Subm.: The Witcher 2: Assassins of kings Enhanced edition

Akratus

Akratus

Bleep bloop.
250px-Witcher_2_cover.jpg

The Witcher 2: Assassins of kings Enhanced Edition
Released in 2013
DCProjektRed
PC, Xbox 360
In retail stores, on steam and gog.com

Of Witchers and Witches.

At the end of the first Witcher game, Geralt of Rivia saved King Foltest of Temeria's life by foiling an assassin's plot. Now, he is his trusted bodyguard. He finds himself at the siege of Castle La Vallete. The La Vallete's disagree with their king's rule and have revolted. But with Foltest's Trebuchets and large army arrayed against them, it seems they will be defeated if they do not surrender. However, this is but a minor point in Geralt's new adventure that starts in this game, as he will find after the siege is done. He was sent by the king to find the royal bastard kids in a church. And what happens there? Well, suffice it to say, Geralt loses his position as best mates with the king, and basically everything else too.

hqdefault.jpg


The world of the Witcher 2 is set in the northern kingdoms of the witcher world. There are a number of countries there, and tensions between them are high. Political struggles, assassinations, secret meetings and hushed plans are commonplace in these troublesome times. Besides that, dwarves and elves are still fighting for their freedom, or terrorizing everyone else if a lot of humans are to be believed.

In this powder keg, someone is about to make his move. And Geralt will be in the thick of it.

"Piss on the laws! I'll change them if need be."

With CDProjektRed's sucess in the online store gog.com and the Witcher RPG game they had the oppurtunity to create another grand rpg set in the witcher universe. But that wasn't enough for CDProjektRed. They wanted to attempt surpassing the quality of the first game, and many RPGs before it. It's fans agree, that in this they surely succeeded.

Every single aspect of the first game was blown away by this grand Polish adventure. The graphics are very polished, the aesthethic and use of color is much more diverse and beautiful, combat has been tightened and overhauled, the amount and quality of cinematics easily surpassed the first game. But the main feature that is talked of, is the maturity and complexity of the game's story and it's accompanying quests, dialogue, lore and backstory. An acclaimed part of this is the second chapter that can be completed on two sides.

Political intrigue, weighty choices, a wide catalogue of npc's and adventures make up the world set by the Witcher 2.

choice.jpg


Polish Perfection?

Some say Assassins of Kings is the best RPG of recent years. Some say it is the best of all time. It seems that modern and older rpg fans are amazed by this game. It's not hard to see why.

One point of annoyance for myself was the user interface. In the first game I thought the design of the user interface was perfect so the changes made in the second game are quite baffling to me.

Though I was quite amazed by the mature story telling, finding myself in a fantasy novel steered by my choices. Most stories in games are very much "videogame stories" (Mostly modern ones) but this one breaks that mold. Any RPG fan owes it to himself to complete this game at least once.
 
Last edited:
Yeah it really sucks when choices and consequences play out in a game in another manner than just some dialogue.
 
Sam Ecorners said:
So you were annoyed by good C&C?
Click to expand...

Dragula said:
Yeah it really sucks when choices and consequences play out in a game in another manner than just some dialogue.
Click to expand...

No, you see, implementing choices and consequences means being a good game designer. Making the player feel like a dick and giving them exactly what they don't want with no option to do anything about it, and specifically saying that to his face, is being an asshole.
 
I never noticed that happened during my Witcher playthroughs, sure you did not miss anything in the story..?
 
The choice at the end of chapter 1 is

[spoiler:130ea5d696]Skewed towards Roche. You have a choice here between an elf whom you know NOTHING about and Roche who has been very helpful, who later turns out to be a pretty questionable bastard himself. All you've heard about him is that people say he's a terrorist AND he's been nothing but a douchebag or just uncaring to you so far. All I needed was a single line of: "People think I'm a terrorist, but I'm just fighting for my ideals." concerning Iorveth and I would've reconsidered. But not only that, but the choice you make lands you in either a position where you have to basically lead a war against peasants fighting for their ideals with your heavily trained and equiped army or fight for those ideals and save the day.

Sure maybe I could've read about this in the information section of the game, or just accepted my choice. But this is not something I will go along with which is the reason I went back and changed my choice. I will replay both games soon and just play organically without trying to metagame and see where it takes me then. [/spoiler:130ea5d696]
 
While the graphics and the art design were gorgeous in this game, the plot was very boring to me and the combat was horrible. I don't mind more down to earth smaller scale stories, but I didn't care for either of those kingdoms, didn't care enough to fight for them and so on. All those intrigues just left me shrugging. The combat was a bit spoiled for me because I have played Dark Souls before and Witcher 2s combat felt very similar to it, but worse in every aspect.
 
Surf Solar said:
While the graphics and the art design were gorgeous in this game, the plot was very boring to me and the combat was horrible. I don't mind more down to earth smaller scale stories, but I didn't care for either of those kingdoms, didn't care enough to fight for them and so on. All those intrigues just left me shrugging. The combat was a bit spoiled for me because I have played Dark Souls before and Witcher 2s combat felt very similar to it, but worse in every aspect.
Click to expand...

I agree somewhat on the story, I love it but there indeed lacks a certain human element. There's no relatable people who are involved in the story throughout all chapters. There's no likeable characters besides Geralt and maybe the female leader of that rebellion. Triss is mostly absent, which I think is the game's biggest detriment. And the combat was kind of a 'sideways' improvement from the first one I would say. It's not bad, but just making it more action-y does not improve the combat enough to stand out.

I think siding with Iorveth at the end of the first chapter is better overall for the story, at least if you want some relatability and something to want to do things for other than yourself, or Geralt.

Did you side with Roche? If so I can understand your sentiment.
 
Please disregard all my previous comments on the Chapter 1 choice. When I replay the game, I'll try to be less of a silly sod. :oops:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top