The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Review

[Yossarian1507]

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

 

[beastrn]

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.

No. Only just realized it went below 90 during my last post here.

Only reason I'm here is to add my voice to the dissent this review has riled. It's an unjust review backed up by someone that thinks Dragon Age 2 is a good game.

Also, read my other posts to learn why "subjective" is not an excuse for "bad at games and should have played on Easy"

 

[eNTi]

this game is just boring. the mechanics are frantic and mindless. the ideas are mediocre and the main character is your standard dark fantasy hero with an identity disorder. the game is realistic in the most profane and uninteresting ways and on the other hand shows a lack of consequence in every other aspect. like stealing from everyone in front of them. there's money lying around everywhere. you have your standard open doors/locked doors one way street with precious herbs growing in the midst of the city that's basically on fire. this all makes so little sense, i can't understand how anyone could play this poor excuse for an rpg for more than 10 minutes. we have to put up with so much crap from the industry that games like the witcher actually appeal to people, because they don't know that there has been a time, where games were good? fuck this industry, fuck everything about it.

 

[Traun]

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.

The battle system was inspired by Demon's Soul, a game known for it's difficulty and it delivers. You have to know what you are doing, when you are engaging and when to retreat (sometimes legging it, and the game allows you to do that, is the best option). Not to mention the beauty of preparing yourself for combat. As long as you aren't playing on easy the gameplay will deliver.

Think about it this way - even those defending the reviewer say that this is an awesome game, despite it's flaws.

 

[AngryFrenchCanadian]

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.

Hello, Mr. Straw McStrawman of Strawmanville.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Don't you kids make me turn this internet around.


So Greg Tito gave The Witcher 2 a less that stellar rating? So fucking what? Go read the reviews elsewhere that get down on their knees and wrap their lips around the game instead, if it means that much to you.

I personally think The Witcher 2 is a flawed gem, but then I like Obisidian Entertainment games so I'm obviously mad.

Greg shouldn't be burnt at the stake for having a differing opinion...

... writing a D&D 4e supplement, OTOH.

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

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.

No. Only just realized it went below 90 during my last post here.

Only reason I'm here is to add my voice to the dissent this review has riled. It's an unjust review backed up by someone that thinks Dragon Age 2 is a good game.

Also, read my other posts to learn why "subjective" is not an excuse for "bad at games and should have played on Easy"

How can you even begin to make an assumption that he is 'bad' at games without a) having witnessed his playthrough of The Witcher 2 and b) witnessed his playthroughs of different games as a control? You are literally talking out of your ass here.

 

[beastrn]

How can I begin? Er, I dunno, at the part where he played The Witcher 2 on Normal and complained it was too hard? Or the part where he said Dragon Age 2 had challenging combat?

Like the Journal in this game - all the information you need is right there.

If I went and played D&D with Greg (an apparently decade-experienced D&D player) and said "Greg, D&D actually isn't good. Why are we rolling dice, anyway? I've got a sword. I want to hit you with it. Just tell me how much damage it does so we can actually have FUN playing this game. It's a GAME. Why isn't it intuitive, Greg? Where are the tutorials Greg? No, no. Don't give me a huge book of rules. I can't be bothered reading that shite! I just want to have FUN Greg! I give D&D a five out of ten."

Do you think he would let me be entitled to my "opinion"?

Don't give me a bullshit answer. Think about it.

 

[Plinglebob]

"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.

I think this sort of thinking is whats hurting the game industry and isn't helping the case for games being considered "Legitimate" art. You're saying that every profesional review having the same opinion on something is a bad thing, but if you look at the various mediums (music, film etc), you'll see that 90% of the time they agree. This is because personal preference makes up less then 10% of a review. The rest is based on its artistic merit analysing and judging the individual areas. For example, a film review will be based on the narrative/screenplay, acting, directing and cinematography with the reviewers own opinion only coming in at the end. For computer games, too high a percentage of a review/score is determined by the feelings of the reviewer.

Back OT: Its hard for me to judge as I only managed to get this yesterday (stupid Royal Mail) and only got to play about 1/2hr of it, but it really shows a lot of promise. Yes its hard and makes you read the manual (had nothing else to do while installing anyway), but considering how much people complain about games dumbing down and being too easy, isn't it a bit hypocritical to complain about a game that IS tough? In my 1/2hr, I died 5 times, 3 times in fights where I got overconfident and twice to the fire (which is when I saved and quit as was 1:30am).

 

[Djed Moros]

I really love the combat. Started on hard difficulty since I played the first game, which was far too easy, even on highest difficulty. First fight sent me tumbling cause the controls were a bit unfamiliar, but I think you can get used to it pretty quick if you played a few other direct-control RPGs or action adventures before. First death hit me when I had a bad start in the dragon chase scene.

Witcher is not a casual game, neither the first, nor the second installment of the series. The combat can be rough, but then so it was in Severance, Demon Souls or the preview versions of PoP: Warrior Within. I personally never immersed into a game in which I simply had to click on the enemy and went out to make coffee to return once my all-mighty party vanquished every last foe on the screen. Witcher 2 aims for at least some realism and two things reality teaches you pretty quick is:
a) swords WILL hurt you - especially if they hit you in the back or unguarded
b) no one will wait till you swallow that elixir in the middle of the fun

The atmosphere in the game would be ruined immediately if Geralt would turn out to suck in more sword slashes than the house high kraken boss monster he's supposed to slay. And the game DOES warn you about the difficulty - and the consequences of your choices. So, first choice you make turns out to be the difficulty. It clearly says there in the menu that alchemy is necessary for survival on normal mode and you will die quickly. So why not start on easy if you're new to the series? As in real life, pride can be restored but try that when your arm has been cut off.

Still, I don't know why they changed the alchemy system. I really liked the system in the first game; the drink-only-three rule in Witcher 2 seems to miss strategic depth. However, I'm not through yet, so maybe it gets better later on.
So far, the game has been really unique in terms of gameplay (which really means something in the days of streamlined RPGs) and it offers the deepest experience I found in games since the release of its predecessor. Only thing I didn't like were the quick time events. They're well executed but still a bit cheap compared to the rest.

Guess Yahtzee will still beat the shit out of this one next week.

 

[dantoddd]

i love the tribalism of witcher fans.

I am absolutely certain that the majority of witcher fans, especially the chaps who are ranting on the internet, were convinced that TW2 deserved 95+ on game ratings even before the game came out.

 

[rsvp42]

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

omg I'm laughing so hard at this XD

Seriously I had to replay that--god I don't remember how many times. That's exactly how I felt too, except I don't think the game is designed poorly or is untested, I just think those fights were way too ridiculous for the beginning of a game. I realize it's hardcore, "Normal" is not normal Normal, blah de blah, I get it... but shit got [u[way[/u] easier after that prologue so far.

 

[Keava]

I am truly amazed by people's lack of reading comprehension skills in some cases. Some of you even go so far as compare it to Jim's review. Want to know the difference? Well i'll tell you anyway. Jim, in each and every paragraph, as usual, tried to prove his initial point bit too hard - that the game just isn't good often bending facts to support his thesis, Greg on the other hand focused on explaining why he thinks the game could use some more polish from the purely technical side of things. Still don't see a difference?

While i do not agree with every point brought up, it's ok, it's beautiful that people can disagree, that's the while point of human interaction. To disagree and consider each other's point of view.
Some of the design choices were based on the novels itself, like the potion drinking prior to fights, some i consider balancing choices like the drawbacks of many of the potions. The combat in this game is constructed in such way you don't need maximum stats to win, with bit of luck and well timed use of available tools you can one hit almost any non-boss opponent with coup de grace moves.

Same time however, anyone remaining blind to obvious shortcomings of the UI is just acting childish in my eyes. There are things that just took way too much time to perform from user's perspective. The crafting system could have been better, without forcing a player to talk to crafting NPC several times because you lack one of ingredients. Some of the talent's have really vague descriptions not exactly matching the effects in game or are simply misleading (like the mutagen boosting skill from Alchemy tree, it won't work on existing mutagens, only the ones you put after obtaining the skill).
Personally, for me, such things are minor issues because i tend to play games for all the different reasons than the ominous 'majority', whatever it means, but i do recognize those flaws and i know they might annoy people. It's called not being ignorant.

The only way to improve games is to point out even slightest annoyances to the developers that read those reviews, so they can take notes and if they feel that the outcry was justified they can react in their next production.
CDPR is young company when it get's to making games, it's their second game ever, they went through the effort of designing their own engine for it and they did good job at the visual and story sides of the game, they created interesting combat, but they do lack experience in ironing out all the small bits which is, for me, perfectly understandable. It doesn't mean i should just pat them on the head as if they were suffering from retardation - they aren't and the best way they can improve is if they get constructive feedback.

Sales wise they are doing so far with it, i think vgchartz showed over 200k retail copies sold in first week, which is quite impressive for PC only title from a minor company and singleplayer RPG genre.

End Of Rant.

 

[beastrn]

Ohhh my god Soviet, I want to punch DSP in the face twenty times.

"This game could learn from Assassin's Creed - that game lets you fight crowds of people"

UGGHHHHHHHHHHH YEAH FIGHTING MULTIPLE PEOPLE SHOULD BE EASY

 

[DayDark]

How can I begin? Er, I dunno, at the part where he played The Witcher 2 on Normal and complained it was too hard? Or the part where he said Dragon Age 2 had challenging combat?

Like the Journal in this game - all the information you need is right there.


Do you think he would let me be entitled to my "opinion"?

Don't give me a bullshit answer. Think about it.

How about the part where he explained that it's the system he's got a problem with and therefore lowering the difficulty is absolutely irrelevant. He even says that the only thing that makes it challenging is that he's out of touch with the controls.

You were already explain how a tutorial is better than a manual, because showing is always better than telling.

Could you maybe stop being a broken record parroting the same shit that has already been addressed? Did someone die because if this review, because you sound like you were raped or something.

If I went and played D&D with Greg (an apparently decade-experienced D&D player) and said "Greg, D&D actually isn't good. Why are we rolling dice, anyway? I've got a sword. I want to hit you with it. Just tell me how much damage it does so we can actually have FUN playing this game. It's a GAME. Why isn't it intuitive, Greg? Where are the tutorials Greg? No, no. Don't give me a huge book of rules. I can't be bothered reading that shite! I just want to have FUN Greg! I give D&D a five out of ten."

Are you seriously comparing intuitiveness, with getting a rulebook in text for a pen and paper experience, with getting a rulebook in text for a virtual audio/visual experience. How would it not be more intuitive to get the info audio/visually in a game primarily portrayed in such a way?

 

[Delusibeta]

How can I begin? Er, I dunno, at the part where he played The Witcher 2 on Normal and complained it was too hard? Or the part where he said Dragon Age 2 had challenging combat?

Like the Journal in this game - all the information you need is right there.

If I went and played D&D with Greg (an apparently decade-experienced D&D player) and said "Greg, D&D actually isn't good. Why are we rolling dice, anyway? I've got a sword. I want to hit you with it. Just tell me how much damage it does so we can actually have FUN playing this game. It's a GAME. Why isn't it intuitive, Greg? Where are the tutorials Greg? No, no. Don't give me a huge book of rules. I can't be bothered reading that shite! I just want to have FUN Greg! I give D&D a five out of ten."

Do you think he would let me be entitled to my "opinion"?

Don't give me a bullshit answer. Think about it.

This is making you so mad. Your indignation is palpable, bro.

Which is ironic, since your indignation is obvious from miles away. Trolling trolls just makes trolls.

Most of the complaints regarding the tutorial can be argued with "well, they didn't include a 60+ page manual for nothing." CD Projekt is very much in the old school of doing things (e.g. only having to pay for Actual Expansion Packs that are probably large enough to get a individual retail release, getting rid of the DRM in the first bloody patch), so the mantra of RTFM should be expected.

 

[teebeeohh]

i actually liked that the game didn't treat me like lobotomized idiot. And reading the manual is not that hard, it's like 30 pages, half of which are full of disclaimers, install instructions and detailed tables of the talents(which you won't need anyway since those are more or less locked during the beginning. And regarding Alt-tapping out of the game: your fucking phone probably reads the manual.

Well this is most likely something that will be fixed with the enhanced edition and possibly the console versions, including some kind of tutorial that packs you up all nice in foam so you won't hurt yourself, the only thing they really need to tell you is this: When in doubt use the Quen sign. Although including a dragon in your very fist dialog option and putting possible the hardest section of the game behind that is a dick move.

oh and regarding the potions: you can easily brew enough swallow and rook potions to poison vizima, so just pop on whenever you go somewhere you expect combat. And if you are not buffed just be defensive and use the Quen sign.