Witcher 2

^Are you from Poland perhaps?

I did not like the story of the first game too much, I liked the book better actually, Last Wish. But that's just a couple of similar stories about Geralt. I would like to read the books from the real saga first before playing the W2 game but only one is translated into English...

What do you guys think will console specific players will think of this game? Too hard for their taste?
Or will they bend to the simple truth that god mode play-style is boring after so many games like it. I'm talking about everything handed on a plate, and here it begins without any real instruction on how to survive.
 
I am, but on your place I wouldn't count much on the saga being translated, it's a nigh-impossible job. It's a book written with polish language in mind, there's just so much you'd loose in the translation. But hell, who knows.

As for the game - there's one thing bothering me since I finished the Witcher 2....who the hell was the assassin from the end of the Witcher 1? He is never mentioned by anyone, aside from the tent scene in prologue. He is not working with the Kingslayer (or he simply ignores his existance), he's not know to Geralt...looks to me like they just forgot to explain his role at all.
 
Who wants to read six pages of Wotcha 2 review?

ZgBz0.jpg
 
One thing I don't get are the complaints on this board about the removal of the top-down camera. I mean, I get the nostalgia and all that, but how many of you actually found the pseudo-iso mode in TW1 more comfortable to use than the 3P mode? The mouse mode was absolutely clunky and didn't work for me at all.

Also, BN, you're lucky you never tried the potion-master build, or you'd have even more beef with the imbalances. A lot of the boss fights follow cutscenes, during which the potion-timer keeps running. For the long ones (like chapter 2) they're just not viable; if you concentrated on potions only, you're basically f*cked for the Draug fight (BTW, he just walks through basic unupgraded Yrden).
 
I noticed potions didn't last through the Chapter 2 ghost sequence.

Also, I'm not saying draw back the camera with this system, it wouldn't work. But if you take a very similar combat system in concept (chaining attacks, dodging, countering) in Arkham Asylum, note that its combat system works fine with a drawnback camera, because its targeting system is bound to the keys rather than the mouse. That game determines the camera for you, and pulls it back for fights where you need the overview, like the final fight.

But if we're talking PC gamers with this kind of combat system, many will prefer pulling the camera back in combat view for tactical overview. That's how I played the Drakensang games. It's how I would've played the Witcher 2 if it was possible. One of the various reasons you have to leap around so much is a lack of seeing who is where and easily getting attacking in the back.

Also, some people get motion sickness from TPS view. One of GameBanshee's editors can't play this game, at all.
 
What can I say, great and detailed read as always. Good job ! The part with reverse diff curve intrigued me most, was wondering whether it applies to fallout to some extent, as it certainly applies to vanilla BG2 for example (with rather few exceptions).
 
IMO, tactical overview is only useful if the game is designed for it, and if it works well. In TW1 it just didn't work well at all. And it was action-y, with very little real combat tactics involved that'd warrant such a camera perspective. It almost felt like the pseudo-iso perspective was thrown in at the last moment in TW1, just to appease the old-school RPG fans, or because it was already built into the engine. I "defaulted" to it originally, but it became quite clear that it sucks.

I haven't played Batman, but from what I've seen, the camera is quite different; it's not the "tactical view camera" like in DA:O, it's the Capcom-like fixed camera for action games. Works mostly well for slashers, but wouldn't work for a game with bigger, more open environments like TW2.

When it comes to combat, TW2 plays like a typical TPS action title, and IMO the camera tied to mouse is the best option I've seen on PC for that kind of gameplay (tying camera to keyboard just stands for lazy console port, really). There's that bit of an problem you mention, because the game makes group fights pretty deadly, but then again, there's the talents quite early on that take care of that. And the whole talk about how much you need to roll is really quite unreasonable, I barely ever rolled in my two playthroughs because there are usually easier ways to avoid immediate danger. Even if you do, then at least you'd better use lock-on camera to keep track of what's going on.

Motion-sickness sucks, I have a friend with the same problem, but it's not like you can blame it on the game either.

P.S. Another curious thing in your review - you mention lag during video cutscenes. I wonder what's causing it - I had the exact same problem, in TW2 as well as Crysis2.


The part with reverse diff curve intrigued me most, was wondering whether it applies to fallout to some extent, as it certainly applies to vanilla BG2 for example (with rather few exceptions).
Click to expand...

IMO not so much - early encounters in FO aren't really all that difficult. FO2's Temple can be annoying with the wrong build, but that's about it. At higher levels, FO gets quite a bit easier; FO2 is more balanced since Enclave patrols can OHKO you with a lucky crit even if you have APA.

Never experienced that in BG2, since I guess I played as one of those "exceptions" - the Bard. He just consistently sucks.
 
Yeah, bard sucks. What I meant though is that vanilla BG 2 gets extremely easy if you know how it works, with some classes (kensai/mage, kensai/thief I'm looking at you) being extremely overpowered from the midgame on, being able to solely defeat anything and everything. The difference between BG 2 and W2 is that the latter (as mentiond in review) appears to be hard if one doesn't know what to do exactly. BG 2 is fairly easy even without this knowledge.

And I have to agree with FO opinion. Yet IMO in FO2, after level 30 or so, PC also becomes demigod of the wasteland, whom only very lucky combatants can take off (navarro turrets, Oil rig soldier pack)
 
Good review BN. I would have been a bit harsher on the difficulty curve and I disagree about the characters (I found some of them a bit dull (Triss), too EEEBIL (Henselt) or quite stupid (most of the other sorceresses, could go on a page-long rant about them)). And the little issues add up more to me, so while it is indeed a great game I did my second playthrough more because I felt it was necessary than because I really wanted to do it, and Flotsam already gets a bit tedious the second time around.
 
Why isn't this being released on the PS3 as well?

997903_172176_front.jpg


Damn you CD Projeckt RED. :cry:
---
EDIT: Dear Mods, sorry for posting in the wrong thread. :oops:
 
Cause everyone knows that PS3 is only for Japanese games and crappy XBOX360 ports. Witcher is certainly not the former, and I'm guessing they've passed on the latter.

Why not just play on PC? Unlike TW1, TW2 felt pretty polished, with little to "enhance".
 
I dunno what kind of PC cover you have, but my PC cover is just Geralt's face and most of his torso, as he glares at the gamer angrily. Not the best I've ever seen, but it's not improved by overcrowding the boxart with superfluous stuff, as they did.
 
Nice of them to show us how Demovend (that was the king's name IIRC) died. Wish we could have used whatever was in that vial in actual gameplay.
 
Ausdoerrt said:
Why not just play on PC? Unlike TW1, TW2 felt pretty polished, with little to "enhance".
Click to expand...

I am not rich enough to buy a PC capable of running The Witcher 2 on with recommended settings. I could play it on my laptop but I prefer to play my games the way I always do: on my 32" LED TV in 1080p. :D

Lexx said:
Man, this cover looks really shitty, imo.
Click to expand...

Hehehehe! :lol: I agree, the first The Witcher game had an awesome cover though.
 
Lexx said:
Man, this cover looks really shitty, imo.
Click to expand...

Much better than the previous one.

The completely first one was fine, Geralt looked cool...then they replaced it with different looking Geralt, which I dislike..but sadly they went with it.
This one looks better, hell at least it has Triss.

Also, that new intro is ace. Letho is a badass and a great character. Cannot wait for new content, I will replay the game for a third time in april.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top