezing glitch ruined my save. I'll play again but I have to commit to losing close to 2 hours of play time.
 

Waaghpowa

Needs more Dakka
Apr 13, 2010
3,073
0
0
Rationalization said:
I shouldn't have specified what kind of fanboy, but that was my first thought considering some of the ignorant comments coming from their users.

By no means am I suggesting that the W2 is perfect, far from it. The issue that some people are apparently having is DA2 was reviewed as being a perfect game, while the W2 is heavily flawed and not as good by the same person who said:
[DA2 is] A pinnacle of role-playing games with well-designed mechanics and excellent story-telling, Dragon Age II is what videogames are meant to be.
I personally thought DA2 was far from being perfect, minus combat improvements it wasn't any better than the original. While W2, though I enjoyed it, wasn't perfect either though a significant improvement on the original.

I honestly don't care what anyone else thinks. I've already bought my copy, played it, and loved it. People need to just let it go, but I still raised an eye brow upon reading all of this.

I also realize that reviews are all subjective, but it may have been better to have a different person do the review to avoid situations such as this.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
Zhukov said:
*sigh*

This review sure has the fanatics crawling out of the woodwork like rats.

Anyway, I'm not finding the game all that difficult. Except for the dragon part. Not gonna lie, that was utter balls.
Well, we knew it would be all downhill after giving Dragon Age 2 a perfect score. Now everybody's favorite game is going to be compared to that. "You gave DA2 a 5 but gave THIS a 3?" But in this instance, where we're comparing apples to apples, RPG to RPG, it really makes the least amount of sense. I guess targeting an RPG playing audience with an RPG is what drops your score down 1.5 points these days. Targeting Devil May Cry/CoD players with your RPGs is what's cool these days.
 

Throwitawaynow

New member
Aug 29, 2010
759
0
0
WaaghPowa said:
By no means am I suggesting that the W2 is perfect, far from it.
Oops, that perfect quote was directed at someone else. Specificly the guy who made the jim sterling witcher 2 rant thread. Not towards you, my last quote just came after yours.
 

bob1052

New member
Oct 12, 2010
774
0
0
Rationalization said:
I've slotted vigor for armor, and put points in vigor for character, I've worked my way to the last point in signs. Pretty sure I've also mutated to get more in signs, but that may have been dmg or range. I've done all I could to increase vigor, but still only 2 bars lol.
You might've missed the talent that gives you a straight boost to vigor capacity.
 

Bretty

New member
Jul 15, 2008
864
0
0
This game was the most immersive RPG I have played for a LONG time. This beats the pants off of Dragon Age 2, or as I like to call it, Ride Along Dragon 2.

I had ALOT of difficulty to begin with. The combat system is not easy to get used to and the initial tooltips and ability prompts are so easily missed I did in fact miss more than half of them, who knew I could hit space bar?

This is the first RPG where the pacing of the story and the events really gave me an idea that I didnt have all the time in the world to get things done. I was wholly immersed in the story and whether to go for love or duty.

CDProject have beaten Bioware IMO. They have created the ground works for some fantastic future itterations. I loved the crafting, gambling and fighting systems. The fact that there were people around me but I had no control over was a refreshing change.

Also the choices that you need to make in this game are HARD!

Overall a 9/10 due to the first peice of the game and sometimes rediculous quests. I should also mention I loved Dragon Age 1, but I actually think this one had a much faster pace and was more immersive.
 

Throwitawaynow

New member
Aug 29, 2010
759
0
0
bob1052 said:
Rationalization said:
I've slotted vigor for armor, and put points in vigor for character, I've worked my way to the last point in signs. Pretty sure I've also mutated to get more in signs, but that may have been dmg or range. I've done all I could to increase vigor, but still only 2 bars lol.
You might've missed the talent that gives you a straight boost to vigor capacity.
Well, don't I look like an idiot? 1 vigor = 1 bar. For some reason all my clothing and character specializations were in regeneration instead of a flat boost to the max. I'll edit my original stuff to reflect this. I think it's a great game, I just think this foamed mouth defense that some people are giving is really silly.
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
Rationalization said:
I've slotted vigor for armor, and put points in vigor for character, I've worked my way to the last point in signs. Pretty sure I've also mutated to get more in signs, but that may have been dmg or range. I've done all I could to increase vigor, but still only 2 bars lol.
That's really odd, since I know I have 3. I'll check again later to make sure. Another glitch maybe? (edit: never mind, other dude figured it out)

Rationalization said:
The wind happens everytime I'm outside in part 2 with dialogue. Especially when talking to the Palpatine looking mage. I always play with subtitles because I like to run my own music in the background, I usually just want dialogue sound to stay on. It also happened in flotsam I think with the background chatter. It's as loud as the person talking for some reason. I have to turn off my own music, max out regular sound and just deal with the ridiculous wind. I havn't gotten past the part after you cross through the fog, becuase the combat freezing glitch ruined my save. I'll play again but I have to commit to losing close to 2 hours of play time.
Oh snap, didn't realize it got to that point later on. I'm still meandering about Flotsam after dealing with the Kayran and some other stuff after that. I only have a couple hours each night to play. As an aside, you might want to listen to some of the ambient noise every once in a while. They did a great job with it.
 

Alma Mare

New member
Nov 14, 2010
263
0
0
Most of the flaws he's pointing out are accurate, but no way in hell they are worth a clean 30% chop in the score, not in my book. This looked like Yahtzee grasping for straws, without the humour part.
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
beastrn said:
Hey reviewer, do you review books? If someone asked you to review a novel from one of the most respected writers, would you say yes? No, no you wouldn't. You wouldn't because you know that your grasp of literature, your experience with books and your understanding of difficult written concepts is weak.

It's the same here. Why are you even reviewing video games? Who are you? You're obvious terrible at them. You obviously don't understand how to press a button a read a journal. You're just a baby raised on golden trails and compasses.

Why are you reviewing games if you're terrible at them?
Why do you care so much what someone else thinks of this game? Yes, it's good, but he has legitimate concerns. Just because they didn't bother you when playing doesn't mean you need to attack his integrity as a reviewer.
 

sta697

New member
Mar 31, 2011
42
0
0
rsvp42 said:
sta697 said:
after giving da2 5 stars with the one location boring characters and no story how can you give this 3.this just doesnt add up.
In DA2's defense, the characters were the highlight. Really unique and had some great banter. It also had many locations, they were simply reused too many times, which is the main issue with the game. Well, that and the exploding bodies. And it had a story, it was just episodic instead of being one long epic.
no the story of da2 is in the sequel also intresting banter isnt intresting characters also the 10 locations in a 40 hour long campaing isnt many
 

Throwitawaynow

New member
Aug 29, 2010
759
0
0
rsvp42 said:
That's really odd, since I know I have 3. I'll check again later to make sure. Another glitch maybe?

Oh snap, didn't realize it got to that point later on. I'm still meandering about Flotsam after dealing with the Kayran and some other stuff after that. I only have a couple hours each night to play. As an aside, you might want to listen to some of the ambient noise every once in a while. They did a great job with it.
Yeah, @bob1052 Pointed out that I had missed the flat boosts, and was going in to regeneration.

After you leave flotsam, it gets REALLY windy lol. I listened to the ambience for a while but hearing the same drunk song 100+ times while trying to find something for the troll DLC is extremely annoying. Also, after you leave Flotsam about 3 guys call out another guys name for hours. And it's really loud, they don't stop till you find him. And I can't not listen to it = P, the sound adjustment is just music/everything else. They really should have added an ambience adjustment.

Edit: Playing again, the last loadable save was 1 1/2 hours from the glitched save, oh well. I like the game, just think some people are being silly here.
 

Soviet Heavy

New member
Jan 22, 2010
12,218
0
0
beastrn said:
Hey reviewer, do you review books? If someone asked you to review a novel from one of the most respected writers, would you say yes? No, no you wouldn't. You wouldn't because you know that your grasp of literature, your experience with books and your understanding of difficult written concepts is weak.

It's the same here. Why are you even reviewing video games? Who are you? You're obvious terrible at them. You obviously don't understand how to press a button a read a journal. You're just a baby raised on golden trails and compasses.

Why are you reviewing games if you're terrible at them?
And here lies the problem. I may not agree with Tito's score here or for Dragon Age 2, but a smart person would not use them as a basis to launch personal attacks for having a different opinion.

So he doesn't like the game as much, get over it. Greg Tito reviews games because he is a game reviewer. I can also be a game reviewer, you want to know why? Because it means giving your opinion on a game. You have no right to throw insults around because he disagrees with you. I don't see anywhere in the review where he attacked you personally, or anyone who enjoys The Witcher 2 for that matter.

Get over it, and good luck hanging around the boards with this kind of attitude.
 

maddhatter190

New member
Mar 26, 2009
8
0
0
clearly , they got the wrong dude to review the game. I can understand the first part of the game being frustrating. but even on hard i never died on anything other than the quick time sequences. In fact ,dare i say this review is a text book example of how the current age of dumbed down console ports ( in which the players hand is held so much that the damn games might as well play them selves) has ruined a generation of gamers.

the witcher series are titles from an indi developer. its not gona be your callofdragonage2 clone.


you'd think with all the fable games we have had that the dodge parry attack formula would be familiar by now. Rather the only thing that i had trouble with was finding which buttons do the blocking parrying etc. ( which 30 seconds of button pressing later solved that conundrum).

its very sad that the current gaming community is so damn inpatient that they would refuse to do the three or four minutes of reading needed to get the control scheme down.

frankly i am glad they didn't do a "hold your hand day care tutorial" as generally most tutorials are done in such a way as the very act of doing them feels hollow and unnatural (" if anyone has played the dawn of war 2 series you will know how much damage a poorly done tutorial can murder immersion"

its about time we got something that isnt afraid to kick you while you are down.

i am not saying the reviewer was bad or anything, but what i am saying is that he was not the best choice to review this game
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
Rationalization said:
After you leave flotsam, it gets REALLY windy lol. I listened to the ambience for a while but hearing the same drunk song 100+ times while trying to find something for the troll DLC is extremely annoying. Also, after you leave Flotsam about 3 guys call out another guys name for hours. And it's really loud, they don't stop till you find him. And I can't not listen to it = P, the sound adjustment is just music/everything else. They really should have added an ambience adjustment.
True. I misinterpreted what you meant when you said you play your own music while playing.
 

bob1052

New member
Oct 12, 2010
774
0
0
Rationalization said:
rsvp42 said:
That's really odd, since I know I have 3. I'll check again later to make sure. Another glitch maybe?

Oh snap, didn't realize it got to that point later on. I'm still meandering about Flotsam after dealing with the Kayran and some other stuff after that. I only have a couple hours each night to play. As an aside, you might want to listen to some of the ambient noise every once in a while. They did a great job with it.
Yeah, @bob1052 Pointed out that I had missed the flat boosts, and was going in to regeneration.

After you leave flotsam, it gets REALLY windy lol. I listened to the ambience for a while but hearing the same drunk song 100+ times while trying to find something for the troll DLC is extremely annoying. Also, after you leave Flotsam about 3 guys call out another guys name for hours. And it's really loud, they don't stop till you find him. And I can't not listen to it = P, the sound adjustment is just music/everything else. They really should have added an ambience adjustment.
Just out of curiousity, which choice did you make at the end of Chapter 1?

I didn't experience the wind and I don't recall anyone shouting for another. I sided with Iorveth.
 

IamGamer41

New member
Mar 19, 2010
245
0
0
Felix Arturo Macias Ibarra said:
The games looks amazing, but its true I got burned by that frigging dragon at the beginning and died like 13 times because I didn't knew wth to do and the "tutorial" was just a few in game windows that appeared for like 2 seconds before banishing making me check my journal to read what they were trying to tell me. Its like they never play tested the damn thing.

You mean you didnt see the flashing 'push the right mouse button to duck' Key?

I died there 3 times myself but its not hard to left click run right click and run some more.
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
maddhatter190 said:
I was playing on Normal and had a lot of trouble at first. This was because I'm used to games at least explaining their combat system. It doesn't have to be mandatory. I would have loved an optional tutorial for players like myself who didn't play the first one.
 

Throwitawaynow

New member
Aug 29, 2010
759
0
0
bob1052 said:
Just out of curiousity, which choice did you make at the end of Chapter 1?

I didn't experience the wind and I don't recall anyone shouting for another. I sided with Iorveth.
I sided with:
The damaged humans, and the ass hole spy = P. I thought I could do more help while working within the system. A messenger guy shows up before you leave saying that he's a jerk, but he's patriotic. Plus, my game got messed up and I saw that Iorveth immediately says he won't help you find triss after you defeat letho, or something to that affect. I'm trying to break the curse while working with the king. I don't think Iorveth is doing that, he was on the other side of the place where the wind is.
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
IamGamer41 said:
Felix Arturo Macias Ibarra said:
The games looks amazing, but its true I got burned by that frigging dragon at the beginning and died like 13 times because I didn't knew wth to do and the "tutorial" was just a few in game windows that appeared for like 2 seconds before banishing making me check my journal to read what they were trying to tell me. Its like they never play tested the damn thing.

You mean you didnt see the flashing 'push the right mouse button to duck' Key?

I died there 3 times myself but its not hard to left click run right click and run some more.
He might have been referring to the part where it's burning the roof above you and you have to fight off all the soldiers as you run to avoid getting burned to death. That was a tough part.
 

IamGamer41

New member
Mar 19, 2010
245
0
0
Soviet Heavy said:
beastrn said:
Hey reviewer, do you review books? If someone asked you to review a novel from one of the most respected writers, would you say yes? No, no you wouldn't. You wouldn't because you know that your grasp of literature, your experience with books and your understanding of difficult written concepts is weak.

It's the same here. Why are you even reviewing video games? Who are you? You're obvious terrible at them. You obviously don't understand how to press a button a read a journal. You're just a baby raised on golden trails and compasses.

Why are you reviewing games if you're terrible at them?
And here lies the problem. I may not agree with Tito's score here or for Dragon Age 2, but a smart person would not use them as a basis to launch personal attacks for having a different opinion.

So he doesn't like the game as much, get over it. Greg Tito reviews games because he is a game reviewer. I can also be a game reviewer, you want to know why? Because it means giving your opinion on a game. You have no right to throw insults around because he disagrees with you. I don't see anywhere in the review where he attacked you personally, or anyone who enjoys The Witcher 2 for that matter.

Get over it, and good luck hanging around the boards with this kind of attitude.

If all a review is is someone's opinion of a game then Little Big Planet and Heavy Rain, Halo and Starcraft are 1 out of 10.True they some people get hot headed when they see a game they know themselfs as being good get a low score.So if this said reviewer did have trouble with the game he could very well give it a shit score cause of that.I mean wouldn't you cry foul if someone give Batman Arkam Asylum a 2 out of 5?
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
Canadish said:
Dragon Age 2 - 5 Stars
The Witcher 2 - 3 1/2 Stars?

Yeah okay, cool story bro.

Mr. Tito is obviously a VERY different kind of gamer then myself.
I find it hilarious when people on this site keep preaching about the meaning of opinions and how they can be subjective, and yet they complain about "unfair" reviews of their favorite games.
 

Shamanic Rhythm

New member
Dec 6, 2009
1,653
0
0
As soon as I saw this review was by Greg Tito I thought, "Uh oh, incoming shitstorm of people berating him for giving Dragon Age 2 five stars".

I may not think 5 stars is a fair assessment of DA2, but the kind of elitism used to defend The Witcher 2 against reviews that are actually quite positive (3.5 on a 5 point scale is not a bad game, for christ's sake) is just astonishing. "This game was clearly made for hardcore masochists like myself and that makes it perfect."

Barbara Cartland novels may be designed for bored housewives, but if you're going to use that argument to call them perfect I'm going to have to laugh myself to death.
 

IamGamer41

New member
Mar 19, 2010
245
0
0
rsvp42 said:
maddhatter190 said:
I was playing on Normal and had a lot of trouble at first. This was because I'm used to games at least explaining their combat system. It doesn't have to be mandatory. I would have loved an optional tutorial for players like myself who didn't play the first one.

The combat is totally different in wither 1.Its basically just chain clicking on a target wile switching stances.The Witcher 2s combat was shown off many times in trailers.There is also the manual for the game.Or do people even read those anymore.Even the digital version got one just have to download it.
 

awesome_ninja

New member
Mar 2, 2011
39
0
0
sravankb said:
Canadish said:
Dragon Age 2 - 5 Stars
The Witcher 2 - 3 1/2 Stars?

Yeah okay, cool story bro.

Mr. Tito is obviously a VERY different kind of gamer then myself.
I find it hilarious when people on this site keep preaching about the meaning of opinions and how they can be subjective, and yet they complain about "unfair" reviews of their favorite games.
DA2 was a POS deal with it... Witcher 2 is superior in MANY ways. You actually have to figure out things yourself, not like most of today's games that are for a wider audience. That said, I can't care less about that review, as it's his own personal opinion, and I respect it. As for me, it's one of the best RPGs I've ever played.
 

Gralian

Me, I'm Counting
Sep 24, 2008
1,787
0
0
It's interesting to see how this review panned out and it's even more interesting to see people's responses to this.

I think most of all what this does is make us question the nature of so-called 'professional' (paid, journalistic, critical) reviews. Someone earlier in the thread plugged Jim Sterling and his Jimquisition on reviewer bias. Jim puts forward a convincing argument in that shouldn't be subject to abuse just because his ideas are not in line with metacritic and that his subjective view goes against the 'objective agreement'. The reason i say reviews like this (and indeed, reviewers like Sterling) question the nature of professional reviewing is whether or not such things should be entirely objective or entirely subjective.

Here in this review, Greg gave the game a 3.5 / 5 because it wasn't really his thing, he wasn't comfortable with the combat. But he liked the world and the story. Similarly, Jim Sterling also gave The Witcher a low 6 / 10 because of issues he had with the game. Yet the general consensus from Metacritic and other 'professional' review sites is one of high praise, around the 9 / 10 mark. Because they are in the majority we can assume (rightly or wrongly) that they make up the objective opinion. Does this mean reviewers like Greg Tito and Jim Sterling should be trashed for stating outright that something wasn't their cup of tea, that it's not something they personally enjoy? After all, if they say they don't enjoy it and mark it down severely because of that, it's giving people a false impression that the game won't be fun for everyone - not just the reviewer. However, i can respect the integrity of reviewers like Greg and Jim for stating their opinion and going against the general agreed consensus by saying that they didn't like it and it wasn't for them. However, part of me feels like it is the professional reviewer's responsibility to be as objective as possible and not include any subjective opinion as that is generally all that separates the professionals from the public. Without objectivity professional reviews here will be no different from the user reviews, and at that point i have to question the validity of said professional reviews and whether they are even necessary in the first place and what qualifies them to be regarded as professional.

It's a conundrum and one well worth philosophising over. It might even make for an interesting poll. Just two options and a question asking whether you value subjectivity or objectivity in professionalism.
 

Soviet Heavy

New member
Jan 22, 2010
12,218
0
0
IamGamer41 said:
Soviet Heavy said:
beastrn said:
Hey reviewer, do you review books? If someone asked you to review a novel from one of the most respected writers, would you say yes? No, no you wouldn't. You wouldn't because you know that your grasp of literature, your experience with books and your understanding of difficult written concepts is weak.

It's the same here. Why are you even reviewing video games? Who are you? You're obvious terrible at them. You obviously don't understand how to press a button a read a journal. You're just a baby raised on golden trails and compasses.

Why are you reviewing games if you're terrible at them?
And here lies the problem. I may not agree with Tito's score here or for Dragon Age 2, but a smart person would not use them as a basis to launch personal attacks for having a different opinion.

So he doesn't like the game as much, get over it. Greg Tito reviews games because he is a game reviewer. I can also be a game reviewer, you want to know why? Because it means giving your opinion on a game. You have no right to throw insults around because he disagrees with you. I don't see anywhere in the review where he attacked you personally, or anyone who enjoys The Witcher 2 for that matter.

Get over it, and good luck hanging around the boards with this kind of attitude.

If all a review is is someone's opinion of a game then Little Big Planet and Heavy Rain, Halo and Starcraft are 1 out of 10.True they some people get hot headed when they see a game they know themselfs as being good get a low score.So if this said reviewer did have trouble with the game he could very well give it a shit score cause of that.I mean wouldn't you cry foul if someone give Batman Arkam Asylum a 2 out of 5?
I honestly wouldn't care if they did. That's their choice, and if they don't want to play a game because they feel it is shit, then more power to them. Am I going to suddenly start attacking you because you don't like Halo while I do? No, because I don't have any more right to tell you what to like than the person I was quoting.

You can disagree without needing to attack somebody's integrity for having a different opinion. If Tito didn't enjoy the gameplay, well there isn't much anyone can do about that but him. That isn't a basis to say he is an ignorant fuckwit who is an idiot for not seeing things the same way.
 

IamGamer41

New member
Mar 19, 2010
245
0
0
Right right.that part I pretty much bum rushed to the end.One one thing I didnt like was with all the commotion I didn't here the dialog from the characters.
 

JerrytheBullfrog

New member
Dec 30, 2009
232
0
0
beastrn said:
Soviet Heavy said:
beastrn said:
Hey reviewer, do you review books? If someone asked you to review a novel from one of the most respected writers, would you say yes? No, no you wouldn't. You wouldn't because you know that your grasp of literature, your experience with books and your understanding of difficult written concepts is weak.

It's the same here. Why are you even reviewing video games? Who are you? You're obvious terrible at them. You obviously don't understand how to press a button a read a journal. You're just a baby raised on golden trails and compasses.

Why are you reviewing games if you're terrible at them?
And here lies the problem. I may not agree with Tito's score here or for Dragon Age 2, but a smart person would not use them as a basis to launch personal attacks for having a different opinion.

So he doesn't like the game as much, get over it. Greg Tito reviews games because he is a game reviewer. I can also be a game reviewer, you want to know why? Because it means giving your opinion on a game. You have no right to throw insults around because he disagrees with you. I don't see anywhere in the review where he attacked you personally, or anyone who enjoys The Witcher 2 for that matter.

Get over it, and good luck hanging around the boards with this kind of attitude.
"Here lies the problem"?

Er, no - the problem lies with the fact that this "reviewer" does not know how to seek knowledge or learn how to play a video game. The PROBLEM lies in the fact that this "reviewer" struggled with basic gameplay because he is used to being led around by both hands in everything he has ever played.

This is not "foaming at the mouth defense" - this is pointing out that people that are bad at games have no right to have an opinion on them - especially not on a wide publication. So yes - of course I care. People might actually read this trollop.

This is why gaming cannot move forward. This is why every single game has a radar and a quest arrow and a mini map dot and a golden trail and text telling you what to do and completely immersion breaking UI's and idiotic tutorials - because even people that get PAID to play these games are too fucking sheltered to figure something out on their own.

If you wanted baby-mode-adventure the interactive movie - you should have played on EASY.
He likes Mount and Blade [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/events/summerpicks2010/7828-The-Escapist-Staffs-Summer-Picks-Greg]. That alone invalidates all of your little whining.

Gaming *has* moved forward. I grew up on old-school PC gaming, but a lot of those choices that we've ditched? They actually kind of sucked, looking back at it.
 

Gralian

Me, I'm Counting
Sep 24, 2008
1,787
0
0
Soviet Heavy said:
I honestly wouldn't care if they did. That's their choice, and if they don't want to play a game because they feel it is shit, then more power to them. Am I going to suddenly start attacking you because you don't like Halo while I do? No, because I don't have any more right to tell you what to like than the person I was quoting.
Stating you don't like Halo casually on a public forum is vastly different to claiming your opinion is professional and critical.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
awesome_ninja said:
sravankb said:
Canadish said:
Dragon Age 2 - 5 Stars
The Witcher 2 - 3 1/2 Stars?

Yeah okay, cool story bro.

Mr. Tito is obviously a VERY different kind of gamer then myself.
I find it hilarious when people on this site keep preaching about the meaning of opinions and how they can be subjective, and yet they complain about "unfair" reviews of their favorite games.
DA2 was a POS deal with it...
Again, "opinions". Please try not to force yours on mine.
 

Soviet Heavy

New member
Jan 22, 2010
12,218
0
0
Gralian said:
Soviet Heavy said:
I honestly wouldn't care if they did. That's their choice, and if they don't want to play a game because they feel it is shit, then more power to them. Am I going to suddenly start attacking you because you don't like Halo while I do? No, because I don't have any more right to tell you what to like than the person I was quoting.
Stating you don't like Halo casually on a public forum is vastly different to claiming your opinion is professional and critical.
But if I gave reasons for why I didn't enjoy a game, such as a clunky interface or unoptimized controls, would me stating those reasons be met with the same reaction?

If I said that Halo felt too floaty and loose in the controls department, would I still be ignored by merit of me not being a professional critic? This review stated that he had troubles with the interface, and that he did not find the controls intuitive. Yet like the Halo example, it is purely subjective. Whereas some might find the controls just right, others might not feel the same way.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
sravankb said:
awesome_ninja said:
sravankb said:
Canadish said:
Dragon Age 2 - 5 Stars
The Witcher 2 - 3 1/2 Stars?

Yeah okay, cool story bro.

Mr. Tito is obviously a VERY different kind of gamer then myself.
I find it hilarious when people on this site keep preaching about the meaning of opinions and how they can be subjective, and yet they complain about "unfair" reviews of their favorite games.
DA2 was a POS deal with it...
Again, "opinions". Please try not to force yours on mine.
Thing is, regardless of your opinion, there are subjective facts to be found here. Bioware is under EA now. CDPR is their own independent studio, publishing by Atari. Dragon Age 2 was developed in a little under a year. Witcher 2 took between three and four years to develop.

Now, in your opinion, which of these two development environments do you think will produce the better game nine times out of ten? I'd say the choice is fairly easy.
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
sta697 said:
[
no the story of da2 is in the sequel also intresting banter isnt intresting characters also the 10 locations in a 40 hour long campaing isnt many
The story is what it is. Because you didn't enjoy it doesn't make it not a story. And actually, interesting banter IS interesting characters. How characters interact with each other is 80% of what makes up their personality. Anyone with a general understanding of writing, acting, or character design knows that.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
Xzi said:
sravankb said:
awesome_ninja said:
sravankb said:
Canadish said:
Dragon Age 2 - 5 Stars
The Witcher 2 - 3 1/2 Stars?

Yeah okay, cool story bro.

Mr. Tito is obviously a VERY different kind of gamer then myself.
I find it hilarious when people on this site keep preaching about the meaning of opinions and how they can be subjective, and yet they complain about "unfair" reviews of their favorite games.
DA2 was a POS deal with it...
Again, "opinions". Please try not to force yours on mine.
Thing is, regardless of your opinion, there are subjective facts to be found here. Bioware is under EA now. CDPR is their own independent studio, publishing by Atari. Dragon Age 2 was developed in a little under a year. Witcher 2 took between three and four years to develop.
"Subjective facts"? Wut?

Also, I prefer one over the other. Yes, I do enjoy the more-action oriented gameplay, and liked the characters more in DA2. Why do people seem to have a problem with this?

Another question - why are TW2's fans so defensive? The game is loved by many people and is quite successful as it is. Losing one customer like me won't make a hint of a difference to them.
 

beastrn

New member
Oct 21, 2007
21
0
0
If there were valid critisisms or eye-opening game design perception there wouldn't be an issue and the game could get 7/10'd everywhere for all I care.

Problem is the only reason these people can come up with is "it's too hard" or "my hand wasn't held enough" - the reason for this is because they are bad at games and have been raised on 30-hour tutorials and don't know anything about video games.

Surely, even an unreasonable person, can understand why that rubs logical people the wrong way.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
beastrn said:
It's not so much fans of TW2, but more fans of the truth.
Was that a reply to my post? If it was, then I have a suspicion that you're trolling. Cause liking a game doesn't exactly make you a shining knight who defends the "truth".

If not, move on folks, nothing to see here.
 

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
beastrn said:
If there were valid critisisms or eye-opening game design perception there wouldn't be an issue and the game could get 7/10'd everywhere for all I care.

Problem is the only reason these people can come up with is "it's too hard" or "my hand wasn't held enough" - the reason for this is because they are bad at games and have been raised on 30-hour tutorials and don't know anything about video games.

Surely, even an unreasonable person, can understand why that rubs logical people the wrong way.
Right now, you are doing anything but being logical. And with that sort of attitude and tone you will not last very long on these forums. Just an FYI.
 

Grey_Focks

New member
Jan 12, 2010
1,969
0
0
Gralian said:
Without objectivity professional reviews here will be no different from the user reviews, and at that point i have to question the validity of said professional reviews and whether they are even necessary in the first place and what qualifies them to be regarded as professional.
Hmm, something to ponder over indeed. Personally, I think that a professional reviewer SHOULD keep their personal bias in their review. Not everyone is going to see eye-to-eye with the general opinion on most things, and games like DA2 and TW2 are perfect examples of this. Every review really shouldn't just be a copy-pasta of all the others for everything out there, which is really what they would be if everyone were to just remove their feelings from said reviews. Having someone actually put their personal opinions and preferences for a game into their review, I think, is really quite important, because undoubtedly there will be some people who like the same types of games as that reviewer, and some who don't share their preferences at all.

"That's the point of user reviews! Professional reviews should be just that, professional!"

Indeed they should, but being professional doesn't mean keeping your own opinions out of the review, if anything, it should mean the opposite, just doing it well. It should mean being able to criticize something without just bashing it or insulting it, but instead pointing out individual problems, and what they should've done instead. It means being able to point out what the game does right, without just mindlessly praising it.

Really, I think professional reviews should be a balance of giving the reviewers actual opinion on a game/movie/book/whatever, while still being able to look at it from someone else's viewpoint. Every critic just giving one uniform score across the board really doesn't help anyone, since we all have varying tastes, and if they truly removed their own opinions from them, there really would be no point. To help, I think all reviewers should have some sort of article/page listing what their preferences are, so that way we know if their tastes are similar to our own, then we can judge whether the review is for us accordingly, which is actually kinda what The Escapist does (why they all have unique GOTY lists and whatnot), so I say they just keep doing what they're doing, and I actually hope more sites follow suit...and for all I know they do, since I really don't go on any other "game news" site, other than occasionally kotaku, and even then I never really read the reviews.

Forgive me if this makes little sense or if I rambled a bit, it's been a veeeeery long day/evening of work.
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
beastrn said:
No, resvp42, you're wrong. Banter is a cheap alternative to anything actually substantial.

Also in DA2 due to terrible design, most of the time the banter is cancled due to scripted events, fights, or simply because there are loading screens every 5 seconds.

Not opinion, fact. Thus your opinion is wrong. Thus we can make judgments on the quality of your opinion.
Banter is characters talking to each other and you'll notice in the game that the banter actually progresses and is changed by in-game events. BioWare does banter very well. Character development isn't just about major plot points or cutscenes, it's about how characters relate to each other and idle conversation is an important part of that.

You can judge my opinion on character development, but don't call it wrong because you disagree. You are no expert on the subject, I presume.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
beastrn said:
If you wanted baby-mode-adventure the interactive movie - you should have played on EASY.
I laughed heartily :D
Totally agree with you mate and as with all strong opinons on this website that come from the heart and can offend you will get slapped with a warning for it.
I cannot even BEGIN TO UNDERSTAND WTF IS GOING ON.
Is this a representation of the escapist community?
I mean really Dragon Age 2 gets 5? ( which created a huge shit stir mind you)
And the witcher gets 3.5?
(I bought Dragon Age 2 because of the review on this website and my love for the first btw)
I just am struggling to really comment on this as the language I would use might be to colourful for the escapist community.
I mean with the huge user base is this the best that escapist has to offer to its community?
YES ITS AN OPINION WE KNOW.
Someone can also have an opinion about vintage cars who has no interest in them or ever studied them. That does not mean it will be front page of VintageCars.com.
What I am saying is that maybe someone ELSE should of reviewed this game.
I mean its not fair on Greg to be thrown into the big boys pool when he hasn't learnt to swim.
 

rsvp42

New member
Jan 15, 2010
897
0
0
Calibretto said:
What I am saying is that maybe someone ELSE should of reviwed this game.
I mean its not fair on Greg to be thrown into the big boys pool when he hasn't learnt to swim.
You know, there are a lot of really glowing reviews out there for the Witcher 2. You can always read those and get some good vibes. This one wasn't really a bad review, he was just calling it out on some things that frustrated him. Doesn't mean he didn't like it or couldn't play out of incompetence. I don't know why everyone expects all reviews to be the same.
 

beastrn

New member
Oct 21, 2007
21
0
0
rsvp42 said:
beastrn said:
No, resvp42, you're wrong. Banter is a cheap alternative to anything actually substantial.

Also in DA2 due to terrible design, most of the time the banter is cancled due to scripted events, fights, or simply because there are loading screens every 5 seconds.

Not opinion, fact. Thus your opinion is wrong. Thus we can make judgments on the quality of your opinion.
Banter is characters talking to each other and you'll notice in the game that the banter actually progresses and is changed by in-game events. BioWare does banter very well. Character development isn't just about major plot points or cutscenes, it's about how characters relate to each other and idle conversation is an important part of that.

You can judge my opinion on character development, but don't call it wrong because you disagree. You are no expert on the subject, I presume.
You're right to some degree. Bioware DID do banter well. They don't anymore, however. This is proven in Dragon Age 2 and most of Dragon Age.

I also agree with you that character development isn't just about major plot points. However, in Dragon Age 2 Bioware completely relied on the "banter" for all forms of character progression. It failed miserably. Poorly delivered. Random interjections. No character whatsoever.

Banter is meant to be the icing on the cake, not the entire cake.

Oh, an, I am an expert. Probably the most expertious player on the entire internet.
 

Omnific One

New member
Apr 3, 2010
935
0
0
Rationalization said:
Omnific One said:
Ah the Escapist... Bioware fanboys to the end... even the editors.

Dragon Age II- Escapist: 100% Metacritic: 79%
Witcher 2- Escapist: 70% Metacritic: 89%

Jesus Christ, you guys really need to get those freaking nostalgia glasses off.

As Skyrim isn't made by BW, I'm calling the Escapist giving it between a 60 and 80%.

The Rasmussen of RPG reviews. Congrats on the title.
Metacritic can be trusted. Also witcher 2 has less than 1/2 the reviews that dragon age 2 does. I disagree with Tito too, the game is perfect and just isn't for the casuals. PC is the bestest of all the consoles EVAR! It has no bugs, it doesn't re-use anything, and the inventory is easy to manage if you're not a noob. That light attack, heavy attack sword system is too deep for people.
Did I say it was perfect? No.

Did I make any reference as to my personal opinion, beyond stating that the Escapist favors Bioware? No. You are extrapolating, and poorly at that.

All I noted was the massive discrepancy, nothing more.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
rsvp42 said:
Calibretto said:
What I am saying is that maybe someone ELSE should of reviwed this game.
I mean its not fair on Greg to be thrown into the big boys pool when he hasn't learnt to swim.
You know, there are a lot of really glowing reviews out there for the Witcher 2. You can always read those and get some good vibes. This one wasn't really a bad review, he was just calling it out on some things that frustrated him. Doesn't mean he didn't like it or couldn't play out of incompetence. I don't know why everyone expects all reviews to be the same.
I understand what your saying really I do.
But I have met no one that would say DA2 is 5/5 its the first time that made me really question The Escapist.
I love the escapist and I come here because its my favourite site on the internet and I am sure thats a representation of most people on these forums.
I mean its a gaming website and its reviews actualy get broadcasted everywhere for example DA2 on its website was proudly displaying the escapists 5/5 which made me cringe.
I mean what would people who are not apart of The Escapist community think?
These aren't just games that are "oh its another release" these are games that many people have waited for in anticipation and others who dont know much about the game will look at the review for guidance.
Anyways I will leave it at that rant over.
 

Soviet Heavy

New member
Jan 22, 2010
12,218
0
0
This review was done professionally, it stated its opinion, and it did not attack anyone.

If you want a reason to get mad at somebody, look at this video.

 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
sravankb said:
Xzi said:
sravankb said:
awesome_ninja said:
sravankb said:
Canadish said:
Dragon Age 2 - 5 Stars
The Witcher 2 - 3 1/2 Stars?

Yeah okay, cool story bro.

Mr. Tito is obviously a VERY different kind of gamer then myself.
I find it hilarious when people on this site keep preaching about the meaning of opinions and how they can be subjective, and yet they complain about "unfair" reviews of their favorite games.
DA2 was a POS deal with it...
Again, "opinions". Please try not to force yours on mine.
Thing is, regardless of your opinion, there are subjective facts to be found here. Bioware is under EA now. CDPR is their own independent studio, publishing by Atari. Dragon Age 2 was developed in a little under a year. Witcher 2 took between three and four years to develop.
"Subjective facts"? Wut?

Also, I prefer one over the other. Yes, I do enjoy the more-action oriented gameplay, and liked the characters more in DA2. Why do people seem to have a problem with this?

Another question - why are TW2's fans so defensive? The game is loved by many people and is quite successful as it is. Losing one customer like me won't make a hint of a difference to them.
Yeah, sorry, objective was the term I was looking for there, not subjective. I'm not being defensive at all, just pointing out the facts of it. And I was using this review as a reference point more so than talking to you in a direct manner. I think even most level-head fans of DA2 can recognize that it's not a flawless game, and neither is it deserving of a flawless score. When you give a game a 100%, then it's that game that's going to be used as a baseline for every other review written on the same site, for better or worse. It's unfortunate that Dragon Age 2 had to be that point of contention here, but for that you can blame Tito.
 

danhere

New member
Apr 5, 2010
98
0
0
Clunky interface? Poor pacing?

I thought they'd learn from the first game. :|

I guess I'll have to see. If I can get through the first game (still never have even though I bought it a good 3 years ago!), I'll get this one. Otherwise, meh.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
Xzi said:
It's unfortunate that Dragon Age 2 had to be that point of contention here, but for that you can blame Tito.
Yeh I got no problem with Greg he sounds like a nice guy.
But I guess the best way to analyse the situation is like in a artistic portfolio, YOU WILL BE ALWAYS JUDGED BY YOUR WORST WORK.
 

tautologico

e^(i * pi) + 1 = 0
Apr 5, 2010
725
0
0
So much fanboy rage...

Funny fact that surely no one cares about: what convinced me to buy The Witcher was the Zero Punctuation review. It trashed the game, but at that point in time I already knew Yahtzee's biases, so I expected to really like it, by what I saw in the video.

I guess I don't really care if a reviewer or critic gives a low score for a game I like. People have different opinions, who knew?
 

infohippie

New member
Oct 1, 2009
2,369
0
0
JerrytheBullfrog said:
Someone pointed out that it would be out of character for this badass Warmaster to have to go through a "and here's how you block" tutorial, so I was thinking - wouldn't it be cool if you started the game as some sort of neophyte recruit who was being GIVEN a lesson by *the* Geralt himself? That'd preserve Geralt as a wise experienced warrior while still introduce newbies to the game.

And then maybe the recruit gets killed and Geralt takes over, providing the player with an immediate emotional attachment to the game. I think it would have been a cool idea.
Now that sounds like an excellent idea!
I'm a huge fan of The Witcher - both games and Sapkowski's writing - but I do agree at least in part with this review. There should have been better explanation given for some things.
I also have a couple of gripes of my own. Don't think I'm hating on the game, though. I loved it, it's easily one of the best games I've played in recent years. I just think it could have been even better.

Firstly, it's too short. Three chapters, with the third chapter being considerably shorter than the first two? I would have liked it to be at least five chapters, all of them at least as long as the first. Maybe CDPR will address this with expansions, as long as they're done better than the "bonus missions" from the first game's Enhanced Edition.

Second, I wasn't all that keen on the storyline. (Although I haven't finished chapter three yet, so I don't know how things will end up with Yennefer, Triss and the Wild Hunt.) I don't like seeing Geralt get so mixed up in politics. I'd rather a game where he traveled from town to town doing witcher's work. Kill some spriggans that have moved into an abandoned mineshaft, investigate the disappearance of local fishermen at night and eliminate the drowners that turn out to be responsible. Perhaps a village suffers from some supernatural manifestation like the Barghests in the first game and you need to investigate firstly what is happening, then why it's happening, followed by who might be responsible and if they're even aware of it before even starting to figure out what to do about it. Maybe this needs some kind of twist so it doesn't get boring, but I'd rather play Geralt being a witcher than him getting involved in the follies of monarchs. Some investigative work could be really interesting if implemented right. I thought the first game had a much better overall plot, with the exception of chapter five's fighting in Vizima.

Third, and most important to my own enjoyment, I thought the alchemy had been far too simplified. I know it's not really a big part of the original lore but I thought it worked very well in the first game, and I miss that. There are no longer secondary effects possible and you don't have to find alcohol of various purities to use as a potion base. You can't just experiment to come up with potions you may not have researched yet and you can't just drink unidentified potions to see what they do. Potions and the associated toxicity also last far too short a time. I would have preferred to see alchemy made much more complex for the second game, rather than simplifying it as it was.
 

drisky

New member
Mar 16, 2009
1,605
0
0
It seems to me that a lot of people here are just complaining about the number differences between the reviews. Witcher 2 lost points because the it is not for every one, they are letting people know that the system is complicated and under-explained. You know your self weather or not that is a deal breaker, so if the flaws pointed out aren't things you consider flaws, then you ignore that part of the review. Don't just look at the score, look at the positives and negatives presented to you and decide for your self if they are what you want/can deal with.
 

Mr. Omega

ANTI-LIFE JUSTIFIES MY HATE!
Jul 1, 2010
3,902
0
0
Good God, if the fanboys are getting this butthurt over this review, calling it and claiming it was nitpicking, nonprofessional, I can't wait until when Yahtzee reviews it, where the entire point is nitpicking and all pretense of professionalism is thrown out the window...

I mean damn, I've never seen fanboys get so absolutely butthurt as a result of a review, insulting the reviewer, saying that someone else should have done it, blaming another game, blaming gaming in general... damn.
 

Throwitawaynow

New member
Aug 29, 2010
759
0
0
Omnific One said:
Rationalization said:
Omnific One said:
Ah the Escapist... Bioware fanboys to the end... even the editors.

Dragon Age II- Escapist: 100% Metacritic: 79%
Witcher 2- Escapist: 70% Metacritic: 89%

Jesus Christ, you guys really need to get those freaking nostalgia glasses off.

As Skyrim isn't made by BW, I'm calling the Escapist giving it between a 60 and 80%.

The Rasmussen of RPG reviews. Congrats on the title.
Metacritic can be trusted. Also witcher 2 has less than 1/2 the reviews that dragon age 2 does. I disagree with Tito too, the game is perfect and just isn't for the casuals. PC is the bestest of all the consoles EVAR! It has no bugs, it doesn't re-use anything, and the inventory is easy to manage if you're not a noob. That light attack, heavy attack sword system is too deep for people.
Did I say it was perfect? No.

Did I make any reference as to my personal opinion, beyond stating that the Escapist favors Bioware? No. You are extrapolating, and poorly at that.

All I noted was the massive discrepancy, nothing more.
Did I say you did make a reference to your personal opinion? No. You are extrapolating, and poorly at that.

All I noted was that other commentors, not having to be you as you were not mentioned, didn't like the game. Nothing more.
 

Jandau

Smug Platypus
Dec 19, 2008
5,034
0
0
Don't use Quen to absorb damage, at least not always. It precludes energy regeneration, so you can cast Quen, parry one blow and then sit there with an empty Vigor bar while people kill you. Better use your Vigor on Parrying and dodge the rest of the time. Quen is for times when you can't avoid taking damage any other way, like charging at archers and such.
 

beastrn

New member
Oct 21, 2007
21
0
0
lithium.jelly said:
JerrytheBullfrog said:
Someone pointed out that it would be out of character for this badass Warmaster to have to go through a "and here's how you block" tutorial, so I was thinking - wouldn't it be cool if you started the game as some sort of neophyte recruit who was being GIVEN a lesson by *the* Geralt himself? That'd preserve Geralt as a wise experienced warrior while still introduce newbies to the game.

And then maybe the recruit gets killed and Geralt takes over, providing the player with an immediate emotional attachment to the game. I think it would have been a cool idea.
Now that sounds like an excellent idea!
I'm a huge fan of The Witcher - both games and Sapkowski's writing - but I do agree at least in part with this review. There should have been better explanation given for some things.
I also have a couple of gripes of my own. Don't think I'm hating on the game, though. I loved it, it's easily one of the best games I've played in recent years. I just think it could have been even better.

Firstly, it's too short. Three chapters, with the third chapter being considerably shorter than the first two? I would have liked it to be at least five chapters, all of them at least as long as the first. Maybe CDPR will address this with expansions, as long as they're done better than the "bonus missions" from the first game's Enhanced Edition.

Second, I wasn't all that keen on the storyline. (Although I haven't finished chapter three yet, so I don't know how things will end up with Yennefer, Triss and the Wild Hunt.) I don't like seeing Geralt get so mixed up in politics. I'd rather a game where he traveled from town to town doing witcher's work. Kill some spriggans that have moved into an abandoned mineshaft, investigate the disappearance of local fishermen at night and eliminate the drowners that turn out to be responsible. Perhaps a village suffers from some supernatural manifestation like the Barghests in the first game and you need to investigate firstly what is happening, then why it's happening, followed by who might be responsible and if they're even aware of it before even starting to figure out what to do about it. Maybe this needs some kind of twist so it doesn't get boring, but I'd rather play Geralt being a witcher than him getting involved in the follies of monarchs. Some investigative work could be really interesting if implemented right. I thought the first game had a much better overall plot, with the exception of chapter five's fighting in Vizima.

Third, and most important to my own enjoyment, I thought the alchemy had been far too simplified. I know it's not really a big part of the original lore but I thought it worked very well in the first game, and I miss that. There are no longer secondary effects possible and you don't have to find alcohol of various purities to use as a potion base. You can't just experiment to come up with potions you may not have researched yet and you can't just drink unidentified potions to see what they do. Potions and the associated toxicity also last far too short a time. I would have preferred to see alchemy made much more complex for the second game, rather than simplifying it as it was.
MGS Peace Walker does this
 

Wuggy

New member
Jan 14, 2010
976
0
0
Good grief is there some serious fanboy crying here. Seriously guys, a review isn't a personal insult against those who like the game. You don't have to be so up on arms to defend the product that you bought just because someone else didn't enjoy it as much. I've been playing Witcher 2 for a couple days now and am genuinely enjoying myself, but that doesn't mean that I should get all riled up when someone else isn't enjoying it as much. It's their loss, not mine.

And could you please, please shut the frack up about DA2 already.
 

Don Reba

Bishop and Councilor of War
Jun 2, 2009
999
0
0
Sounds delicious. Reviews are aimed at wide audiences, so they can't be relied upon to judge game diffuculty. One just has to keep that in mind.
 

mexicola

New member
Feb 10, 2010
924
0
0
Haha fanboy whining is delicious! *licks screen*

Well it's nice for the reviewer to give his honest opinion and not feel intimidated or obliged to give this game an automatic 9/10. I still haven't played the game so I don't know how much I agree with him.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
beastrn said:
hahaha at all the people using the word "fanboy"

Nice to see stupid people exist on the internet even when all the knowledge of the human race is at their fingertips. Doomed to be peasants, I suppose.
Dude, stop while you can. These sort of posts will get you banned.

Also, yes - if you get so defensive over someone else's opinion of your favorite game, then you will be called one; there really isn't another word for it.
 

beastrn

New member
Oct 21, 2007
21
0
0
sravankb said:
beastrn said:
hahaha at all the people using the word "fanboy"

Nice to see stupid people exist on the internet even when all the knowledge of the human race is at their fingertips. Doomed to be peasants, I suppose.
Dude, stop while you can. These sort of posts will get you banned.

Also, yes - if you get so defensive over someone else's opinion of your favorite game, then you will be called one; there really isn't another word for it.
1: Do you even read your own posts? You're posting far worse than I am, bud.

2: No, you're wrong. People defending a game that has been unfairly judged does not mean they are a "fanboy". I defend a great many games from uneducated people. Am I a fanboy of each of those individual games? Obviously not.

If you truly must label people discrediting this review as a fanboy it would be a "fanboy of logic and integrity"

3: My post is clearly ironic. Look at all the idiots here saying "lol at the fanboys lol" without any basis. I can't do the same? Herp?
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
beastrn said:
I've said this once, and I'll say it again. This review was his opinion of the game, not an "unfair judgement". You're not gonna change his view, and you're not gonna change the view of people who dislike it. Especially with that attitude. And please stop painting yourself as some sort of defender of logic and integrity. It sounds really odd.

Plus, you're a brand new user; not even close to being a regular on the site. You cannot seriously expect me to detect "irony" in each of your posts. Sarcasm/ironic statements do not come across well over the internet.

Most of all, you may wanna calm down, dude. Trust me, people aren't gonna pay too much attention to your posts on this site if you keep insulting someone or the other each time.
 

theriddlen

New member
Apr 6, 2010
897
0
0
There is no time between pressing a button and witcher blocking. It just happens that blocks use up Vigor, and if you're out of it, well, axe or mace goes straight to your face.

Also, map is not in Cyrlic, but some fictional language. And you're not meant to even try reading it - just a decoration.
 

beastrn

New member
Oct 21, 2007
21
0
0
sravankb said:
beastrn said:
I've said this once, and I'll say it again. This review was his opinion of the game, not an "unfair judgement". You're not gonna change his view, and you're not gonna change the view of people who dislike it. Especially with that attitude. And please stop painting yourself as some sort of defender of logic and integrity. It sounds really odd.

Plus, you're a brand new user; not even close to being a regular on the site. You cannot seriously expect me to detect "irony" in each of your posts. Sarcasm/ironic statements do not come across well over the internet.

Most of all, you may wanna calm down, dude. Trust me, people aren't gonna pay too much attention to your posts on this site if you keep insulting someone or the other each time.
You don't need to repeat yourself - it has already been explained to you why you're wrong. You should read those posts again.

So what if it is an opinion? Do I care? Is that the point? It's an UNEDUCATED opinion. It's a FLAWED opinion. That's the issue. Do I go out and have an "opinion" on thousand year old artifacts? No, of course I don't. I haven't studied history nor have I a strong background in artifact analysis. If I went to a museum and said "guys, guys - this pot here actually is pretty dumb. Actually I don't like it. That's my opinion, ok?" I would probably be banned from the premises.

So.. sure, you're right. It's just his opinion. The fact is, though, that it's an uneducated opinion.

FYI - arguing with me on this point makes you an escapist fanboy, according to you.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
sravankb said:
beastrn said:
I've said this once, and I'll say it again. This review was his opinion of the game, not an "unfair judgement". You're not gonna change his view, and you're not gonna change the view of people who dislike it. Especially with that attitude. And please stop painting yourself as some sort of defender of logic and integrity. It sounds really odd.

Plus, you're a brand new user; not even close to being a regular on the site. You cannot seriously expect me to detect "irony" in each of your posts. Sarcasm/ironic statements do not come across well over the internet.

Most of all, you may wanna calm down, dude. Trust me, people aren't gonna pay too much attention to your posts on this site if you keep insulting someone or the other each time.
It says he has joined in 2007>? I would hardly call that brand new.
Alot of people just read the forums and dont actually engage in them you know.
Obviously this is a topic he has felt he needs to speak up after 4 YEARS OF SILENCE.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
beastrn said:
You don't need to repeat yourself - it has already been explained to you why you're wrong. You should read those posts again.

So what if it is an opinion? Do I care? Is that the point? It's an UNEDUCATED opinion. It's a FLAWED opinion. That's the issue. Do I go out and have an "opinion" on thousand year old artifacts? No, of course I don't. I haven't studied history nor have I a strong background in artifact analysis. If I went to a museum and said "guys, guys - this pot here actually is pretty dumb. Actually I don't like it. That's my opinion, ok?" I would probably be banned from the premises.

So.. sure, you're right. It's just his opinion. The fact is, though, that it's an uneducated opinion.

FYI - arguing with me on this point makes you an escapist fanboy, according to you.
He played the game - isn't that enough to formulate an opinion on it? Before you answer, yes it is enough because it is a game, an entertainment product, and not the study of a "thousand year old artifact", which requires way more experience, skill, and knowledge than playing a game.

Honestly, I wouldn't care if you thought the review was bad, but dude, you really need to stop trying to push "facts" into everyone's faces and telling them "you're wrong" for their view on the matter. You're being aggressive for no apparent reason.

P.S. How in the world am I an "Escapist fanboy"?
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
Calibretto said:
It says he has joined in 2007>? I would hardly call that brand new.
Alot of people just read the forums and dont actually engage in them you know.
Obviously this is a topic he has felt he needs to speak up after 4 YEARS OF SILENCE.
Okay, but my point still remains valid - he didn't post enough on the site for me to know about his use of irony/sarcasm. If he was a regular, I would have a much better idea of how serious he was being.
 

beastrn

New member
Oct 21, 2007
21
0
0
Thanks, Calibretto. Appreciate it.

Just a final addition to what I'm saying; sravankb, and others who are saying "it's just an opinion who cares why post" and whatever - I would agree with you if this website was called wwWeAreAllNoobsWhoAreBadAtGames.com.

Unfortunately, this is theescapist - a once fairly well respected internet publication that also gets to display it's judgments on METACRITIC. Do you know that The Witcher 2 was brought below 90/100 because of this review? So because of this uneducated opinion, because of this reviewers incompetency and inability to learn something for himself, the developers get to show their stock holders and dependants a below 90/100 game when clearly it is not.

Surely even illogical internet people can understand why that is worthy of being discussed.

There wouldn't even be an issue if the reviewer could muster anything other than "I thought the game was too hard but I didn't just set it on Easy" - but he doesn't.
 

tzimize

New member
Mar 1, 2010
2,391
0
0
redemption92 said:
but its so gooooooooooooooooooood
Basically this.

I found the combat to be engaging enough to not be dull, but simple enough to still be an action-rpg (combat-wise). If its to difficult, play on an easier setting or simply run away more...

The game is an absolute gem, with some of the best dialogue in any game, ever. Its beautiful, with the rivertown Flotsam as the high point (for me at least) and has the first episode of elegant sensuality in a game I have seen (the scene with Geralt and Triss waking up in the prologue).

While its not a perfect game by any definition the flaws are so minor and far between that they have absolutely no impact on me. I'm faaaaaar too busy enjoying the fantastic game. Easily a 10 for me, and probably GOTY as well. The only possible contender being Arkham City. And even that will probably be a lesser game.

beastrn said:
There wouldn't even be an issue if the reviewer could muster anything other than "I thought the game was too hard but I didn't just set it on Easy" - but he doesn't.
Good point, I've been wondering about this too. And the reviewer is not the only one making this mistake.
 

drisky

New member
Mar 16, 2009
1,605
0
0
beastrn said:
There wouldn't even be an issue if the reviewer could muster anything other than "I thought the game was too hard but I didn't just set it on Easy" - but he doesn't.
You keep bringing that up, but it doesn't fix the issue. He said it was unfairly hard because it was unintuitive because of menus, lack of tutorials, and a delay before casting spells. Turning the difficultly down fixes none of those issues, and those issues would be concerns for some people so its worth mentioning.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
sravankb said:
Calibretto said:
It says he has joined in 2007>? I would hardly call that brand new.
Alot of people just read the forums and dont actually engage in them you know.
Obviously this is a topic he has felt he needs to speak up after 4 YEARS OF SILENCE.
Okay, but my point still remains valid - he didn't post enough on the site for me to know about his use of irony/sarcasm. If he was a regular, I would have a much better idea of how serious he was being.
So you saying you base ones opinions on the amount of posts they have done?
I didnt ever post on these forums FOR AGES after I joined.
Call it shyness call it whatever but I was happy just reading.
You cant just shutdown someone because what he is saying does not coincide with what you believe should be said.
There should be some semblance of freedom of speech.
Yes he feels emotional yes he is talking from the heart but is that so wrong?
You know sometimes when you speak about something that you feel strongly about alot of people are not going to be happy about it.
Does that mean he should be banned?
Does that mean he sould recieve warnings?
Why is it wrong to criticise someone about something when they have a love the website and obviously been here for alot LONGER THEN YOU HAVE.
I mean a great many people might not like what you say but that IS LIFE.
On the other hand he speaks about how the reviwer is reflected on a global viewpoint.
This website is not just a small corner of the internet it is a HUGE gaming website.
Its reviews are a REFLECTION ON ITSELF.
The same way people can group EA or ACTIVISION for grinding out money making ventures.
Consistant bad reviews will BE REFLECTED IN PUBLIC OPINION.
 

beastrn

New member
Oct 21, 2007
21
0
0
You're right, drisky - I should have added "and press J to read the Journal (or read the manual)".
 

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
beastrn said:
sravankb said:
beastrn said:
I've said this once, and I'll say it again. This review was his opinion of the game, not an "unfair judgement". You're not gonna change his view, and you're not gonna change the view of people who dislike it. Especially with that attitude. And please stop painting yourself as some sort of defender of logic and integrity. It sounds really odd.

Plus, you're a brand new user; not even close to being a regular on the site. You cannot seriously expect me to detect "irony" in each of your posts. Sarcasm/ironic statements do not come across well over the internet.

Most of all, you may wanna calm down, dude. Trust me, people aren't gonna pay too much attention to your posts on this site if you keep insulting someone or the other each time.
You don't need to repeat yourself - it has already been explained to you why you're wrong. You should read those posts again.

So what if it is an opinion? Do I care? Is that the point? It's an UNEDUCATED opinion. It's a FLAWED opinion. That's the issue. Do I go out and have an "opinion" on thousand year old artifacts? No, of course I don't. I haven't studied history nor have I a strong background in artifact analysis. If I went to a museum and said "guys, guys - this pot here actually is pretty dumb. Actually I don't like it. That's my opinion, ok?" I would probably be banned from the premises.

So.. sure, you're right. It's just his opinion. The fact is, though, that it's an uneducated opinion.

FYI - arguing with me on this point makes you an escapist fanboy, according to you.
I know Greg fairly well, and I know he's been playing PC RPGs and DMing tabletop RPGs for literally decades now. So to suggest that he doesn't know what he's talking about on that front is patently ludicrous.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
beastrn said:
Thanks, Calibretto. Appreciate it.

Just a final addition to what I'm saying; sravankb, and others who are saying "it's just an opinion who cares why post" and whatever - I would agree with you if this website was called wwWeAreAllNoobsWhoAreBadAtGames.com.

Unfortunately, this is theescapist - a once fairly well respected internet publication that also gets to display it's judgments on METACRITIC. Do you know that The Witcher 2 was brought below 90/100 because of this review? So because of this uneducated opinion, because of this reviewers incompetency and inability to learn something for himself, the developers get to show their stock holders and dependants a below 90/100 game when clearly it is not.

Surely even illogical internet people can understand why that is worthy of being discussed.

There wouldn't even be an issue if the reviewer could muster anything other than "I thought the game was too hard but I didn't just set it on Easy" - but he doesn't.
Okay, this seemed less aggressive than the other posts. Thanks for not being too offensive on this one (not sarcastic).

Back to the content of your post - This review alone didn't bring down the score. That's like saying that the last vote that decides a 50/50 tiebreaker is the only one that counts. Plus, 89 and 90 are awfully close. I really don't think that the consequences of a 1% decrease can be that drastic.

However, I do agree that he could've changed the difficulty if he thought it was too hard. Although, I have to admit that I don't really remember him saying what setting he chose.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
Calibretto said:
You seem to have misunderstood me (not being sarcastic here).

I'm not saying that his opinion is invalid because of the number of his posts. It's just that he said that I didn't understand his "clear" use of irony (didn't know he was actually being sarcastic). I replied by saying that there's no way I would know how he uses sarcasm or irony in his posts, especially because I really haven't read them before (hence the mention of the low-post count).
 

JerrytheBullfrog

New member
Dec 30, 2009
232
0
0
beastrn said:
Thanks, Calibretto. Appreciate it.

Just a final addition to what I'm saying; sravankb, and others who are saying "it's just an opinion who cares why post" and whatever - I would agree with you if this website was called wwWeAreAllNoobsWhoAreBadAtGames.com.

Unfortunately, this is theescapist - a once fairly well respected internet publication that also gets to display it's judgments on METACRITIC. Do you know that The Witcher 2 was brought below 90/100 because of this review? So because of this uneducated opinion, because of this reviewers incompetency and inability to learn something for himself, the developers get to show their stock holders and dependants a below 90/100 game when clearly it is not.

Surely even illogical internet people can understand why that is worthy of being discussed.

There wouldn't even be an issue if the reviewer could muster anything other than "I thought the game was too hard but I didn't just set it on Easy" - but he doesn't.
What? I just checked, and The Escapist's review isn't even listed on Metacritic yet. Check for yourself [http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-witcher-2-assassins-of-kings/critic-reviews]. It probably will tomorrow, but it went up late.

There are also 10 reviews below 90% there already, including another 7/10 and two 6/10s. By your logic, any site giving any great game a mediocre review should be ashamed of themselves.

Hell, by your logic then there should be no reviews, just a "common consensus." But no, that's silly.

How can you tell that this is an uneducated opinion? How do you know what the reviewer likes to play? How can you say that he's "incompetent" and "unable to learn something for himself" when he likes playing MOunt and Blade, one of the most obtuse games out there.

Face it, dude, I like the game as much as anyone, but it has *issues.* And it should get called out for those issues.
 

beastrn

New member
Oct 21, 2007
21
0
0
John Funk said:
beastrn said:
sravankb said:
beastrn said:
I've said this once, and I'll say it again. This review was his opinion of the game, not an "unfair judgement". You're not gonna change his view, and you're not gonna change the view of people who dislike it. Especially with that attitude. And please stop painting yourself as some sort of defender of logic and integrity. It sounds really odd.

Plus, you're a brand new user; not even close to being a regular on the site. You cannot seriously expect me to detect "irony" in each of your posts. Sarcasm/ironic statements do not come across well over the internet.

Most of all, you may wanna calm down, dude. Trust me, people aren't gonna pay too much attention to your posts on this site if you keep insulting someone or the other each time.
You don't need to repeat yourself - it has already been explained to you why you're wrong. You should read those posts again.

So what if it is an opinion? Do I care? Is that the point? It's an UNEDUCATED opinion. It's a FLAWED opinion. That's the issue. Do I go out and have an "opinion" on thousand year old artifacts? No, of course I don't. I haven't studied history nor have I a strong background in artifact analysis. If I went to a museum and said "guys, guys - this pot here actually is pretty dumb. Actually I don't like it. That's my opinion, ok?" I would probably be banned from the premises.

So.. sure, you're right. It's just his opinion. The fact is, though, that it's an uneducated opinion.

FYI - arguing with me on this point makes you an escapist fanboy, according to you.
I know Greg fairly well, and I know he's been playing PC RPGs and DMing tabletop RPGs for literally decades now. So to suggest that he doesn't know what he's talking about on that front is patently ludicrous.
Frankly, to suggest that someone that struggled to realized that literally every piece of information you need on The Witcher 2 can be accessed by pressing J is a decade-experience tabletop player, is truly ludicrous.

I appreciate that you are required to defend your friend and website - though nowhere in the review does it suggest Greg should be anywhere near a PC RPG.

-Play on Easy
-Press J to read the tutorials

I fail to see how the above two lines of text do not invalidate this entire review.
 
Sep 17, 2009
2,851
0
0
Theotherguy said:
I read the whole review, than said to myself without checking the mark: "This is a 7 from a lotr/dragon age fanboy". And than I smiled.

Yes the ui is kinda bad, but the rest of the stuff like "I died there, I died here" is just funny. I can understand Dragon Age 2 dragging ou by the hand with it's pathetic difficulty level, but come on! How lazy can You get?

And You didn't mention so many things in the review, which are good sides of The Witcher 2. Dude, being objective is a must for a reviever, the game is a 9 not a 7.
How can you call someone bias when you are immediatly dismissing his review because you assume he is a "lotr/dragon age fanboy"? The hypocricy had me chuckling there.

And to insult the reviewers intelligence by then calling Dragon Age's (a game I have never played) difficulty level pathetic and basically asserting he is bad at games and needs to be "taken by the hand". And to top it all off you flat out called the guy lazy.

Wow, way to patronize and insult someone who happens to have a different opinion than you. It is a review not fact, maybe you should solidify your opinions a bit more so you don't have to bash the opinions of others.

OT: The Witcher looks really good, I honestly would pick it up if I had a strong enough PC.
 

drisky

New member
Mar 16, 2009
1,605
0
0
beastrn said:
You're right, drisky - I should have added "and press J to read the Journal (or read the manual)".
But he covered that, he expects games to have a tutorial making it easier to assimilate in to the game play. If you need to study in order to play a game, like he said, its a pain in the ass compared to a tutorial showing rather that telling.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
Well to be honest Im starting to like Greg Titos Reviews because they lead to fun forum discussions :D
 

beastrn

New member
Oct 21, 2007
21
0
0
JerrytheBullfrog said:
beastrn said:
Thanks, Calibretto. Appreciate it.

Just a final addition to what I'm saying; sravankb, and others who are saying "it's just an opinion who cares why post" and whatever - I would agree with you if this website was called wwWeAreAllNoobsWhoAreBadAtGames.com.

Unfortunately, this is theescapist - a once fairly well respected internet publication that also gets to display it's judgments on METACRITIC. Do you know that The Witcher 2 was brought below 90/100 because of this review? So because of this uneducated opinion, because of this reviewers incompetency and inability to learn something for himself, the developers get to show their stock holders and dependants a below 90/100 game when clearly it is not.

Surely even illogical internet people can understand why that is worthy of being discussed.

There wouldn't even be an issue if the reviewer could muster anything other than "I thought the game was too hard but I didn't just set it on Easy" - but he doesn't.
What? I just checked, and The Escapist's review isn't even listed on Metacritic yet. Check for yourself [http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-witcher-2-assassins-of-kings/critic-reviews]. It probably will tomorrow, but it went up late.

There are also 10 reviews below 90% there already, including another 7/10 and two 6/10s. By your logic, any site giving any great game a mediocre review should be ashamed of themselves.

Hell, by your logic then there should be no reviews, just a "common consensus." But no, that's silly.

How can you tell that this is an uneducated opinion? How do you know what the reviewer likes to play? How can you say that he's "incompetent" and "unable to learn something for himself" when he likes playing MOunt and Blade, one of the most obtuse games out there.

Face it, dude, I like the game as much as anyone, but it has *issues.* And it should get called out for those issues.
My bad - I thought I saw escapist on there.

You're right, it does have issues and should be called out. Though the issues being called out on these reviews that are 6/10's are a joke. any intelligent person can read the text that tells them to press J for further information. Any intelligent person could just lower the difficulty to easy mode because they are casual players.

Also, I'm not saying anything under a 9/10 should be ignored, nor am I saying there's a common consensus. I'm saying bringing out a 6/10 score due to errors in the reviewers judgment is unfair and illogical.

Also, Mount and Blade? Why are you heralding that as if it's some hard game? The combat couldn't be easier AND there's a tutorial. The core of the game is clicking on a big map and reading some text. There's nothing hard about it and I'm sure he was playing on the default -50% damage mode, too.
 

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
beastrn said:
John Funk said:
beastrn said:
sravankb said:
beastrn said:
I've said this once, and I'll say it again. This review was his opinion of the game, not an "unfair judgement". You're not gonna change his view, and you're not gonna change the view of people who dislike it. Especially with that attitude. And please stop painting yourself as some sort of defender of logic and integrity. It sounds really odd.

Plus, you're a brand new user; not even close to being a regular on the site. You cannot seriously expect me to detect "irony" in each of your posts. Sarcasm/ironic statements do not come across well over the internet.

Most of all, you may wanna calm down, dude. Trust me, people aren't gonna pay too much attention to your posts on this site if you keep insulting someone or the other each time.
You don't need to repeat yourself - it has already been explained to you why you're wrong. You should read those posts again.

So what if it is an opinion? Do I care? Is that the point? It's an UNEDUCATED opinion. It's a FLAWED opinion. That's the issue. Do I go out and have an "opinion" on thousand year old artifacts? No, of course I don't. I haven't studied history nor have I a strong background in artifact analysis. If I went to a museum and said "guys, guys - this pot here actually is pretty dumb. Actually I don't like it. That's my opinion, ok?" I would probably be banned from the premises.

So.. sure, you're right. It's just his opinion. The fact is, though, that it's an uneducated opinion.

FYI - arguing with me on this point makes you an escapist fanboy, according to you.
I know Greg fairly well, and I know he's been playing PC RPGs and DMing tabletop RPGs for literally decades now. So to suggest that he doesn't know what he's talking about on that front is patently ludicrous.
Frankly, to suggest that someone that struggled to realized that literally every piece of information you need on The Witcher 2 can be accessed by pressing J is a decade-experience tabletop player, is truly ludicrous.

I appreciate that you are required to defend your friend and website - though nowhere in the review does it suggest Greg should be anywhere near a PC RPG.

-Play on Easy
-Press J to read the tutorials

I fail to see how the above two lines of text do not invalidate this entire review.
He's the best DM I've ever had, for one. He's written D&D supplements [http://e23.sjgames.com/item.html?id=GMG4400]. Trust me on this one.

You have to understand that as a reviewer, we go by experience. If the game doesn't communicate something to the player - even if it's located somewhere else but doesn't *tell* you it's located there - that can make for a less engaging experience. A good tutorial teaches you how to play the game in a smooth, integrated manner. Reading a manual and lines of text is not a smooth, integrated manner, especially when (from how it sounds) Witcher 2 just throws you in the deep end and expects you to swim.

Also, his problems with the game's combat were with the game's combat SYSTEM. Playing on Easy wouldn't make those go away.
 
Feb 11, 2009
97
0
0
I loved the game and pretty much fully agree with the review. If these things are fixed, I'm going to be happy. First and foremost, give me back my PC UI, in which I can switch between the C,J,M,and I without exiting any of them.
 

beastrn

New member
Oct 21, 2007
21
0
0
drisky said:
beastrn said:
You're right, drisky - I should have added "and press J to read the Journal (or read the manual)".
But he covered that, he expects games to have a tutorial making it easier to assimilate in to the game play.
I read that as "he doesn't know what immersion is and is used to being told exactly what to do in every aspect of his life"

I didn't need a tutorial. I didn't need to "study". It's all right there.
 

RhombusHatesYou

New member
Mar 21, 2010
5,800
0
0
Xzi said:
CDPR is their own independent studio, publishing by Atari.
Errr... CD Projekt RED is owned by CD Projekt, who are the publisher for The Witcher 2. Atari is just one of the distributors for the game.
 
Sep 17, 2009
2,851
0
0
Also, I think it is hilarious that people bombarded metacritic user reviews with perfect 10s...seems a little insecure.

Although, I wish I had a PC to play this game on.
 

drisky

New member
Mar 16, 2009
1,605
0
0
Nautical Honors Society said:
Also, I think it is hilarious that people bombarded metacritic user reviews with perfect 10s...seems a little insecure.

Although, I wish I had a PC to play this game on.
Exactly why collective fan reviews can't be trusted, for 50% of the internet its ether the highest or lowest score possible, and goes for reviews on absolutely anything.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
Ok enough is enough IM one click away from buying the game I DONT KNOW IF I SHOULD. I have deep reservations about buying ANY GAME after dragon age 2 ( it has scarred me for life).
DO I CLICK THe BUY OPTION Or NOT!!!?!
PS.The harder the game the better. Unless its likes DA2 Nightmare mode which is the most non fun difficulty I have ever played filled with kiting and wonderful new spawning enemies on my head.
 

marcie.johnson

New member
May 2, 2011
2
0
0
Another disappointing review by the Escapist. But then again, what did I expect from a magazine that called Dragon Age II "a pinnacle of role-playing games". You obviously like your games to be casual, not making you think twice and holding your hand a lot. That explains the low score - yep, TW2 is not for the casual gamer.

Annoying though is the reviewer's whining about the difficult combat while refusing to drop the difficulty down to easy. How silly is that? Is "easy" too unmanly for him? Doesn't make him feel awesome enough? *rolls eyes*

I simply love this game - it's balm to the soul of those who are sick of all the brainless action-crap we're being served nowadays.
 

zsec

New member
May 21, 2011
3
0
0
Same guy that gave Dragon Age 2 the only perfect score from any game review site, magazine, gives a much better game that wasn't rushed out the door a lesser score.

I guess this guy just likes to teleport through a map with recycled zones for THREE acts, and make people explode with swings of his swords.

edit: this whole Witcher vs Dragon Age 2. Know what it is? It's the true Bioware fans who had their jaws drop during Ostagar, finding the Urn of Sacred Ashes, going into Deep Roads for 3+ hours and fithing Brood Mother at the end, defending Redclif village from the undead, cleansing the magi tower, and killing the Archdemon with entire armies. We felt betrayed with DA2, simple as that.
 

Mxrz

New member
Jul 12, 2010
133
0
0
Bawwwwwwww. My game didn't get as good a review as a game I chose to hate, bawwww!

Anyway. Hearing the console version is being tweaked, so that might help. The one thing that puts me off the game more than the clunky combat and UI is just the art direction. I just can't get into the drab quasi medievalness of it all, especially while walking around as a dude with white anime hair.
 

beastrn

New member
Oct 21, 2007
21
0
0
marcie.johnson said:
Another disappointing review by the Escapist. But then again, what did I expect from a magazine that called Dragon Age II "a pinnacle of role-playing games". You obviously like your games to be casual, not making you think twice and holding your hand a lot. That explains the low score - yep, TW2 is not for the casual gamer.

Annoying though is the reviewer's whining about the difficult combat while refusing to drop the difficulty down to easy. How silly is that? Is "easy" too unmanly for him? Doesn't make him feel awesome enough? *rolls eyes*

I simply love this game - it's balm to the soul of those who are sick of all the brainless action-crap we're being served nowadays.
Great post - playing a ROLE PLAYING GAME and getting upset that there aren't enough hand -holding features that completely break atmosphere? That's like playing chess and crying that all the strategies aren't automatically chosen for you.

Calibretto said:
Ok enough is enough IM one click away from buying the game I DONT KNOW IF I SHOULD. I have deep reservations about buying ANY GAME after dragon age 2 ( it has scarred me for life).
DO I CLICK THe BUY OPTION Or NOT!!!?!
PS.The harder the game the better. Unless its likes DA2 Nightmare mode which is the most non fun difficulty I have ever played filled with kiting and wonderful new spawning enemies on my head.
Dude, buy it. There are some niggles - the combat can be unresponsive and rough at first - but the experience is awesome. If you're still undecided - go buy Gothic 2 instead. It's amazing as well. :D
 

Shamanic Rhythm

New member
Dec 6, 2009
1,653
0
0
beastrn said:
Do you know that The Witcher 2 was brought below 90/100 because of this review? So because of this uneducated opinion, because of this reviewers incompetency and inability to learn something for himself, the developers get to show their stock holders and dependants a below 90/100 game when clearly it is not.
So in other words, you're angry because the game's rating on metacritic has fallen below 90, and you've made this your own personal little crusade.

'When it clearly is not'. Explain this to me. Along what standards are you judging it? Before you answer, let me point out that whatever you answer will be YOUR criteria for judging a good game. Others may have different criteria. That's what we call 'subjectivity'. No one can objectively state that The Witcher 2 is worth 90/100. What they can say is that according to a subjective critical consensus, it has reached a certain standard. That's all metacritic is, that's all it should be interpreted as. If you think that CP Project's stockholders may view a lesser score as a reason to pull support from the company, then the problem lies with them, not with Greg Tito expressing his subjective opinion of the game.
 

Yossarian1507

New member
Jan 20, 2010
681
0
0
While I had my own couple of issues with the game (navigating through some parts of the forest outside of Flotsam is a serious pain in the ass, and there are some minor logical flaws, like with Loredo switching between telling us to work with him and trying to kill us at the same time, if you played a certain side quest right before/after the main storyline quest at the beginning of Act I), it's still One of the best games this year, and definitely RPG of the Year 2011 so far (let's see how Skyrim will do). The combat is challenging, yes, but also rewarding at the same time. Good plot, branched with a lot of choices that ACTUALLY MATTER something. And in terms of graphics - it's a new game to beat in terms of environment (character models and their body mimics could be much better though).

Overall, if this review made you unsure about buying The Witcher 2 - go for it. Seriously, it's a barrel of fun. Also, since you watched/read the review, you already know what to expect from the unforgiving tutorial, so you are already prepared :p