The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Review

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 . . . 16 NEXT
 

beastrn:

You don't need to repeat yourself - it has already been explained to you why you're wrong. You should read those posts again.

So what if it is an opinion? Do I care? Is that the point? It's an UNEDUCATED opinion. It's a FLAWED opinion. That's the issue. Do I go out and have an "opinion" on thousand year old artifacts? No, of course I don't. I haven't studied history nor have I a strong background in artifact analysis. If I went to a museum and said "guys, guys - this pot here actually is pretty dumb. Actually I don't like it. That's my opinion, ok?" I would probably be banned from the premises.

So.. sure, you're right. It's just his opinion. The fact is, though, that it's an uneducated opinion.

FYI - arguing with me on this point makes you an escapist fanboy, according to you.

He played the game - isn't that enough to formulate an opinion on it? Before you answer, yes it is enough because it is a game, an entertainment product, and not the study of a "thousand year old artifact", which requires way more experience, skill, and knowledge than playing a game.

Honestly, I wouldn't care if you thought the review was bad, but dude, you really need to stop trying to push "facts" into everyone's faces and telling them "you're wrong" for their view on the matter. You're being aggressive for no apparent reason.

P.S. How in the world am I an "Escapist fanboy"?

Calibretto:

It says he has joined in 2007>? I would hardly call that brand new.
Alot of people just read the forums and dont actually engage in them you know.
Obviously this is a topic he has felt he needs to speak up after 4 YEARS OF SILENCE.

Okay, but my point still remains valid - he didn't post enough on the site for me to know about his use of irony/sarcasm. If he was a regular, I would have a much better idea of how serious he was being.

Thanks, Calibretto. Appreciate it.

Just a final addition to what I'm saying; sravankb, and others who are saying "it's just an opinion who cares why post" and whatever - I would agree with you if this website was called wwWeAreAllNoobsWhoAreBadAtGames.com.

Unfortunately, this is theescapist - a once fairly well respected internet publication that also gets to display it's judgments on METACRITIC. Do you know that The Witcher 2 was brought below 90/100 because of this review? So because of this uneducated opinion, because of this reviewers incompetency and inability to learn something for himself, the developers get to show their stock holders and dependants a below 90/100 game when clearly it is not.

Surely even illogical internet people can understand why that is worthy of being discussed.

There wouldn't even be an issue if the reviewer could muster anything other than "I thought the game was too hard but I didn't just set it on Easy" - but he doesn't.

redemption92:
but its so gooooooooooooooooooood

Basically this.

I found the combat to be engaging enough to not be dull, but simple enough to still be an action-rpg (combat-wise). If its to difficult, play on an easier setting or simply run away more...

The game is an absolute gem, with some of the best dialogue in any game, ever. Its beautiful, with the rivertown Flotsam as the high point (for me at least) and has the first episode of elegant sensuality in a game I have seen (the scene with Geralt and Triss waking up in the prologue).

While its not a perfect game by any definition the flaws are so minor and far between that they have absolutely no impact on me. I'm faaaaaar too busy enjoying the fantastic game. Easily a 10 for me, and probably GOTY as well. The only possible contender being Arkham City. And even that will probably be a lesser game.

beastrn:

There wouldn't even be an issue if the reviewer could muster anything other than "I thought the game was too hard but I didn't just set it on Easy" - but he doesn't.

Good point, I've been wondering about this too. And the reviewer is not the only one making this mistake.

beastrn:

There wouldn't even be an issue if the reviewer could muster anything other than "I thought the game was too hard but I didn't just set it on Easy" - but he doesn't.

You keep bringing that up, but it doesn't fix the issue. He said it was unfairly hard because it was unintuitive because of menus, lack of tutorials, and a delay before casting spells. Turning the difficultly down fixes none of those issues, and those issues would be concerns for some people so its worth mentioning.

sravankb:

Calibretto:

It says he has joined in 2007>? I would hardly call that brand new.
Alot of people just read the forums and dont actually engage in them you know.
Obviously this is a topic he has felt he needs to speak up after 4 YEARS OF SILENCE.

Okay, but my point still remains valid - he didn't post enough on the site for me to know about his use of irony/sarcasm. If he was a regular, I would have a much better idea of how serious he was being.

So you saying you base ones opinions on the amount of posts they have done?
I didnt ever post on these forums FOR AGES after I joined.
Call it shyness call it whatever but I was happy just reading.
You cant just shutdown someone because what he is saying does not coincide with what you believe should be said.
There should be some semblance of freedom of speech.
Yes he feels emotional yes he is talking from the heart but is that so wrong?
You know sometimes when you speak about something that you feel strongly about alot of people are not going to be happy about it.
Does that mean he should be banned?
Does that mean he sould recieve warnings?
Why is it wrong to criticise someone about something when they have a love the website and obviously been here for alot LONGER THEN YOU HAVE.
I mean a great many people might not like what you say but that IS LIFE.
On the other hand he speaks about how the reviwer is reflected on a global viewpoint.
This website is not just a small corner of the internet it is a HUGE gaming website.
Its reviews are a REFLECTION ON ITSELF.
The same way people can group EA or ACTIVISION for grinding out money making ventures.
Consistant bad reviews will BE REFLECTED IN PUBLIC OPINION.

You're right, drisky - I should have added "and press J to read the Journal (or read the manual)".

beastrn:

sravankb:

beastrn:
Snip.

I've said this once, and I'll say it again. This review was his opinion of the game, not an "unfair judgement". You're not gonna change his view, and you're not gonna change the view of people who dislike it. Especially with that attitude. And please stop painting yourself as some sort of defender of logic and integrity. It sounds really odd.

Plus, you're a brand new user; not even close to being a regular on the site. You cannot seriously expect me to detect "irony" in each of your posts. Sarcasm/ironic statements do not come across well over the internet.

Most of all, you may wanna calm down, dude. Trust me, people aren't gonna pay too much attention to your posts on this site if you keep insulting someone or the other each time.

You don't need to repeat yourself - it has already been explained to you why you're wrong. You should read those posts again.

So what if it is an opinion? Do I care? Is that the point? It's an UNEDUCATED opinion. It's a FLAWED opinion. That's the issue. Do I go out and have an "opinion" on thousand year old artifacts? No, of course I don't. I haven't studied history nor have I a strong background in artifact analysis. If I went to a museum and said "guys, guys - this pot here actually is pretty dumb. Actually I don't like it. That's my opinion, ok?" I would probably be banned from the premises.

So.. sure, you're right. It's just his opinion. The fact is, though, that it's an uneducated opinion.

FYI - arguing with me on this point makes you an escapist fanboy, according to you.

I know Greg fairly well, and I know he's been playing PC RPGs and DMing tabletop RPGs for literally decades now. So to suggest that he doesn't know what he's talking about on that front is patently ludicrous.

beastrn:
Thanks, Calibretto. Appreciate it.

Just a final addition to what I'm saying; sravankb, and others who are saying "it's just an opinion who cares why post" and whatever - I would agree with you if this website was called wwWeAreAllNoobsWhoAreBadAtGames.com.

Unfortunately, this is theescapist - a once fairly well respected internet publication that also gets to display it's judgments on METACRITIC. Do you know that The Witcher 2 was brought below 90/100 because of this review? So because of this uneducated opinion, because of this reviewers incompetency and inability to learn something for himself, the developers get to show their stock holders and dependants a below 90/100 game when clearly it is not.

Surely even illogical internet people can understand why that is worthy of being discussed.

There wouldn't even be an issue if the reviewer could muster anything other than "I thought the game was too hard but I didn't just set it on Easy" - but he doesn't.

Okay, this seemed less aggressive than the other posts. Thanks for not being too offensive on this one (not sarcastic).

Back to the content of your post - This review alone didn't bring down the score. That's like saying that the last vote that decides a 50/50 tiebreaker is the only one that counts. Plus, 89 and 90 are awfully close. I really don't think that the consequences of a 1% decrease can be that drastic.

However, I do agree that he could've changed the difficulty if he thought it was too hard. Although, I have to admit that I don't really remember him saying what setting he chose.

Calibretto:
Snip.

You seem to have misunderstood me (not being sarcastic here).

I'm not saying that his opinion is invalid because of the number of his posts. It's just that he said that I didn't understand his "clear" use of irony (didn't know he was actually being sarcastic). I replied by saying that there's no way I would know how he uses sarcasm or irony in his posts, especially because I really haven't read them before (hence the mention of the low-post count).

beastrn:
Thanks, Calibretto. Appreciate it.

Just a final addition to what I'm saying; sravankb, and others who are saying "it's just an opinion who cares why post" and whatever - I would agree with you if this website was called wwWeAreAllNoobsWhoAreBadAtGames.com.

Unfortunately, this is theescapist - a once fairly well respected internet publication that also gets to display it's judgments on METACRITIC. Do you know that The Witcher 2 was brought below 90/100 because of this review? So because of this uneducated opinion, because of this reviewers incompetency and inability to learn something for himself, the developers get to show their stock holders and dependants a below 90/100 game when clearly it is not.

Surely even illogical internet people can understand why that is worthy of being discussed.

There wouldn't even be an issue if the reviewer could muster anything other than "I thought the game was too hard but I didn't just set it on Easy" - but he doesn't.

What? I just checked, and The Escapist's review isn't even listed on Metacritic yet. Check for yourself. It probably will tomorrow, but it went up late.

There are also 10 reviews below 90% there already, including another 7/10 and two 6/10s. By your logic, any site giving any great game a mediocre review should be ashamed of themselves.

Hell, by your logic then there should be no reviews, just a "common consensus." But no, that's silly.

How can you tell that this is an uneducated opinion? How do you know what the reviewer likes to play? How can you say that he's "incompetent" and "unable to learn something for himself" when he likes playing MOunt and Blade, one of the most obtuse games out there.

Face it, dude, I like the game as much as anyone, but it has *issues.* And it should get called out for those issues.

John Funk:

beastrn:

sravankb:

I've said this once, and I'll say it again. This review was his opinion of the game, not an "unfair judgement". You're not gonna change his view, and you're not gonna change the view of people who dislike it. Especially with that attitude. And please stop painting yourself as some sort of defender of logic and integrity. It sounds really odd.

Plus, you're a brand new user; not even close to being a regular on the site. You cannot seriously expect me to detect "irony" in each of your posts. Sarcasm/ironic statements do not come across well over the internet.

Most of all, you may wanna calm down, dude. Trust me, people aren't gonna pay too much attention to your posts on this site if you keep insulting someone or the other each time.

You don't need to repeat yourself - it has already been explained to you why you're wrong. You should read those posts again.

So what if it is an opinion? Do I care? Is that the point? It's an UNEDUCATED opinion. It's a FLAWED opinion. That's the issue. Do I go out and have an "opinion" on thousand year old artifacts? No, of course I don't. I haven't studied history nor have I a strong background in artifact analysis. If I went to a museum and said "guys, guys - this pot here actually is pretty dumb. Actually I don't like it. That's my opinion, ok?" I would probably be banned from the premises.

So.. sure, you're right. It's just his opinion. The fact is, though, that it's an uneducated opinion.

FYI - arguing with me on this point makes you an escapist fanboy, according to you.

I know Greg fairly well, and I know he's been playing PC RPGs and DMing tabletop RPGs for literally decades now. So to suggest that he doesn't know what he's talking about on that front is patently ludicrous.

Frankly, to suggest that someone that struggled to realized that literally every piece of information you need on The Witcher 2 can be accessed by pressing J is a decade-experience tabletop player, is truly ludicrous.

I appreciate that you are required to defend your friend and website - though nowhere in the review does it suggest Greg should be anywhere near a PC RPG.

-Play on Easy
-Press J to read the tutorials

I fail to see how the above two lines of text do not invalidate this entire review.

Theotherguy:
I read the whole review, than said to myself without checking the mark: "This is a 7 from a lotr/dragon age fanboy". And than I smiled.

Yes the ui is kinda bad, but the rest of the stuff like "I died there, I died here" is just funny. I can understand Dragon Age 2 dragging ou by the hand with it's pathetic difficulty level, but come on! How lazy can You get?

And You didn't mention so many things in the review, which are good sides of The Witcher 2. Dude, being objective is a must for a reviever, the game is a 9 not a 7.

How can you call someone bias when you are immediatly dismissing his review because you assume he is a "lotr/dragon age fanboy"? The hypocricy had me chuckling there.

And to insult the reviewers intelligence by then calling Dragon Age's (a game I have never played) difficulty level pathetic and basically asserting he is bad at games and needs to be "taken by the hand". And to top it all off you flat out called the guy lazy.

Wow, way to patronize and insult someone who happens to have a different opinion than you. It is a review not fact, maybe you should solidify your opinions a bit more so you don't have to bash the opinions of others.

OT: The Witcher looks really good, I honestly would pick it up if I had a strong enough PC.

beastrn:
You're right, drisky - I should have added "and press J to read the Journal (or read the manual)".

But he covered that, he expects games to have a tutorial making it easier to assimilate in to the game play. If you need to study in order to play a game, like he said, its a pain in the ass compared to a tutorial showing rather that telling.

Well to be honest Im starting to like Greg Titos Reviews because they lead to fun forum discussions :D

JerrytheBullfrog:

beastrn:
Thanks, Calibretto. Appreciate it.

Just a final addition to what I'm saying; sravankb, and others who are saying "it's just an opinion who cares why post" and whatever - I would agree with you if this website was called wwWeAreAllNoobsWhoAreBadAtGames.com.

Unfortunately, this is theescapist - a once fairly well respected internet publication that also gets to display it's judgments on METACRITIC. Do you know that The Witcher 2 was brought below 90/100 because of this review? So because of this uneducated opinion, because of this reviewers incompetency and inability to learn something for himself, the developers get to show their stock holders and dependants a below 90/100 game when clearly it is not.

Surely even illogical internet people can understand why that is worthy of being discussed.

There wouldn't even be an issue if the reviewer could muster anything other than "I thought the game was too hard but I didn't just set it on Easy" - but he doesn't.

What? I just checked, and The Escapist's review isn't even listed on Metacritic yet. Check for yourself. It probably will tomorrow, but it went up late.

There are also 10 reviews below 90% there already, including another 7/10 and two 6/10s. By your logic, any site giving any great game a mediocre review should be ashamed of themselves.

Hell, by your logic then there should be no reviews, just a "common consensus." But no, that's silly.

How can you tell that this is an uneducated opinion? How do you know what the reviewer likes to play? How can you say that he's "incompetent" and "unable to learn something for himself" when he likes playing MOunt and Blade, one of the most obtuse games out there.

Face it, dude, I like the game as much as anyone, but it has *issues.* And it should get called out for those issues.

My bad - I thought I saw escapist on there.

You're right, it does have issues and should be called out. Though the issues being called out on these reviews that are 6/10's are a joke. any intelligent person can read the text that tells them to press J for further information. Any intelligent person could just lower the difficulty to easy mode because they are casual players.

Also, I'm not saying anything under a 9/10 should be ignored, nor am I saying there's a common consensus. I'm saying bringing out a 6/10 score due to errors in the reviewers judgment is unfair and illogical.

Also, Mount and Blade? Why are you heralding that as if it's some hard game? The combat couldn't be easier AND there's a tutorial. The core of the game is clicking on a big map and reading some text. There's nothing hard about it and I'm sure he was playing on the default -50% damage mode, too.

beastrn:

John Funk:

beastrn:

You don't need to repeat yourself - it has already been explained to you why you're wrong. You should read those posts again.

So what if it is an opinion? Do I care? Is that the point? It's an UNEDUCATED opinion. It's a FLAWED opinion. That's the issue. Do I go out and have an "opinion" on thousand year old artifacts? No, of course I don't. I haven't studied history nor have I a strong background in artifact analysis. If I went to a museum and said "guys, guys - this pot here actually is pretty dumb. Actually I don't like it. That's my opinion, ok?" I would probably be banned from the premises.

So.. sure, you're right. It's just his opinion. The fact is, though, that it's an uneducated opinion.

FYI - arguing with me on this point makes you an escapist fanboy, according to you.

I know Greg fairly well, and I know he's been playing PC RPGs and DMing tabletop RPGs for literally decades now. So to suggest that he doesn't know what he's talking about on that front is patently ludicrous.

Frankly, to suggest that someone that struggled to realized that literally every piece of information you need on The Witcher 2 can be accessed by pressing J is a decade-experience tabletop player, is truly ludicrous.

I appreciate that you are required to defend your friend and website - though nowhere in the review does it suggest Greg should be anywhere near a PC RPG.

-Play on Easy
-Press J to read the tutorials

I fail to see how the above two lines of text do not invalidate this entire review.

He's the best DM I've ever had, for one. He's written D&D supplements. Trust me on this one.

You have to understand that as a reviewer, we go by experience. If the game doesn't communicate something to the player - even if it's located somewhere else but doesn't *tell* you it's located there - that can make for a less engaging experience. A good tutorial teaches you how to play the game in a smooth, integrated manner. Reading a manual and lines of text is not a smooth, integrated manner, especially when (from how it sounds) Witcher 2 just throws you in the deep end and expects you to swim.

Also, his problems with the game's combat were with the game's combat SYSTEM. Playing on Easy wouldn't make those go away.

I loved the game and pretty much fully agree with the review. If these things are fixed, I'm going to be happy. First and foremost, give me back my PC UI, in which I can switch between the C,J,M,and I without exiting any of them.

drisky:

beastrn:
You're right, drisky - I should have added "and press J to read the Journal (or read the manual)".

But he covered that, he expects games to have a tutorial making it easier to assimilate in to the game play.

I read that as "he doesn't know what immersion is and is used to being told exactly what to do in every aspect of his life"

I didn't need a tutorial. I didn't need to "study". It's all right there.

Xzi:
CDPR is their own independent studio, publishing by Atari.

Errr... CD Projekt RED is owned by CD Projekt, who are the publisher for The Witcher 2. Atari is just one of the distributors for the game.

Also, I think it is hilarious that people bombarded metacritic user reviews with perfect 10s...seems a little insecure.

Although, I wish I had a PC to play this game on.

Nautical Honors Society:
Also, I think it is hilarious that people bombarded metacritic user reviews with perfect 10s...seems a little insecure.

Although, I wish I had a PC to play this game on.

Exactly why collective fan reviews can't be trusted, for 50% of the internet its ether the highest or lowest score possible, and goes for reviews on absolutely anything.

Ok enough is enough IM one click away from buying the game I DONT KNOW IF I SHOULD. I have deep reservations about buying ANY GAME after dragon age 2 ( it has scarred me for life).
DO I CLICK THe BUY OPTION Or NOT!!!?!
PS.The harder the game the better. Unless its likes DA2 Nightmare mode which is the most non fun difficulty I have ever played filled with kiting and wonderful new spawning enemies on my head.

Another disappointing review by the Escapist. But then again, what did I expect from a magazine that called Dragon Age II "a pinnacle of role-playing games". You obviously like your games to be casual, not making you think twice and holding your hand a lot. That explains the low score - yep, TW2 is not for the casual gamer.

Annoying though is the reviewer's whining about the difficult combat while refusing to drop the difficulty down to easy. How silly is that? Is "easy" too unmanly for him? Doesn't make him feel awesome enough? *rolls eyes*

I simply love this game - it's balm to the soul of those who are sick of all the brainless action-crap we're being served nowadays.

Calibretto:

DO I CLICK THe BUY OPTION Or NOT!!!?!

Only if it's on GoG. Best version, least bugs, FAST download (I got 10~20Mb/s @.@)

Same guy that gave Dragon Age 2 the only perfect score from any game review site, magazine, gives a much better game that wasn't rushed out the door a lesser score.

I guess this guy just likes to teleport through a map with recycled zones for THREE acts, and make people explode with swings of his swords.

edit: this whole Witcher vs Dragon Age 2. Know what it is? It's the true Bioware fans who had their jaws drop during Ostagar, finding the Urn of Sacred Ashes, going into Deep Roads for 3+ hours and fithing Brood Mother at the end, defending Redclif village from the undead, cleansing the magi tower, and killing the Archdemon with entire armies. We felt betrayed with DA2, simple as that.

Bawwwwwwww. My game didn't get as good a review as a game I chose to hate, bawwww!

Anyway. Hearing the console version is being tweaked, so that might help. The one thing that puts me off the game more than the clunky combat and UI is just the art direction. I just can't get into the drab quasi medievalness of it all, especially while walking around as a dude with white anime hair.

marcie.johnson:
Another disappointing review by the Escapist. But then again, what did I expect from a magazine that called Dragon Age II "a pinnacle of role-playing games". You obviously like your games to be casual, not making you think twice and holding your hand a lot. That explains the low score - yep, TW2 is not for the casual gamer.

Annoying though is the reviewer's whining about the difficult combat while refusing to drop the difficulty down to easy. How silly is that? Is "easy" too unmanly for him? Doesn't make him feel awesome enough? *rolls eyes*

I simply love this game - it's balm to the soul of those who are sick of all the brainless action-crap we're being served nowadays.

Great post - playing a ROLE PLAYING GAME and getting upset that there aren't enough hand -holding features that completely break atmosphere? That's like playing chess and crying that all the strategies aren't automatically chosen for you.

Calibretto:
Ok enough is enough IM one click away from buying the game I DONT KNOW IF I SHOULD. I have deep reservations about buying ANY GAME after dragon age 2 ( it has scarred me for life).
DO I CLICK THe BUY OPTION Or NOT!!!?!
PS.The harder the game the better. Unless its likes DA2 Nightmare mode which is the most non fun difficulty I have ever played filled with kiting and wonderful new spawning enemies on my head.

Dude, buy it. There are some niggles - the combat can be unresponsive and rough at first - but the experience is awesome. If you're still undecided - go buy Gothic 2 instead. It's amazing as well. :D

beastrn:
Do you know that The Witcher 2 was brought below 90/100 because of this review? So because of this uneducated opinion, because of this reviewers incompetency and inability to learn something for himself, the developers get to show their stock holders and dependants a below 90/100 game when clearly it is not.

So in other words, you're angry because the game's rating on metacritic has fallen below 90, and you've made this your own personal little crusade.

'When it clearly is not'. Explain this to me. Along what standards are you judging it? Before you answer, let me point out that whatever you answer will be YOUR criteria for judging a good game. Others may have different criteria. That's what we call 'subjectivity'. No one can objectively state that The Witcher 2 is worth 90/100. What they can say is that according to a subjective critical consensus, it has reached a certain standard. That's all metacritic is, that's all it should be interpreted as. If you think that CP Project's stockholders may view a lesser score as a reason to pull support from the company, then the problem lies with them, not with Greg Tito expressing his subjective opinion of the game.

While I had my own couple of issues with the game (navigating through some parts of the forest outside of Flotsam is a serious pain in the ass, and there are some minor logical flaws, like with Loredo switching between telling us to work with him and trying to kill us at the same time, if you played a certain side quest right before/after the main storyline quest at the beginning of Act I), it's still One of the best games this year, and definitely RPG of the Year 2011 so far (let's see how Skyrim will do). The combat is challenging, yes, but also rewarding at the same time. Good plot, branched with a lot of choices that ACTUALLY MATTER something. And in terms of graphics - it's a new game to beat in terms of environment (character models and their body mimics could be much better though).

Overall, if this review made you unsure about buying The Witcher 2 - go for it. Seriously, it's a barrel of fun. Also, since you watched/read the review, you already know what to expect from the unforgiving tutorial, so you are already prepared :P

Shamanic Rhythm:

beastrn:
Do you know that The Witcher 2 was brought below 90/100 because of this review? So because of this uneducated opinion, because of this reviewers incompetency and inability to learn something for himself, the developers get to show their stock holders and dependants a below 90/100 game when clearly it is not.

So in other words, you're angry because the game's rating on metacritic has fallen below 90, and you've made this your own personal little crusade.

'When it clearly is not'. Explain this to me. Along what standards are you judging it? Before you answer, let me point out that whatever you answer will be YOUR criteria for judging a good game. Others may have different criteria. That's what we call 'subjectivity'. No one can objectively state that The Witcher 2 is worth 90/100. What they can say is that according to a subjective critical consensus, it has reached a certain standard. That's all metacritic is, that's all it should be interpreted as. If you think that CP Project's stockholders may view a lesser score as a reason to pull support from the company, then the problem lies with them, not with Greg Tito expressing his subjective opinion of the game.

No. Only just realized it went below 90 during my last post here.

Only reason I'm here is to add my voice to the dissent this review has riled. It's an unjust review backed up by someone that thinks Dragon Age 2 is a good game.

Also, read my other posts to learn why "subjective" is not an excuse for "bad at games and should have played on Easy"

this game is just boring. the mechanics are frantic and mindless. the ideas are mediocre and the main character is your standard dark fantasy hero with an identity disorder. the game is realistic in the most profane and uninteresting ways and on the other hand shows a lack of consequence in every other aspect. like stealing from everyone in front of them. there's money lying around everywhere. you have your standard open doors/locked doors one way street with precious herbs growing in the midst of the city that's basically on fire. this all makes so little sense, i can't understand how anyone could play this poor excuse for an rpg for more than 10 minutes. we have to put up with so much crap from the industry that games like the witcher actually appeal to people, because they don't know that there has been a time, where games were good? fuck this industry, fuck everything about it.

Calibretto:
Ok enough is enough IM one click away from buying the game I DONT KNOW IF I SHOULD. I have deep reservations about buying ANY GAME after dragon age 2 ( it has scarred me for life).
DO I CLICK THe BUY OPTION Or NOT!!!?!
PS.The harder the game the better. Unless its likes DA2 Nightmare mode which is the most non fun difficulty I have ever played filled with kiting and wonderful new spawning enemies on my head.

The battle system was inspired by Demon's Soul, a game known for it's difficulty and it delivers. You have to know what you are doing, when you are engaging and when to retreat (sometimes legging it, and the game allows you to do that, is the best option). Not to mention the beauty of preparing yourself for combat. As long as you aren't playing on easy the gameplay will deliver.

Think about it this way - even those defending the reviewer say that this is an awesome game, despite it's flaws.

RhombusHatesYou:

Xzi:
CDPR is their own independent studio, publishing by Atari.

Errr... CD Projekt RED is owned by CD Projekt, who are the publisher for The Witcher 2. Atari is just one of the distributors for the game.

Err yeah, close enough. A branch of an independent studio. Did think Atari was publisher just because their name is all over the Witcher games though. My bad.

I'm gonna have to comment on this more in-depth later cause I gotta go, but have to post those videos of the kind of person that has "problems" with the game's combat in the Prologue already, I found it quite hilarious:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PG1kBrrvPpA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCjzA-C647o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9-j148iT8g

Me personally, I died 2 or 3 times till I handled it... but that was honestly my fault because at that point I hadn't read anything about the magic signs or combat system in the Game Manual that is part of every game box, nor did I bother to press "J" and look up the Combat Tutorials in the Journal.

Still I had the basic gist of the combat system, how parrying takes away Vigor and how to stun people for a few seconds, how to not turn my back to enemies while fighting cause they do increased damage (or do the same to them) and how to dodge etc. and it was over with rather quick.

CDProjekt has made a statement towards that by the way:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-05-24-cd-projekt-defends-witcher-2-difficulty

In Eurogamer's 9/10 review of the game last week, Quintin Smith complained that the game was "ungodly tough" at the start before becoming more manageable later on.

"Obviously we have been inspired by hardcore games, by difficult games, and maybe that might be the reason why it was not that obvious to us," answered senior producer Tomasz Gop.

"But we didn't want the game to be a piece of cake at the beginning like, you know, an interactive movie. That wasn't what we were aiming for. We definitely wanted to introduce at least some level of difficulty.

"I think the most common misunderstanding is that most people compare our 'normal difficulty' to other games' 'normal difficulty'," he continued.

"Since we are a hardcore game, we do require a hardcore approach on the 'normal' skill. The 'easy' skill is basically for the guys who want to take it light.

Honestly if you fail at this game you fail because you cannot understand/comprehend something about it, NOT because the combat system is flawed.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 . . . 16 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here