The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Review

[Enoz]

For the love of PETE, never forgive, never forget.

 

[Bostur]

...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.

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.

For anyone scared by this section, judge for yourself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAcuZYzzsGI
And this is how the myths of hardcore and unforgivable evil PC games are born...

If you look closely at the video you linked, you will notice that Geralt is standing in the fire for a long time without actually getting hurt. Also at one point the player is waiting for some cue that wasn't obvious to me at all. He is probably timing it with the dialogue because he played it before.
My experience was that there was no way to tell where the bad spots was. The advice of moving out of fire simply doesn't work in that sequence because moving out of fire may get you killed by fire. Also keep in mind that you have to fight some rather dangerous enemies in confined spaces, kill them quickly and at the same time read tutorial messages that pop away after a few seconds.

This is the tutorial, it may be one of the first things a new player does in that game.

Hardcore and unforgivably evil? Certainly not, but unintuitive design.

 

[abija]

Geralt's not standing in fire, the roof breathed on by the dragon catches fire and Triss seems to have a poor aim.
Follow your group, hide under wooden structure(it takes you 1 load to realize it will eventually burn down if you wait really long) seem simple things to me.

There are 2 wait times there and both are obvious, wait for dragon to stop breathing on your structure (you can see him flying away on the left side if you increase the resolution in that video) and wait for your group to follow you to new safespot (because that's the logical thing to do after once you charged into 3 enemies and get killed).

And the movement is specific to this sequence, it's completely irrelevant if you started with this sequence directly or not. It has nothing to do with game not exposing relevant combat mechanics and tactics.

 

[Mangue Surfer]

Have you people considered that maybe a game having a difficulty curve like running headlong into a brick wall might actually be a bad thing? Isn't the early stage of a game -supposed- to be fairly easy to get you used to the controls, and gradually ramp up the difficulty? Now the incline of the curve can differ depending on the setting, but a game should never start out horrifyingly difficult and then get -easier-.

Megaman

 

[Abriael]

Geralt of Rivia is one badass motherf'er.

And you, sir, completely fail as a reviewer, but most importantly as a gamer.

This (and others of course) review is just another piece of proof that the Escapist should stick to the lulz and leave reviewing to more qualified writers.

Since when has being hand-led and spoon-fed become a necessary condition to a game being good?
This is a mature RPG, and mature gamers (17+ or 18+ depending on your region) are supposed to have enough little grey cells to actually understand that if they're taking too much damage, they should either defend (yeah, that incredibly obscure action that tends to make you take less damage) or use the magical shield (another oh so obscure magic that again, tends to make you take less damage). Anyone that didn't go through a self-service lobotomy should not need to be thaught those elementary elements by a tutorial.

The game is not perfect (while quite near, and definitely quite a lot nearer than dumbed down crap like Dragon Age 2, to which, mind you, the same reviewer gave 5 stars, showing fully how little he understands of RPGs...), but giving it a 7 borders on the lack of integrity, and falls flat into the complete lack of ability of reviewing a videogame fairly.

Seriously, Greg, go back to reviewing console games. Actually no, scratch that, give up reviewing, quite obviously it isn't for you.

 

[rsvp42]

A reviewer thoroughly plays the game analyzes all aspects and points the good things and the flaws. You know, so the reader gets an idea of what he might like or not in the game.
This review is more like a first impression of the game both in the way is written and in level of analysis.

A quick look at Metacritic would let curious customers know that this review is slightly lower than the average. The game's getting stellar reviews for the most part and if any RPG fan is making the purchase decision based entirely on Tito's opinion, they're doing it wrong. So what's at stake here and why people are getting so up-in-arms over it? I can only assume that people are idle/bored like me and are just killing time by debating online.

I think you and I both know people pay more attention to negative reviews
Noone trusts glowing reviews.
I don't know why, it may be journalistic integrity is long gone, people don't trust companies not to buy out reviewers I don't know

Thats why negative reviews like this, ones that are based on logical fallacies(the game didn't tell me fire was bad, so I'm not gonna dodge it)is really damaging, because of the false impression they give to readers on the fence and this is especially so because the amount of people negative reviews draw in.

Thats why people call Greg out on it, especially in light of DA2 review, a game with far more glaring flaws and bad design choices and he gave it a five stars calling it the pinnacle of RPG games
Its not consistent and really draws suspicion to the review process for the site
He will forever draw comparisons to that damning review, because it was so incredulous that flaws as big and as bad that game had were ignored and he can't do the same for other games which have slight problems.

Okay, so this is not the first time people have attacked this straw man: Greg wasn't saying he needed to be told not to stand in fire, he was saying that throwing fire at the player along with several groups of tough enemies without easing the player into that difficulty was the problem. I think I died 5 times or more there simply because the game hadn't given me a chance to get used to fighting that many enemies before putting me on the run and dealing with elemental hazards.

I realize that compared to his DA2 review, this would raise some eyebrows sky-high, but maybe he's just a big BioWare fan and all the DA2 hate was getting on his nerves. Maybe it's just that DA2 came first and if he had played TW2 first, the scores would be different. Maybe he just really likes DA2's characters. I dunno, I'm not concerned because I don't rely on just one review to make purchasing decisions.

 

[Levethian]

Just played the tutorial on 'Normal'. Fairly difficult, but not outrageously difficult. At all.

And you, sir, completely fail as a reviewer, but most importantly as a gamer.

Agreed. I'm not butt-hurt by his subjective opinion - people are welcome to dislike it. As subjective as opinions are, nothing is more objective than a number, and 7/10 ranks The Witcher 2 alongside Hellgate: London on our western 'Metascale'.

I don't expect Yahtzee to like it, but at least his opinions don't congeal into a definitive number that inflicts itself on Metacritic, so are truly subjective.

 

[rsvp42]

Since when has being hand-led and spoon-fed become a necessary condition to a game being good?
This is a mature RPG, and mature gamers (17+ or 18+ depending on your region) are supposed to have enough little grey cells to actually understand that if they're taking too much damage, they should either defend (yeah, that incredibly obscure action that tends to make you take less damage) or use the magical shield (another oh so obscure magic that again, tends to make you take less damage). Anyone that didn't go through a self-service lobotomy should not need to be thaught those elementary elements by a tutorial.

Again, no one's asking to be hand-led or spoon-fed anything. He was just pointing out the absurd difficulty curve in this game. Anyone who doesn't think the curve could use some improvement is kidding themselves. It's still an awesome game, but I'm not going to stick my fingers in my ears and ignore that frustration and I don't expect a reviewer to ignore it either.

I really wish people would stop misrepresenting what he was saying. You can disagree with his score and question his judgment but don't call him a stupid child or suggest he has brain damage. That's in very poor taste.

 

[rsvp42]

I don't expect Yahtzee to like it, but at least his opinions don't congeal into a definitive number that inflicts itself on Metacritic, so are truly subjective.

The reviewer can't help that site policy now requires a number. They didn't used to have them.

But this is the crux of the issue isn't it? It's the number. He can say what he wants, but as soon as he slaps a number on it and messes up fans' precious metascores, there's an issue. It's a shame they had to start scoring these for this very reason.

 

[RoyalWelsh]

I don't expect Yahtzee to like it, but at least his opinions don't congeal into a definitive number that inflicts itself on Metacritic, so are truly subjective.

The reviewer can't help that site policy now requires a number. They didn't used to have them.

But this is the crux of the issue isn't it? It's the number. He can say what he wants, but as soon as he slaps a number on it and messes up fans' precious metascores, there's an issue. It's a shame they had to start scoring these for this very reason.

I was just about to write this exact same thing, I totally agree with you. If Greg didn't give a rating then we wouldn't have so much butt hurt complainers. I hope they stop doing the rating system on this site imo.

 

[Ishiro32]

Ok... I don't agree with this review. I agree with the problems game has, but i think reviewer concentrate on them too much. I can easily say that reviewer didn't play a lot of cRPG's, because since when RPG-s are about mechanics? The best rpg of all time is Planescape: Torment and if you want my opinion it was pretty terrible at the level of mechanics. Witcher has flaws that needed pointing out, since devs really need to know what they fucked up, and new players know what they should expect, fine.
I have question. How you graded this game? As action game with some kind of story? Or as Role playing game with some kind of action? Because lack of good tutorial, gliches in combat (which will be fixed in next patch propably) and difficult level would be big issues in action game. But in RPG, not so much, since most people will be playing this game to experience the story.
You should grade game based on the genre, because something that is important in one genre could be completly optional in another. You should also know history of the genre. And RPG genre is old.
Witcher 2 romance with old times.
The biggest problem with your review i have is... DA2. I see those two reviews, it's the same genre. And... 5/5 DA2? 3,5/5 Witcher 2? Come on... DA2 was avarage. Copy-pasta locations, black/white choices, unfocused story, bandits that fall from the sky in horendous numbers, choices that don't change anything, avarage graphics (after i played DA2 i started DA:O once again, and DA:O had much more details than DA2, which is laughable) etc. And 5/5? You managed to not see those flaws and you can't overcome not having proper tutorial and clear crafting interface? How you can call yourself a reviewer? Even if you liked it a lot, copy-pasta locations should lower the score to at least 4.5/5. If you want to slap a score to a game, please think more about that number.

Back to Witcher 2... Game is not for everyone. Simple ^^. If you are RPG fan, must have. The best RPG in last few years. If you are not RPG fan... Hard game but rewarding. Just remember this game is about Story, if you don't like that kind of stuff... This game is not for you, don't play it, because the difficulty and minor flaws will frustrate shit out of you, and reward for this frustration (which is deep imersive story and characters) will be not enough for you.

 

[Levethian]

I don't expect Yahtzee to like it, but at least his opinions don't congeal into a definitive number that inflicts itself on Metacritic, so are truly subjective.

But this is the crux of the issue isn't it? It's the number.

I hope they stop doing the rating system on this site imo.

Totally agree with both of you. It's the number that hurts.

Fan scores are usually the most representative anyhow. 9.0 for Witcher 2 is pretty accurate. And 4.3 for Dragon Age 2... well that's mean. Deserves a 7-8, but caused too much tangential offence.

Shouldn't every gaming review site have specialist reviewers for different genres and perhaps platforms? It feels like this game just wasn't made for Greg at all..

 

[Abriael]

Again, no one's asking to be hand-led or spoon-fed anything. He was just pointing out the absurd difficulty curve in this game. Anyone who doesn't think the curve could use some improvement is kidding themselves. It's still an awesome game, but I'm not going to stick my fingers in my ears and ignore that frustration and I don't expect a reviewer to ignore it either.

There's a LOT of difference between thinking that "the curve could use some improvement", and basing a whole review (or better a whole rant, because this is a rant, and doesn't really get near to qualifying as a review) on that, completely ignoring the *many* great features of the game, that make it quite unique in the genre. No reviewer worth a grain of sailt would do that, simply because that's *not* how you review a game. It's not a matter of opinion.

Also, starting quite difficult and then getting relatively easier is a classic staple of PC RPGs, if you didn't notice. Gaining a sense of power as levels increase and skills become more powerful is nothing new in the genere (at least until someone introduced that aberration called "level scaling" that turns mice into terrible, terrible dragon rodents). Maybe someone's too used to playing on consoles? Well maybe he should continue to do so, and review only those games, because he obviously has no place reviewing a game like this. This review (pardon, this rant) is a trainwreck.

You simply don't give a game the difficulty curve of which "could use some improvement" a 7 just a couple months after you gave another that sports a lot of massive design flaws a 10.
Unless you're begging for your integrity and sanity to be questioned of course.

I really wish people would stop misrepresenting what he was saying. You can disagree with his score and question his judgment but don't call him a stupid child or suggest he has brain damage. That's in very poor taste.

hard to think of other causes for him not being able to figure how to use defense or defensive spells, or even more simply, lowering the difficulty to easy.

...besides being absurdly biased, of course. I heard that some rabid bioware fanboys can be. They tend to be quite enraged by the fact that CDProjekt undressed the (ex) king.

I heard that some of them are even posting massively unfair reviews of the Witcher 2 to try and persuade the guillible that dumbed crap like Dragon Age 2 is better.
Of course no one is saying that this is the case... The above possibilities still stand.

 

[rsvp42]

I really wish people would stop misrepresenting what he was saying. You can disagree with his score and question his judgment but don't call him a stupid child or suggest he has brain damage. That's in very poor taste.

hard to think of other causes for him not being able to figure how to use defense or defensive spells, or even more simply, lowering the difficulty to easy.

No, but seriously, there's no need to resort to ad hominem attacks like that when you already have a perfectly defensible position. Make your case, but don't insult the reviewer. No need to make yourself sound hurt or petty.

As to your point, there ARE other excuses for not understanding the combat, particularly that the game doesn't explain them outside of a few tips that pop up when you get around to using them. I hadn't played the Witcher before. I didn't know what a "Sign" was or how I should use it in combat. I'm not used to a system where blocking uses the same energy as other abilities. I wasn't expecting to be thrown into combat with 3+ enemies, one armored and one with a shield where you take a few hits and you're dead. This game diverges heavily from expected difficulty curves and it can be surprising and frustrating to new players. This is not about a player's mental capacity or education (I completed HS with an International Baccalaureate diploma and now hold a BFA if you must know). This is about how the game introduces its mechanics. Now again, I personally don't mind this because I don't mind learning through trial and error, but I can definitely say that teaching the mechanics was not this game's strong suit. Do I think that's worth marking it down as much as Greg did? No, but again that's just my opinion and I'm not going to attack his because of it.

And as I mentioned before, switching down to easy is not a solution to the weird difficulty curve. I did that in one of the fights later in the game that was being ridiculous and it removed every bit of the challenge. That's not a fun solution.

...besides being absurdly biased, of course. I heard that some rabid bioware fanboys can be. They tend to be quite enraged by the fact that CDProjekt undressed the (ex) king.

I heard that some of them are even posting massively unfair reviews of the Witcher 2 to try and persuade the guillible that dumbed crap like Dragon Age 2 is better.
Of course no one is saying that this is the case... The above possibilities still stand.

Funny because I heard a lot of those were just troll accounts made by haters to make BioWare fans look bad. Users who had only recently signed up to right ridiculous praise for DA2 and then turn around and bash TW2. Then again, DA2 got a lot of ridiculously low user scores made by people who hadn't played it as well.

I guess the point is that you can't trust user reviews when people are clearly being bitter and petty in the extreme. And being concerned about them affecting purchasing decisions to any significant degree is like being worried about YouTube comments driving away fans of your favorite band. In other words, it won't and it's better to just chill.

People take this shit too personally. It's like everyone wants to get caught up in childish drama over who's favorite studio is the bestest ever. Just play games and ignore stuff like this review if it upsets you.

 

[Mr. Omega]

And now the console bias has some full into the forefront. God I love this... such pathetic whining, all because this game didn't get a perfect score.

But they never think that there might be something wrong with the game. NOOOO. It's all the reveiwer's fault. It's all Dragon Age 2's fault. It's all GAMING'S fault. Or to be sepcific CONSOLE GAMER'S fault for how can anything designed for the PURE, NOBLE, SUPERIOR PC Gamers EVER have even a SINGLE flaw? After all, you PC Gamers are so much SMARTER and have BETTER GAMING SKILLS, and that must mean any game made for them is CLEARLY the best game ever made! You're above making personal insults and making excuses just because someone has a different opinion! NOOOOOOO. It's all everyone else's fault! HOW COULD I BE SO BLIND?

[sub][sub]And people wonder why I hate PC Gamers...[/sub][/sub]

 

[Ancientgamer]

The idea that a unintuitive tutorial in a 40 hour game can lower a review score by half, but the (yes I'm bringing this up, because it bears mentioning) tepid arse gravy that is DA2s repetitive design, phoned in combat and nonexistent story arcs can pull in a perfect score is absurd. It seems that brand name recognition matters more than anything else these days.

 

[Kahunaburger]

The idea that a unintuitive tutorial in a 40 hour game can lower a review score by half, but the (yes I'm bringing this up, because it bears mentioning) tepid arse gravy that is DA2s repetitive design, phoned in combat and nonexistent story arcs can pull in a perfect score is absurd. It seems that brand name recognition matters more than anything else these days.

Haha this is why so many reviewers hate numerical scores.

OT: Honestly, I really don't mind if this particular reviewer didn't like Witcher 2. Most really did, and I am playing it currently and absolutely loving it - miles above pretty much everything else in pretty much every way. I have the right to my opinion, and he has the right to his

 

[Ishiro32]

And now the console bias has some full into the forefront. God I love this... such pathetic whining, all because this game didn't get a perfect score.

But they never think that there might be something wrong with the game. NOOOO. It's all the reveiwer's fault. It's all Dragon Age 2's fault. It's all GAMING'S fault. Or to be sepcific CONSOLE GAMER'S fault for how can anything designed for the PURE, NOBLE, SUPERIOR PC Gamers EVER have even a SINGLE flaw? After all, you PC Gamers are so much SMARTER and have BETTER GAMING SKILLS, and that must mean any game made for them is CLEARLY the best game ever made! You're above making personal insults and making excuses just because someone has a different opinion! NOOOOOOO. It's all everyone else's fault! HOW COULD I BE SO BLIND?

[sub][sub]And people wonder why I hate PC Gamers...[/sub][/sub]

Hmmm... If you read comments you will see that most people agree with the fact that game have flaws. But, don't worry i know that reading is hard when you rage. Most people just doesn't agree with score, and suggest that you know, that reviewer overreact about issues and didn't even mention few features that game has. And about DA2... you know, he did review that game and it's the same genre, so people check it. And... Perfect score, even though DA2 has flaws. And check Witcher 2 and avarage score.
And i know it's opinions etc. but consider this. People have their tastes... for example someone likes advanture games (dead genre i know) and company X release advanture game, then the review of this game make a guy who likes sport games. Even thought he heard about advanture games and maybe he played few of them, he don't know jack about that genre. And that man review this game... Will his review be accurate? Hell no... his review will be garbage since he doesn't know what to look in those games, and he doesn't know what merits advanture game player expect. He will only know that he didn't have enough fun. But people who enjoy advanture games thinks this game is awesome. Now we have problem... Since people who like sport game won't even read his review, because they don't care about advanture games. You see where i'm going with this?
Yes i suggest that Greg isn't RPG expert and therefore he shouldn't write proffesional reviews of that genre. It's joke that he did review DA2 and Witcher 2. I hope Skyrim won't get into his hands.

 

[IamGamer41]

And now the console bias has some full into the forefront. God I love this... such pathetic whining, all because this game didn't get a perfect score.

But they never think that there might be something wrong with the game. NOOOO. It's all the reveiwer's fault. It's all Dragon Age 2's fault. It's all GAMING'S fault. Or to be sepcific CONSOLE GAMER'S fault for how can anything designed for the PURE, NOBLE, SUPERIOR PC Gamers EVER have even a SINGLE flaw? After all, you PC Gamers are so much SMARTER and have BETTER GAMING SKILLS, and that must mean any game made for them is CLEARLY the best game ever made! You're above making personal insults and making excuses just because someone has a different opinion! NOOOOOOO. It's all everyone else's fault! HOW COULD I BE SO BLIND?

[sub][sub]And people wonder why I hate PC Gamers...[/sub][/sub]

Man your pretty damn clueless.Its not the fact that the game is on the PC.Its the fact that the reviewer dropped the ball on the review.The format of which the game is on is irrelevant.

 

[Ancientgamer]

But they never think that there might be something wrong with the game. NOOOO. It's all the reveiwer's fault. It's all Dragon Age 2's fault. It's all GAMING'S fault. Or to be sepcific CONSOLE GAMER'S fault for how can anything designed for the PURE, NOBLE, SUPERIOR PC Gamers EVER have even a SINGLE flaw? After all, you PC Gamers are so much SMARTER and have BETTER GAMING SKILLS, and that must mean any game made for them is CLEARLY the best game ever made! You're above making personal insults and making excuses just because someone has a different opinion! NOOOOOOO. It's all everyone else's fault! HOW COULD I BE SO BLIND?

Good god man, calm down.

No one's upset because it didn't get a perfect, or even good score. The malcontent is with respect to the fact that the recent DA2 got an absolute PERFECT 5/5, in the face of several oft-mentioned and quite foundational flaws. "Because the quality of the game as a whole outweighed those flaws." But that's a double standard. This game got a huge markdown due to one debatable minor quibble, and a few reasonable objections. Were they bribed? No, that's silly. But it's pretty clear they felt obliged to give one game the benefit of the doubt due to massive expectation and brand recognition, while the other got thrown under the bus.