Zero Punctuation: The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings

Spoonius

New member
Jul 18, 2009
1,659
0
0
debrox said:
I_am_a_Spoon said:
You have no need or right to "convert" others!
On need, you are using the straw man fallacy since no one ever stated his argument came out of necessity. On right, we certainly do, so your premise is false and unrelated to your conclusion.
Obviously, I intended to imply that PC users don't have any obligation to convince others. And I definitely don't think that gamers shouldn't be allowed to discuss the pros and cons of their chosen platform, only that when said discussion devolves into personal assumptions or accusations and claims of "objective superiority", then it becomes less a debate and more an opinionated shit-flinging contest dressed up in fancy words.

Nobody has the right, on these forums at least, to mock or openly insult others because of something so trivial as choice of gaming platform.

debrox said:
I_am_a_Spoon said:
People will buy and use whichever platform they personally prefer... WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?!
Again, this is a straw man fallacy as you tacitly claimed we claimed that people will not buy whichever platform they prefer (when you said "WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?"). Of course, we did not claim that idiocy. Further, someone preferring something objectively inferior does not make its use subjective; it could be used by the delusional or ignorant. We've done our part to describe with facts the objective superiority of PC gaming. Where is your work to show that those objective premises are in fact only a matter of opinion, deeming the entire decision subjective?
Fine. You've basically claimed that "objectively inferior" consoles are used primarily by the "delusional or ignorant".

You have not been able to prove that PCs are objectively superior to consoles... please don't assume that your arguments are irrefutably decisive or even completely applicable. To do so is pretentious, and amateurish. PCs and consoles provide different benefits to different users, and cannot be cross-examined in a truly objective way. Without going into truly exhaustive detail regarding the pros and cons of either type of gaming platform, it's plain to see that people will prefer one over the other for personal reasons. Thus, the decision is at least somewhat, if not entirely subjective.

As such, you shouldn't openly claim that those who use technology you personally believe to be inferior are "delusional or ignorant"... such claims reek of hypocrisy.

debrox said:
I_am_a_Spoon said:
Each has their own merits... don't lecture others just so that you can feel superior. I have both a PC and 360, and like both for different reasons.
This is you saying a bunch of nothing since you basically stated you have the counter-evidence without actually giving it to us. Thus, this premise also does not lead to the conclusion.
The claim that I own and employ both a PC and console is a personal testament to the subjective merits of both platforms, rather than evidence to support my statement, and I never presented it otherwise.

I believe (key word there) that selecting one type of platform to the exclusion of all others is pointless, as either offers unique benefits to the user. You, similarly, can do no better than "believe" otherwise.

debrox said:
I_am_a_Spoon said:
There are so many factors that come into play when determining platform choice (and it's just that, a choice) that all attempts to objectively juxtapose the pros or cons of any particular platform are irrelevant. It's almost ENTIRELY subjective.
It is not subjective. PC gaming is objectively better as we've shown. Again, why do you keep acting like we ever argued that the decision was not a choice?
PC gaming is arguably better in some ways, and not in others. Not objectively so on average, as there are so many external factors to consider that comparisons from a purely-objective perspective are useless to a large degree.

I never stated that you argued that the decision isn't a choice, only that said choice is utterly personal and not an obvious one like many (not just PC gamers, but owners of either platform type) would have their "opponents" believe.

And again, PC GAMING IS NOT OBJECTIVELY BETTER. Neither is it objectively worse. Please stop assuming otherwise. Hardware stats and figures can be juxtaposed, but so many other contextual, dynamic factors come into play when determining what to buy that the objectivity of any gaming platform's relative worth is purely subjective.
 

Deathninja19

New member
Dec 7, 2009
341
0
0
Jamie Wroe said:
Exactly. It does make me wonder sometimes if people actually belive this tripe that you need to remortgage your house every 6 months to have a decent gaming PC. The only time a console is better value than a pc is when it's first released, or if you don't have much knowlege about building PC's (and I bet everyone on the escapist could learn).
The thing is a lot of people don't have time to learn to build a computer they have work and lives and when they come home they just want to relax for an hour or two before they have to do something else, with a console there's no need for extra work you can pop in a game and you can start playing. Don't get me wrong I love PC gaming but a lot of PC gamers do sound stuck up when they talk about 'dumbed down' console gaming, some people want to have immediate fun and who can blame them?
 

maddawg IAJI

I prefer the term "Zomguard"
Feb 12, 2009
7,840
0
0
debrox said:
maddawg IAJI said:
debrox said:
I_am_a_Spoon said:
Christ, the number of Escapists vehemently defending the PC is ridiculous.
Here is your conclusion. Let us examine if your premises bring us to it.

I_am_a_Spoon said:
You have no need or right to "convert" others!
On need, you are using the straw man fallacy since no one ever stated his argument came out of necessity. On right, we certainly do, so your premise is false and unrelated to your conclusion.

I_am_a_Spoon said:
People will buy and use whichever platform they personally prefer... WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?!
Again, this is a straw man fallacy as you tacitly claimed we claimed that people will not buy whichever platform they prefer (when you said "WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?"). Of course, we did not claim that idiocy. Further, someone preferring something objectively inferior does not make its use subjective; it could be used by the delusional or ignorant. We've done our part to describe with facts the objective superiority of PC gaming. Where is your work to show that those objective premises are in fact only a matter of opinion, deeming the entire decision subjective?

I_am_a_Spoon said:
Each has their own merits... don't lecture others just so that you can feel superior. I have both a PC and 360, and like both for different reasons.
This is you saying a bunch of nothing since you basically stated you have the counter-evidence without actually giving it to us. Thus, this premise also does not lead to the conclusion.

I_am_a_Spoon said:
There are so many factors that come into play when determining platform choice (and it's just that, a choice) that all attempts to objectively juxtapose the pros or cons of any particular platform are irrelevant. It's almost ENTIRELY subjective.
It is not subjective. PC gaming is objectively better as we've shown. Again, why do you keep acting like we ever argued that the decision was not a choice?
I have played both on the PC and on the Xbox. Both cost me around two hundred dollars. My PC can't run most of the latest games and I will need to spend quite a bit to get the right equipment needed for an upgrade. My Xbox on the other hand, has served me well and is always up to date.

I prefer console gaming because it is easier and cheaper. We all have our reasons for liking what ever brand we buy, but I'll tell you right now, at the moment, the PC master race attitude doesn't make me want to go back to PC gaming and that is part of the reason why so many people dislike PC gamers.
That is like saying a $7 desert from a top restaurant is worse than a Snickers, because the Snickers is slightly more affordable. I don't think affordability (when the gap is so tiny -- only a few thousand dollars) should enter into the equation of supremacy. It can, however, enter into the equation of what is pragmatic for someone to buy, given his leisurely allowance.

Basically, you don't see impoverished people reviewing items, selecting only the least expensive ones as best. You see reviewers who consider what is affordable for most, not themselves.
Affordability does play into the equation, regardless of what you think. Gaming is a luxury, not a necessity. If you even own a game, you bought it because you had spare cash lying around after paying rent, bills and for anything else you might need. A PC requires not only quite a bit of money to stay up to date, but also quite a bit of time. If you play on it a lot, it may be worth it. However, I don't game nearly enough to justify fixing my current PC and between car payments, gas and college bills, its kinda hard to even scrounge up the cash to do it.
 

Turing '88

New member
Feb 24, 2011
91
0
0
Deathninja19 said:
The thing is a lot of people don't have time to learn to build a computer they have work and lives and when they come home they just want to relax for an hour or two before they have to do something else, with a console there's no need for extra work you can pop in a game and you can start playing. Don't get me wrong I love PC gaming but a lot of PC gamers do sound stuck up when they talk about 'dumbed down' console gaming, some people want to have immediate fun and who can blame them?
That's fair enough, I used a console instead of a PC while at University (I didn't have the time to do much gaming so didn't care about having the best system). In my last post I was just trying to debate the point that a PC is significantly more expensive, because that's not the case for everyone and is never as significant as most people seem to think.

Also I don't hate console gamers, I may hate when a specific game is tailored for consoles but I don't blame console gamers or even the dev for that (provided that if they port to PC they do a good job. I'm looking at you GTA:4).

With The Witcher 2 I'm glad it's appearing on console, it adds more money for expansions and DLC plus increases the likelyhood of similar games being made in the future. If you read the comments on the news article about TW:2 going to consoles you'll see most PC gamers seem to feel the same.

It's already obvious TW:2 was designed with consoles in mind, but very few people are complaining about that because the game was fantastic.
 

debrox

New member
Jun 13, 2011
14
0
0
maddawg IAJI said:
debrox said:
maddawg IAJI said:
debrox said:
I_am_a_Spoon said:
Christ, the number of Escapists vehemently defending the PC is ridiculous.
Here is your conclusion. Let us examine if your premises bring us to it.

I_am_a_Spoon said:
You have no need or right to "convert" others!
On need, you are using the straw man fallacy since no one ever stated his argument came out of necessity. On right, we certainly do, so your premise is false and unrelated to your conclusion.

I_am_a_Spoon said:
People will buy and use whichever platform they personally prefer... WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?!
Again, this is a straw man fallacy as you tacitly claimed we claimed that people will not buy whichever platform they prefer (when you said "WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?"). Of course, we did not claim that idiocy. Further, someone preferring something objectively inferior does not make its use subjective; it could be used by the delusional or ignorant. We've done our part to describe with facts the objective superiority of PC gaming. Where is your work to show that those objective premises are in fact only a matter of opinion, deeming the entire decision subjective?

I_am_a_Spoon said:
Each has their own merits... don't lecture others just so that you can feel superior. I have both a PC and 360, and like both for different reasons.
This is you saying a bunch of nothing since you basically stated you have the counter-evidence without actually giving it to us. Thus, this premise also does not lead to the conclusion.

I_am_a_Spoon said:
There are so many factors that come into play when determining platform choice (and it's just that, a choice) that all attempts to objectively juxtapose the pros or cons of any particular platform are irrelevant. It's almost ENTIRELY subjective.
It is not subjective. PC gaming is objectively better as we've shown. Again, why do you keep acting like we ever argued that the decision was not a choice?
I have played both on the PC and on the Xbox. Both cost me around two hundred dollars. My PC can't run most of the latest games and I will need to spend quite a bit to get the right equipment needed for an upgrade. My Xbox on the other hand, has served me well and is always up to date.

I prefer console gaming because it is easier and cheaper. We all have our reasons for liking what ever brand we buy, but I'll tell you right now, at the moment, the PC master race attitude doesn't make me want to go back to PC gaming and that is part of the reason why so many people dislike PC gamers.
That is like saying a $7 desert from a top restaurant is worse than a Snickers, because the Snickers is slightly more affordable. I don't think affordability (when the gap is so tiny -- only a few thousand dollars) should enter into the equation of supremacy. It can, however, enter into the equation of what is pragmatic for someone to buy, given his leisurely allowance.

Basically, you don't see impoverished people reviewing items, selecting only the least expensive ones as best. You see reviewers who consider what is affordable for most, not themselves.
Affordability does play into the equation, regardless of what you think. Gaming is a luxury, not a necessity. If you even own a game, you bought it because you had spare cash lying around after paying rent, bills and for anything else you might need. A PC requires not only quite a bit of money to stay up to date, but also quite a bit of time. If you play on it a lot, it may be worth it. However, I don't game nearly enough to justify fixing my current PC and between car payments, gas and college bills, its kinda hard to even scrounge up the cash to do it.
Everything you said can be refuted with what I just wrote. That has nothing to do with which is actually the better product or experience. It has to do with your limitations to reach a product.
 

maddawg IAJI

I prefer the term "Zomguard"
Feb 12, 2009
7,840
0
0
debrox said:
maddawg IAJI said:
debrox said:
maddawg IAJI said:
debrox said:
I_am_a_Spoon said:
Christ, the number of Escapists vehemently defending the PC is ridiculous.
Here is your conclusion. Let us examine if your premises bring us to it.

I_am_a_Spoon said:
You have no need or right to "convert" others!
On need, you are using the straw man fallacy since no one ever stated his argument came out of necessity. On right, we certainly do, so your premise is false and unrelated to your conclusion.

I_am_a_Spoon said:
People will buy and use whichever platform they personally prefer... WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?!
Again, this is a straw man fallacy as you tacitly claimed we claimed that people will not buy whichever platform they prefer (when you said "WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?"). Of course, we did not claim that idiocy. Further, someone preferring something objectively inferior does not make its use subjective; it could be used by the delusional or ignorant. We've done our part to describe with facts the objective superiority of PC gaming. Where is your work to show that those objective premises are in fact only a matter of opinion, deeming the entire decision subjective?

I_am_a_Spoon said:
Each has their own merits... don't lecture others just so that you can feel superior. I have both a PC and 360, and like both for different reasons.
This is you saying a bunch of nothing since you basically stated you have the counter-evidence without actually giving it to us. Thus, this premise also does not lead to the conclusion.

I_am_a_Spoon said:
There are so many factors that come into play when determining platform choice (and it's just that, a choice) that all attempts to objectively juxtapose the pros or cons of any particular platform are irrelevant. It's almost ENTIRELY subjective.
It is not subjective. PC gaming is objectively better as we've shown. Again, why do you keep acting like we ever argued that the decision was not a choice?
I have played both on the PC and on the Xbox. Both cost me around two hundred dollars. My PC can't run most of the latest games and I will need to spend quite a bit to get the right equipment needed for an upgrade. My Xbox on the other hand, has served me well and is always up to date.

I prefer console gaming because it is easier and cheaper. We all have our reasons for liking what ever brand we buy, but I'll tell you right now, at the moment, the PC master race attitude doesn't make me want to go back to PC gaming and that is part of the reason why so many people dislike PC gamers.
That is like saying a $7 desert from a top restaurant is worse than a Snickers, because the Snickers is slightly more affordable. I don't think affordability (when the gap is so tiny -- only a few thousand dollars) should enter into the equation of supremacy. It can, however, enter into the equation of what is pragmatic for someone to buy, given his leisurely allowance.

Basically, you don't see impoverished people reviewing items, selecting only the least expensive ones as best. You see reviewers who consider what is affordable for most, not themselves.
Affordability does play into the equation, regardless of what you think. Gaming is a luxury, not a necessity. If you even own a game, you bought it because you had spare cash lying around after paying rent, bills and for anything else you might need. A PC requires not only quite a bit of money to stay up to date, but also quite a bit of time. If you play on it a lot, it may be worth it. However, I don't game nearly enough to justify fixing my current PC and between car payments, gas and college bills, its kinda hard to even scrounge up the cash to do it.
Everything you said can be refuted with what I just wrote. That has nothing to do with which is actually the better product or experience. It has to do with your limitations to reach a product.
It has to do with the fact that I get more bang for my buck with the console and that alone makes the experience more enjoyable.
 

odd function

New member
Jul 11, 2010
26
0
0
This "review" makes me realize that consolification is not something made up by whiny PC fanboys, but is something to be feared and despised. It reminds me of a humor video froma while back for Super Mario Bros. which included pop up instruction for how to jump and how to kill enemies.

I'm not going to say that the tutorial wasn't very flawed, but Yahtzee should have been adaptable enough to RTFM or at the very least turn down the difficulty so that he could discuss the game beyond the single aspect he got around to.

It doesn't help his case when he compare the PS3 outage to poor PC connectivity. This is like comparing oranges to cows, and if he was the least bit knowledgeable about this he would know better. Quite simply is a WoW server is down you can still play a different online game or browse the web, not so in the PS3 case.
 

SideburnsPuppy

New member
May 23, 2009
450
0
0
I was expecting another Painkiller skit or somesuch. I think you can imagine how disappointed I am. In case you can't, the answer is, "very."

And thus my bold boycott of Zero Punctuation begins.
 

Cid Silverwing

Paladin of The Light
Jul 27, 2008
3,134
0
0
Neither PC nor console is superior. Take the best of both worlds.

This review reminds me of the time I tried to play The Witcher 1 (on Steam, and what a horrible mess that was). The interface was, mildly speaking, an eldritch abomination of a nightmare, and on contemplating it, it sounds like The Witcher 2 is only worse. Not that I needed another reason to avoid this series whose user interfaces must have apparently been designed by Hitler.
 

Nesco Nomen

New member
Apr 13, 2010
77
0
0
Not necessarily by Hitler himself, but someone with deeply infested hatred for all gamers.

Someone who has never held a mouse in his hand. Most likely because he has no hands.
Because that would explain total and painfully obvious lack of any ergonomics elements.

"But, but" - you say - "there are many games with not that great interface"

Not like this matey. This one takes it to another level completely.
It's like C64 and magnetic tape all over again, as sometimes it takes 20 secs, and multiple key hits, just to get from one interface screen to another. You can loot some corpse and spend next 5 minutes searching for it through the pile of shit they call Inventory system...

[was about to write a wall of text but then saw my cat passing by, and decided to hit her instead]
 

Dendio

New member
Mar 24, 2010
701
0
0
Witcher 2 is one of the best gaming experiences Ive ever had. The main complaints here were "its too hard, I don't know how to equip stuff and I didn't know I could skip cut scenes by pressing the right mouse button.

The game gets considerably easier as you gain more specialties via leveling
Beyond that there is an easy mode for those who want it easy.
Play the game beyond the first chapter before damning it...

And about the elf scene how about commending the writers for pulling a fast one on the gamer who's all too used to the generic "save the damsel in distress and be rewarded" mechanic.

http://www.ign.com/videos/2011/05/24/the-witcher-2-video-review?objectid=14345201

Watch the video it covers more of the game than Yahtzee has in the Witcher and its Sequel combined
 

Olivia75

New member
Jun 10, 2008
8
0
0
I'm totally going to play this game nonstop - for the next 3 years if that's what it takes to finish it. Geralt is HOT. I consider it a privilege, not a predicament, like SOME people. Witcher 1 was amazing - shame yahtzee can't see that. and console games suck; just admit it, people, and move on. Join the glorious master race of PC gamers. we have cookies.
 

Thanatos34

New member
Mar 31, 2009
389
0
0
Err, while I do like ZP, Yahtzee is wrong on one LARGE count here. The cutscenes ARE skippable, CDProjeckt doesn't make the same mistake that Bioware does many times. That five-minute, (more like 30 second), cutscene before the Krayan boss fight? Yeah, all you got to do is hit the right mouse button.

Anyway, I knew he wouldn't like it, just wanted to point out he's completely wrong on that point. Yahtzee has no patience for anything that doesn't immediately start out good, lol. And obviously if he didn't finish The Witcher 1, he's not going to get a lot of things in The Witcher 2. He never even discussed the fact that you can have two *completely* different Act IIs depending with whom you side in Act 1, and the very open-ended... well, ending, the game has.

I didn't really find the game all that hard with group fighting anyway, the only challenge was on Hard mode, except with certain fights that were obviously meant to be hard. It's one of the best games that's come out recently, and I'm happy to disagree with Yahtzee on this one.

As far as fights being too hard, learn to use the Yrden sign, traps, and bombs. Makes them a cinch.
 

andysonofbob

New member
Jan 15, 2011
2
0
0
The second Yhatzee said he was playing a AAA PC game a laptop I took the review as seriously as it was meant to be.

It took me over 2 months to play this game because it took CDPR that long to fix the 3D Vision. Was it worth it? Oh my goodness, yes. I was blown away by everything. Story, gameplay, atmosphere, graphics, sound, lore... everything.

60+ enjoyable hours on my first playthrough as a spellcaster. On to my second playthrough as a Sword specialist. (Obviously being a Witcher you are awesome on all of the 3 specialisms regardless of which you pick)

I can only justify buying one game for the holidays (last year it was Just Cause 2 - fantastic). And I am well pleased it was The Witcher 2.
 

andysonofbob

New member
Jan 15, 2011
2
0
0
It's a cunning economy of scale myth about consoles being cheaper for gaming. If you buy at least one game a month, it is no cheaper to game on console. That's on release...

Looking on Play.com Deus Ex 3 costs £38.89 for PS3 and 360 but £27.99 on PC. PC games often cost £10+ cheaper than consoles. That is on release date. If, like me, you are willing to wait a month (sensible nowadays) the difference quickly becomes even greater, often beyond £15.

I have just upgraded my machine. After shopping around, all the components cost just under £800. I game in 3D so that includes the 3D Vision kit with 23" 3D monitor.

If you are savvy with your CPU when you buy it, you only need to upgrade your CPU, motherboard and RAM every five years. (~£200 for a decent overclockable graphics card every two years.)

Factor in the cost of the console unit and it doesn't take long to see it isn't that good value for money...

Over 5 years:
PC GAMING: 800 + 300 (for 1.5 * gfx card upgrages) = 1100 + 1680 (£28 * 60) = £2780
CONSOLE GAMING: £425 (on release) + 2340 (£39 * 60) = £2765

Only £15 difference and that is assuming you a moron by having bought the game on release date.
 

Jedted

New member
Mar 13, 2008
30
0
0
I actually like the Witcher dispite the fact that i've never finished the game. Everytime i go back and start another playthrough(i have to refresh myself with the story) i always get bored halfway through chapter 2.

That's not to say it's bad, the story just never drove me to see it to the end.