Witcher 2

Visually, the game is downright fantastic, but the gameplay looks a lot like... Fable? Zelda? can't really point it out. Not necessarily a bad thing, mind you, just an observation, it really doesn't seem like a stat-driven RPG, but I would prefer a more functional action-oriented combat than the somewhat boring ''checklist'' system TW1 had (checklist says big monster = silver + strong, checklist says agile human = steel + fast, ect.).

Also, just so I understand, the game had quick time events? And the red we see on the edges of the screen is an indicator of health, or just signs you are in danger like in the first game? Because if it's the second option, they look a bit egregious, and if it's the first, dammit, can't they keep that fill-screen-with-jelly crap to shooters?
 
Is it me or The Witcher 2 is so ...colored compared to the first one. So many bright colors everywhere, in any video I found. I hope the story kicks ass at least..
And is anyone here who likes Geralt's new hair? Oh and btw....I hope the kind of action you see in the video above happens only one time...I really don't like all that shit. Makes it feel like God of War or w/e.
 
Ilosar said:
Also, just so I understand, the game had quick time events? And the red we see on the edges of the screen is an indicator of health, or just signs you are in danger like in the first game? Because if it's the second option, they look a bit egregious, and if it's the first, dammit, can't they keep that fill-screen-with-jelly crap to shooters?
Click to expand...
By just looking at the combat shown above in youtube I would guess they got some inspiration from God of War. But I never played it I just know it from other videos so more like a direct comparison.

Well. The Combat in The Witcher 1 was very action oriented. But the thing is if you do not focus on that ... you have NO chance to get any decent RPG out. Sadly. Publishers, investors. No clue what you want to call them. But they HATE anything that is not called action-RPG thinking anything else will only amuse the so called "hardcore gamer" what ever that now means ...

Al hopes I have left are that The Witcher 2 will have a nice story and well written NPCs.
 
Atomkilla said:
I don't understand what are they going to do with things you learned in the first game.
I mean, all those skills and stuff you gained by leveling can't be just forgotten.
In all previous games we've seen that have been using that tech, each time, you either play a different character, or, as in Mass Effect 2, your character dies.
So what now? As Crni said, amnesia (again)?

Can someone please enlighten me?
Click to expand...

Well, if they wanted to keep the game "RPG", they had to took his skills off just to make sure player will have fun, building Geralt in his own way. Of course they could be realistic and keep him absurdely badass, but it wouldn't work in a game(I can imagine all the whining and crying over missing "level up" elements).
It's a low fantasy setting, so he just can't be absurdely powerful. (Imagine giving him abillities like in Witcher 1 and room for further improvements >.>)
And we don't even know yet how levelling aspect will feel, so it's hard to judge it right now.
 
Tagaziel said:
Or maybe we start badass and simply fight even more badass people and monsters?
Click to expand...

That I would like.

Crni Vuk said:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ravxVjnOoRM[/youtube]
Click to expand...

If done well, quick time events can be enjoyable to watch, but also very tedious if they get repeated all the time.
This one looks good, I just hope they don't go over the top with it.
 
same here. Absolutely hated them in The Force Unleashed. Not because the animations or something have been bad. It did looked good. But you had so god damn many Quick Time Events. It just became extremely tedious ...
 
Well, even a master swordsman won't be killing an enemy with a shield and a solid armor with ease, he just won't get killed first. So I guess not resetting Geralt's skills is fine, since we learn all the time :) Or something like that
 
I'm split myself, I have no love for the thought on installing securom on my computer. On the other hand, I don't have a creditcard either hence I can't buy it from GoG.

Would'nt have minded more details either on the type of activation it is. If they mean that it's a timestamp check of sorts, I don't really mind it, but if it actually requires you to register the game to an account I'm less than pleased. I might've done so willingly though.
 
rcorporon said:
Shame about the DRM... makes me cringe a bit.
Click to expand...

PC users will have unlimited installs on an unlimited amount of PCs as well as the ability to play the game on five systems at once.
Click to expand...

Doesn't seem that bad/ intrusive to me. Or am I missing something here?
 
I just don't like the idea of having to be online to play a single player game the first time I want to play it.
 
But isn't that only for pre-ordered versions? From the wording, it seems that it's used to prevent people from leaking it before world wide release? Would that still be required after a certain date? Maybe I can wait for the gold version again, without any drm at all.
 
They might remove it already with the first patch or something. Who knows ? Happens with some games.

I would NEVER buy any unpatched game today anyway.
 
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrxhxdVot2Q[/youtube]
"Newest" gameplay from the conference. Polish dubbing, I warn ye!

Guy is describing elixir mechanics, weapon oils, traps, exploration, and few abillities in combat. Nothing really new.

I wonder how big the actual game world will be. I always liked the idea of "open world" in games.
 
I only like the Open World if it ads something to the game. So when you have reasons to explore it or to get back and do some quests. Sand Box games usualy are just boring. But it is clear TW2 will not be "Sand Box".
 
Crni Vuk said:
I only like the Open World if it ads something to the game. So when you have reasons to explore it or to get back and do some quests. Sand Box games usualy are just boring. But it is clear TW2 will not be "Sand Box".
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's nice to have big open world to explore and stuff, but after you realize that it's filled with content only in small percent - something's wrong.
It's actually cool when you know that certain area might be good for treasure hunting or finding something connected to lore/quests. Also I like the idea of travelling and getting ambushed by bandits or monsters, while many sandbox titles had totally unsuprising static spawn points :roll:

TW2 devs say that this "open world" comes with many meaningful elements you might find in wilderness. We'll see how they can handle it.
 
"Newest" gameplay from the conference. Polish dubbing, I warn ye!
Click to expand...

Awesome stuff! I can only understand 60-70% of what's being said, but what I'm seeing/hearing looks like more of the same as TW1 except better and better-looking.

TW2 devs say that this "open world" comes with many meaningful elements you might find in wilderness. We'll see how they can handle it.
Click to expand...

Somehow I expect it not to be too different from TW1. TW1 was fairly "open" with lots of stuff to explore, but most of the time it was just collecting ingredients and doing side-quests. No problem with that, personally.
 
That was one thing that made me stop playing Witcher 1. This really tedious always running around from A to B and back and again and blah. I don't have anything against collecting things and stuff, but only if they don't send me over the whole map all the time. Hope that Witcher 2 makes this a bit less tedious.
 
Considering TW classifies itself as an "action-RPG", it was not nearly as bad as it could've been; remember grinding for drops in Diablo? In TW2 most of the time if you collected stuff as you go, you had enough components for anything most of the time - and you could always choose to ignore the "collect x ingredients" quests, which I did quite a bit, I must admit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top