The Witcher 2 Catch-All

Blind_Evil wrote:

That'd make sense. Still, you should be able to get the bonus early in chapter 1.

Yeah, I'll probably start over.

tuffalobuffalo wrote:
Blind_Evil wrote:

That'd make sense. Still, you should be able to get the bonus early in chapter 1.

Yeah, I'll probably start over. :)

Let me make sure this actually works before everyone else goes willy-nilly <_>

"ODRINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN"

"ODRINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN"

"ODRINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN"

Completing a side quest never felt so satisfying.

This is my first time playing through Witcher 2. I popped in the thread a while ago and was greeted with a spoiler and so I haven't read the last 100 or so posts so I apologize if I'm repeating things. I'm in the middle of Chapter 2 right now and have really been enjoying the game. I like how rich the world feels even if I'm confused as to what people are talking about sometimes (the game is almost too rich :lol:). It feels like the world exists on it's own, sort of grounded and the moral gray area of events helps in this world building.

The production values are blowing me away. The texture work in this game is insane. Sometimes I just stare at the NPC clothing and look at all the detail the artists put into them down to the stitching in the cloth. The music and art direction also stand out. I'm used to Tolkien style fantasy and it's great to be in this middle ages inspired world. I'm not sure if I should be impressed that a relatively small studio with a moderate budget is able to create their own engine and put forth these production values or disappointed that studios with massive budgets with 200+ people are incapable of matching it in some areas. Either way, it's really remarkable.

The combat took a while to get used to. Even though I sort of "get" it now, I wouldn't say it's good. The lock-on mechanic I find especially poorly implemented. I can't really pinpoint exactly what the problems are but I think part of it comes down to being locked into long animation sequences along with monsters being hard to read making counters difficult. That said, I'm glad it's at least engaging and not something I can simply spam my way through.

I also like the structure of the game. Having a central town and an explorable surrounding is great. It's not big enough to be overwhelming but it does reward exploration. Just walking around the forest in Flotsam was fun, listening to the birds and being on edge. I like how alchemy works and have been making potions but I feel like the big encounters don't allow you to use them. A bunch of times now, I've been like "ok, something big coming up. I'll drink these 3 potions" and then BAM, the encounter happens and I can't drink potions. It seems like the point of potions is so you can prepare but in order to prepare properly you have to reload a save and I don't think that's designed very well.

Anyway, I've rambled long enough. 20 hours in, really enjoying it and I can't to see what happens next. Here are a couple screenshots I took. I'm using the Nvidia beta drivers FXAA and these were taken on Steam so there is compression but I think they still look great.

IMAGE(http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu231/BNoice/Forums/w1.png)

IMAGE(http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu231/BNoice/Forums/w2.png)

IMAGE(http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu231/BNoice/Forums/w3.png)

Blind_Evil wrote:
Vector wrote:
tuffalobuffalo wrote:
Vector wrote:
Blind_Evil wrote:

I think putting 10-15 hours in before looking at anything was adequate. Purity of experience is a nice ideal, but I consider it mainly pertinent in regard to narrative or visual elements of the game, not character building. Character building should be more front-facing.

As I said earlier in the thread, I feel your character's progress in the game is too slow, so I'm particularly interested in the experience bonus. I also don't think I would have ever thought to kill every training dummy I come across, because the game in no way steers you toward that.

I've played the game 3 times (completing it once) and this is the first time I've even heard of doing that.

Whaaaaaaa? Shoot... At least I'm not through the prologue yet on my second go through.

After looking it up it's not a huge boost unless you game the system a bit.

Spoiler:

You have to kill 10 of the dummies and they are scattered across the chapters. So you won't get the bonus until near the end of the game. However, during the prologue the dummies will respawn if you wait. So if you wait around long enough you can do it that way.

The wiki entry says you get five in the prologue, and there are 6 in Flotsam, which gets you the 10. I tried waiting for the five to respawn in the prologue yesterday over the course of two hours (I was watching a basketball game) and nothing happened.

Ah true, I misread the locations.

Vector wrote:

The wiki entry says you get five in the prologue, and there are 6 in Flotsam, which gets you the 10. I tried waiting for the five to respawn in the prologue yesterday over the course of two hours (I was watching a basketball game) and nothing happened.

Ah true, I misread the locations.

Little update on this, I handled the five in the prologue, the two listed in the guard station, and the two in the non-human exit. I haven't found the two near the Market exit, and the map I've seen shows them exactly where I've looked. The other two are in Loredo's area, but I can't draw a weapon (even fists) here just yet. Thinking they may have made these adjustments to make you wait longer before getting the trait. I'm going to go ahead and do some of Loredo's tasks to see if it'll let me attack them afterward.

Blind_Evil wrote:
Vector wrote:

The wiki entry says you get five in the prologue, and there are 6 in Flotsam, which gets you the 10. I tried waiting for the five to respawn in the prologue yesterday over the course of two hours (I was watching a basketball game) and nothing happened.

Ah true, I misread the locations.

Little update on this, I handled the five in the prologue, the two listed in the guard station, and the two in the non-human exit. I haven't found the two near the Market exit, and the map I've seen shows them exactly where I've looked. The other two are in Loredo's area, but I can't draw a weapon (even fists) here just yet. Thinking they may have made these adjustments to make you wait longer before getting the trait. I'm going to go ahead and do some of Loredo's tasks to see if it'll let me attack them afterward.

You can always uninstall the patch:)

SallyNasty wrote:
Blind_Evil wrote:
Vector wrote:

The wiki entry says you get five in the prologue, and there are 6 in Flotsam, which gets you the 10. I tried waiting for the five to respawn in the prologue yesterday over the course of two hours (I was watching a basketball game) and nothing happened.

Ah true, I misread the locations.

Little update on this, I handled the five in the prologue, the two listed in the guard station, and the two in the non-human exit. I haven't found the two near the Market exit, and the map I've seen shows them exactly where I've looked. The other two are in Loredo's area, but I can't draw a weapon (even fists) here just yet. Thinking they may have made these adjustments to make you wait longer before getting the trait. I'm going to go ahead and do some of Loredo's tasks to see if it'll let me attack them afterward.

You can always uninstall the patch:)

I suspect it was put on the 360 disc like that, but it might be worth a try.

Okay, I managed to get the 10% bonus experience ability after completing the Indecent Proposal quest at Loredo's estate in ch. 1. After you sneak around, then talk to him, you can leave and come back and kill the final dummy. I was level 7 at the time of completion.

So, are there any issues with the game import? I don't know how this can be a spoiler, but:

Spoiler:

I romanced Shani in The Witcher, but wake up next to Triss in the Witcher 2?

Maybe I just got the wrong save, but not sure how that would happen.

Finally got back to this, and just finished the prologue, but this XP bonus now makes me want to go back.

Wakim wrote:
Spoiler:

I romanced Shani in The Witcher, but wake up next to Triss in the Witcher 2?

Check the journal for Shani.

Scratched wrote:

Check the journal for Shani.

LOL, OK, lame but I get it.

Interesting. I was going to start my second playthrough from the end of Act I (just before the big choice, naturally), so I guess I'll never get this training dummy thing.

Dark mode playthrough down! There was a fair amount of new content for me this playthrough (first on Roche's side) and although the 3rd act feels more fleshed out it still is the weakest of the 3. I'm really stoked to see what's next for Temeria though.

Stylez wrote:

although the 3rd act feels more fleshed out it still is the weakest of the 3. I'm really stoked to see what's next for Temeria though.

Are Act I and II about the same in length/scope?

Blind_Evil wrote:
Stylez wrote:

although the 3rd act feels more fleshed out it still is the weakest of the 3. I'm really stoked to see what's next for Temeria though.

Are Act I and II about the same in length/scope?

Act 1 and 2 are, yes, but act 3 is noticeably shorter and feels disjointed.

I agree, act III was kind of a let down. The hours of awesome plot, character, and political build up were are either resolved or pushed to the side with a few paragraphs of dialogue.

Spoiler:

Also, wtf dragons? I'm pretty sure you could have just left that whole thing out of the game.

Squee9 wrote:

I agree, act III was kind of a let down. The hours of awesome plot, character, and political build up were are either resolved or pushed to the side with a few paragraphs of dialogue.

Spoiler:

Also, wtf dragons? I'm pretty sure you could have just left that whole thing out of the game.

Play both paths and some things will make more sense.

Finally got around to starting this. Game looks great, and I think I am going to really enjoy. I only played part of the prologue before I had to shut it down, but am very much liking the vibe of the story. I started it on dark, but should really have played the tutorial:) I will do that tonight as I don't know what the hell the controls are and am just basically trial and erroring it.

Also, I think I need to make the text bigger. I have a big HD TV and it is still almost impossible to read from the couch.

"The last part of the tutorial involves fighting three waves of enemies. Use everything you have learned to defeat them! How well you do will determine your difficulty level."

Okay, sweet.

*second enemy on screen kills me*

"Congratulations, you have completed the tutorial!"

Wait, what?

"Your suggested difficulty level is: Moron."

"Sorry. It doesn't go any lower. Press A to continue."

Gravey wrote:

"The last part of the tutorial involves fighting three waves of enemies. Use everything you have learned to defeat them! How well you do will determine your difficulty level."

Okay, sweet.

*second enemy on screen kills me*

"Congratulations, you have completed the tutorial!"

Wait, what?

"Your suggested difficulty level is: Moron."

"Sorry. It doesn't go any lower. Press A to continue."

HAHAHAHAHA. Wait seriously ?

Also are you guys talking about how dissapointing act III is even with the enhanced edition or the just the standard one ? I can't believe they would put all those hours in and it still wouldn't fix act 3.

Stylez said upthread that act III felt more fleshed out but still lacking compared to the first two.

I'm a little bit into II, and considering I found act I underwhelming, it's not looking good for a second playthrough.

I have had limited play-time, but I found a couple hours last night to go back to Temeria. I started the game on dark, but didn't play the tutorial - just jumped in. Got my ass handed to me on the first fight - ouch. Went back and played the tutorial, was told I should play on easy - but funk dat, went back to my dark save and now that I knew how to use bombs/traps/quen, made good headway through the prologue and am now almost at the end.

So far my take away on the combat - roll, strike, roll, bomb, strike. In between rounds, set traps and use potions.

It seems like combat is preparation, combat, prep, combat.

I actually quite like that and I hope that the deliberate nature of the combat stays consistent throughout the game, and that the game clearly sets up when a fight is in the mix so I can prepare.

One thing - this is sooooo obviously a PC game with the save feature. It is a game that cries for a quick-save, and until I learned to save crazy often, I was getting very frustrated.

All that said - I quite like it so far, and I don't think Dark is all that bad.

SallyNasty wrote:

I have had limited play-time, but I found a couple hours last night to go back to Temeria. I started the game on dark, but didn't play the tutorial - just jumped in. Got my ass handed to me on the first fight - ouch. Went back and played the tutorial, was told I should play on easy - but funk dat, went back to my dark save and now that I knew how to use bombs/traps/quen, made good headway through the prologue and am now almost at the end.

So far my take away on the combat - roll, strike, roll, bomb, strike. In between rounds, set traps and use potions.

It seems like combat is preparation, combat, prep, combat.

I actually quite like that and I hope that the deliberate nature of the combat stays consistent throughout the game, and that the game clearly sets up when a fight is in the mix so I can prepare.

One thing - this is sooooo obviously a PC game with the save feature. It is a game that cries for a quick-save, and until I learned to save crazy often, I was getting very frustrated.

All that said - I quite like it so far, and I don't think Dark is all that bad.

Dark mode really wasn't that difficult barring a few fights, but yes, it does force you to make use of your potions, bombs, and traps in ways normal or even hard did not.

Tom Bissell's thoughts on the game are up at Grantland.com (one of two editorial sites I take seriously). I think more highly of it than he does, and he seems guilty of irrational fantasy hate, but a lot of his points echo my experience.

Edit: Taking out the quotes, I don't think skewering this sacred cow should be quite so...public.

Should be noted that he did not finish the game, which I suppose is the difference between us. I'm unwilling to let my $65 purchase go unfinished, whether I want to or not.

Polygon.com's review also went up over the last week, considerably less glowing than the reviews for the original release. I am disappointed more by what I can only see as hyperbolic praise than I am the actual game.

Ugh, I cringed through Tom's review. I don't think it's fair *at all* to write a review of a game without finishing it, particularly when you only play 24% of the total game time. If you want to look at games, especially their narratives, as art, then you cannot stop that early and expect to understand the shades of grey other reviewers were talking about. It'd be like reading Game of Thrones and stopping before

Spoiler:

Bran falls from the tower

I'm ok with criticisms of the Witcher 2's story even though I generally disagree with them. I just think that if someone going to levy criticisms against a game and its narrative, calling it a sacred cow first ultimately does a disservice to the critic's argument.

This quote in particular bothered me:

The art of game design, like the art of writing, is to communicate non-simple things simply.

I hold a different opinion: In the complexity of art may lie its beauty.

I could say a lot of other things against his review (and his acerbic writing style), but I suspect I'm not his target audience. Oh well, for every Witcher, there's a Fable, Dragon Age and Skyrim and there are people who love each of those games. It's a good time to be a gamer.

Grubber788 wrote:

Oh well, for every Witcher, there's a Fable, Dragon Age and Skyrim and there are people who love each of those games. It's a good time to be a gamer.

This is true. I have enjoyed two Fable games, two Dragon Age games, and two Elder Scrolls games. But the way the game was reviewed, and presented in the community, was as a must-play for RPG fans. I feel I was done a disservice because there are a lot of things you can criticize TW2 for that went largely unreported, swept under the rug. Why? Matt Chandronait (sp?) on Rebel FM, a pretty die-hard PC gamer, talked recently about his underwhelming reaction to the game (he played it last May). He posited that the game was held in higher regard than deserved because it was a PC exclusive, and furthermore an exotic one that couldn't possibly be done on the consoles. I take the PC-gaming master race jest as just that, but there is always some truth to a joke.

Random aside: the game shares an acronym with Two Worlds 2, so I am continually comparing my experiences with each. I liked the latter, considerably. The reason is tied up in complexity.

The short of my issue here is that The Witcher 2 provides a very limited number of gameplay experiences, while being presented as a highwater mark for player agency. There are some meaningful decisions, apparently one big one that determines the nature of the narrative's second act. That's admirable, narrative malleability, but I expected more. Stacked next to Two Worlds 2, the game part of the Witcher pales. Turn to any facet of Two Worlds 2's system and there is more customization. The crafting, the number of enemies, the environments, the traversal, the spells, sword techniques, bow techniques. They even included a fairly interesting multiplayer suite. The only thing The Witcher 2 has going for it is prettier tech and a better narrative thrust, and when I'm playing a video game, gameplay comes first.

I think the Witcher 2 overly complicates what is essentially a very simple combat system, by tweaking variables outside that system. It feels like the design team said, "Well, our combat engine is kind of basic. Let's ramp up the damage and make people employ the consumables or exploit the crafting system." For example, I shouldn't be able to procure the strongest weapons in act 2 at the beginning of act 2, in terms of balance.

Edit:

Grubber788 wrote:

Ugh, I cringed through Tom's review. I don't think it's fair *at all* to write a review of a game without finishing it, particularly when you only play 24% of the total game time.

It should be noted he never once referred to the piece as a review, just his thoughts on it. I can't blame him for not wanting to continue something he's not enjoying.

I thought Bissell's piece was a really well-articulated (I like his style anyway) and honest reaction to playing The Witcher 2. (I also wouldn't say his antipathy to fantasy is "irrational"—it's pretty well backed up in that piece (especially his contrast with Fable), if not outright obvious to any nerd who can take a step back—and I say that as a huge Tolkien/Elder Scrolls fan!) I'd really been looking forward to playing it since I'd heard so much about both games and TW1 wouldn't run well on my Mac, but I'm in the same boat as Bissell and Blind_Evil, which is disappointing. In fact, it was the Gamer Limit review that really crystallized my feelings about the game, which I had the good fortune to read before the Internet flipped its lid over one guy having the gall to voice—horror—a differing opinion. (Which is a separate issue but unfortunately will be inextricably tied to discussing TW2.)

I've only finished the prologue, but as I've written elsewhere, I haven't enjoyed anything in this game so far. I'll take another stab at getting into Chapter 1, but it's probably just that this isn't the game for me.

Blind_Evil wrote:
Grubber788 wrote:

Oh well, for every Witcher, there's a Fable, Dragon Age and Skyrim and there are people who love each of those games. It's a good time to be a gamer.

Edit:

Grubber788 wrote:

Ugh, I cringed through Tom's review. I don't think it's fair *at all* to write a review of a game without finishing it, particularly when you only play 24% of the total game time.

It should be noted he never once referred to the piece as a review, just his thoughts on it. I can't blame him for not wanting to continue something he's not enjoying.

Perhaps, but a rose by any other name...

Gravey wrote:

I thought Bissell's piece was a really well-articulated (I like his style anyway) and honest reaction to playing The Witcher 2.

I'd agree with that, and it's certainly a (mostly) valid reaction, although I can't say I agree with much of it. Dismissing the praise the game's narrative got after only seeing a portion of it isn't really cricket though, six hours isn't nearly enough to get a handle of all that's going on in The Witcher 2.

I was up late again last night playing - and I am not far in at all. I am absolutely smitten with the atmosphere and world of the game. It seems pretty linnear - which I am totes ok with - but it seems to be such a singular experience.

I quite like the combat - it is brutal and unforgiving, but I totally feel like a badass when I get my traps and bombs out successfully and stab a sucker in the throat.

Everyone's opinion is valid - but it always surprises my at how I can react so favorably to a game, and others just bag all over it. To each his own!