Zero Punctuation: The Witcher

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT
 

MinionOfCthulhu:
Did anyone else point out the irony that he mentions how The Witcher tries to make itself seem mature by having the characters curse up a storm and then after the review dub over a cutscene from Painkiller where that angel guy wants to suck off the boring Painkiller guy?

Well, there's a bit of difference between "cursing a lot to be funny" and "cursing a lot because we are very mature and adult." The funny-cursing is, yeah, pretty immature. Twenty minutes! Out front! Puffer fish! Har har har blowjobs. But being purposely immature is good for a few yuks. Meanwhile, actual maturity would dictate that you lay off the dick jokes and the excessive swear words and try to be serious for a few moments while making really important decisions.

Where the boobies fit into this, I'm not sure.

Uhm I am curious about the Witcher, but I am not sure I want to buy a game at full price that is boring. And it might be. As much as I love RPGs I must admit that lately the RPGs are quite disappointing me. I am having MORE FUN with old RPGs like Neverwinter Nights 1 and the Baldur Gates series...

Lately I bought Dangeon Siege 2 (since I like the first one) but it was a great disappont ment.
Same for 2worlds... -_-

TES Oblivion also disappointed me a lot. I really LOVED Morrowind and I had great expectations, which were not met at all (although Oblivion is not a bad game, I liked it but it could have been better)

I am not sure to side or not with Yahtzee about the lenght of text and dialog in RPGs... it depends how interesting it is and how much to the point.

Perhaps I'll wait until they discount it... (and if it's as boring as Yahtzee says it won't take that long either)
In any case the witcher made me curious (especially the complexity of it makes me want to check it out)

Anyway Yahtzee you rule, and say hi to your dad for me LOL

PS: my favourite review is still the one about Clive Barker's Jerico (by Clive Barker). It must be because the game is as lame as an Uwe Boll movie... Although I still love all your reviews :P

As much as I love Yahtzee as if he was some holy gift from the gaming Gods, and I'll admit he does spear the game for some valid points, namely Geralt's rather incongruous botomless libido, and the over-reliance on fetchy quests; and there are some points I'm surprised he didn't pickup on, like some wildly inconsistant voice acting, but all the same you should follow up on his advice in his Mass Effect review and ignore this review's conclusion completely if you happen to be a fan of RPGs. The fact he says nothing whatsoever about the story, even the impressive Hot-Fuzz-esque ending of the first chapter, should be a dead give away. The man has speared several different games for moving your character up and down a slider between saint and skeletor, and fails to give the game enough of a chance to see how this game deals with that. Admittably, those omissions do come from a genuine flaw in the game, that it has both a lengthy tutorial and a starter chapter of doom before you get into the meat of the story,but I could name plenty of other RPGs where that is the case to some extent. Hell,even fallout had the dull-as-dishwater "kill the Radscorpions" village before you got rolling. This wasn't a bad episode, because it was very amusing and had Yahtzee being Yahtzee. But you are not necessarily Yahtzee.

It genuinely annoyed me when someone mentioned he'd skip this game for Torment and Fallout 2. Guess what,Yahtzee hates Torment too. The whole reason he's great is that he never tries to deliver a detailed, neutral analysis, he lets fly with his opinion and is hilarious doing it. However, that also means you've got to consider if what he says applies to you. The Witcher ain't perfect by a long shot, but if you like RPGs, it's worth it to pick it up.

Uhm I am curious about the Witcher, but I am not sure I want to buy a game at full price that is boring. And it might be. As much as I love RPGs I must admit that lately the RPGs are quite disappointing me. I am having MORE FUN with old RPGs like Neverwinter Nights 1 and the Baldur Gates series...

And for guys like this, what Yahtzee desribed was equivalent to Irenicus' Dungeon in BGII. If you're like me youprobably installed Dungeon-Be-Goneto by pass that mind numbing bit of rubbish on your hundredth play-through, but it was worth going through once.

Having actually played Painkiller,I found the "intro-theatre" very funny, but was vaguely disquieted by the fact this made a LOT more sense than the original cinematic. And was better acted. And it has only just occured to me that, coincidentally, both of these games were Polish made, as your total irrelevancy of the day.

RabbitDynamite:
It genuinely annoyed me when someone mentioned he'd skip this game for Torment and Fallout 2. Guess what,Yahtzee hates Torment too.

So what? When you get near a point, make it.

Downwhere? Is that you?!

Wow, sounds a lot better than Antiques RoadShow: Return of The Witch King's Watch.

Also Yahtzee I kinda got a request, even though I know requests are done by email. I think you should do a review of 'In The Name Of The King.' Yeah, it's a movie, but it features the guys from The Transporter, HellBoy, Power Rangers (no lie), and someone who had the godchild of Joey Lawerence and Shawn Michaels from the WWE. Plus Uwe Boll directed and produced the film, so it's no surprise that 'suck' should be on the title...along with 'balls.'

What the world needs right now is this :

image

fugori:
Think about it this way: if your reaction to this review is "I loved this game and can't believe that Yahtzee is misrepresenting it so!", then for a minute imagine the reasons that Yahtzee has provided. Obviously you would have a rebuttal to each of them, but I think it's absolutely fair to say that many people would not, and would in fact line up much more with Yahtzee's line of thinking than yours or mine. Now imagine that you're that person. Hasn't this been a helpful experience?

Personally, I have yet to play The Witcher, but I think this review has informed me just as competently as to the content of the game as any of the lengthy previews I previously checked out.

If you're like me, you watch Yahtzee to get a sense of the game's flaws. The serious reviews tend to concentrate on the positive. But he missed many of this game's real flaws.

1. Not enough inventory slots for all the crap you can collect.

2. Tiny item icons, making it hard to tell just what all those twigs and berries are.

3. No at-a-glance means of telling what secondary properties those leaves and guts have.

4. Somewhat confusing talent tree (can I take Slashy II without having Slashy I? Looks like I can! I wonder if it actually does anything, though). You can probably pick talents at random and do fine.

5. Not nearly enough character models! Too many people look alike. The models aren't bland, they're just over-repeated. I guess if the models were generic it wouldn't matter as much. No, you have some really interesting character models (tall, shirtless guy with tattoo of naked woman on this chest, or an obese man with a bell around his neck) that are repeated for both scrub NPCs and main characters (look, another fat man). Not good.

6. Staging the first boss fight after a lengthy cut-scene exchange. Come on. Almost everyone will die, usually repeatedly. Don't make the players click through the cut-scenes every darn time!

7. Ill-timed spell ("sign") acquisition. By the time you pick up the other signs, you'll have Aard and Igni developed to the point where spending points on the others doesn't make sense.

8. Bland side-games. Not as bad as Bioshock's single flow-puzzle they use for everything, but boxing and dice kinda suck. Should have just ripped off Puzzle Pirates for good diversionary games. On the plus side, I guess, the NPCs are so retarded at playing dice that you never lack for funds.

9. Clunky fight mechanics. This is the Aurora game engine's fault, but sometimes when you click to do something it doesn't "take." Very annoying.

10. Auto-sheathing of weapons. Almost guarantees you'll be caught flat-footed at the beginning of every encounter. That also causes you to pause during that animation. You can loot items before and after, but not while precious Geralt is adjusting his accoutrements.

11. Infinitely-respawning scrub creatures at higher levels. Gee, I can take out a half dozen Drowners with a single sword swing in Act V, so why torment me with the little buggers? At least let me kill them all so I don't have to deal with them anymore.

12. Little or no foreshadowing that you're about to enter a boss battle. Let alone any idea how difficult or easy it might be. You go from slaughtering hordes of thrall with a sharp stick and disapproving glance to "die if you open that next door without a half-dozen potions streaming through your bloodstream and Oil of Ickiness on your silver sword" without warning.

You get the idea. There are real faults with what is, overall, an excellent game. Those are the kind of things I watch Yahtzee to have illuminated for me. All I got was "oooh, it's so complicated my head hurts" when, in fact, the Witcher is one of the most simple RPG games I've ever seen. Simple enough to be a console game. (heh)

Um...TE:
If you're like me, you watch Yahtzee to get a sense of the game's flaws. The serious reviews tend to concentrate on the positive. But he missed many of this game's real flaws.

1. Not enough inventory slots for all the crap you can collect.

2. Tiny item icons, making it hard to tell just what all those twigs and berries are.

3. No at-a-glance means of telling what secondary properties those leaves and guts have.

4. Somewhat confusing talent tree (can I take Slashy II without having Slashy I? Looks like I can! I wonder if it actually does anything, though). You can probably pick talents at random and do fine.

5. Not nearly enough character models! Too many people look alike. The models aren't bland, they're just over-repeated. I guess if the models were generic it wouldn't matter as much. No, you have some really interesting character models (tall, shirtless guy with tattoo of naked woman on this chest, or an obese man with a bell around his neck) that are repeated for both scrub NPCs and main characters (look, another fat man). Not good.

6. Staging the first boss fight after a lengthy cut-scene exchange. Come on. Almost everyone will die, usually repeatedly. Don't make the players click through the cut-scenes every darn time!

7. Ill-timed spell ("sign") acquisition. By the time you pick up the other signs, you'll have Aard and Igni developed to the point where spending points on the others doesn't make sense.

8. Bland side-games. Not as bad as Bioshock's single flow-puzzle they use for everything, but boxing and dice kinda suck. Should have just ripped off Puzzle Pirates for good diversionary games. On the plus side, I guess, the NPCs are so retarded at playing dice that you never lack for funds.

9. Clunky fight mechanics. This is the Aurora game engine's fault, but sometimes when you click to do something it doesn't "take." Very annoying.

10. Auto-sheathing of weapons. Almost guarantees you'll be caught flat-footed at the beginning of every encounter. That also causes you to pause during that animation. You can loot items before and after, but not while precious Geralt is adjusting his accoutrements.

11. Infinitely-respawning scrub creatures at higher levels. Gee, I can take out a half dozen Drowners with a single sword swing in Act V, so why torment me with the little buggers? At least let me kill them all so I don't have to deal with them anymore.

12. Little or no foreshadowing that you're about to enter a boss battle. Let alone any idea how difficult or easy it might be. You go from slaughtering hordes of thrall with a sharp stick and disapproving glance to "die if you open that next door without a half-dozen potions streaming through your bloodstream and Oil of Ickiness on your silver sword" without warning.

You get the idea. There are real faults with what is, overall, an excellent game. Those are the kind of things I watch Yahtzee to have illuminated for me. All I got was "oooh, it's so complicated my head hurts" when, in fact, the Witcher is one of the most simple RPG games I've ever seen. Simple enough to be a console game. (heh)

You did what I did not bother with. You outlined everything thats lacking about this game; and probably more eloquently then I could have done.

QFT

I'm glad I'm not the only one to see what a broken piece of trash The Witcher is.

RabbitDynamite:
And for guys like this, what Yahtzee desribed was equivalent to Irenicus' Dungeon in BGII. If you're like me youprobably installed Dungeon-Be-Goneto by pass that mind numbing bit of rubbish on your hundredth play-through, but it was worth going through once.

Having actually played Painkiller,I found the "intro-theatre" very funny, but was vaguely disquieted by the fact this made a LOT more sense than the original cinematic. And was better acted. And it has only just occured to me that, coincidentally, both of these games were Polish made, as your total irrelevancy of the day.

I liked the Irenicus Dungeon, and I have not replayed BG 2 after finishing it. Since I already know how the story evolves it does not excite me anymore. In a game for me the story itself is the most important thing. And like with books after you finished it you are not really compelled to replay immediately. Although I do read the same book more then one time I do it on intervals of several months of years.

I bought only recently Neverwinter Nights 1 ( I am actually still playing it I am only at Act 3.. I do not have that much time for games), since it was not so expensive and I was not sure to buy NW Nights 2 (which I still haven't) Of course the all'Dangoun & Dragons rules' in NW Nights and BG does not appeal too much to me but they are fun to play for an hour or 2 after a long busy day. What I meant is that I usually have MORE FUN after buying an OLD game with perhaps less atractive graphics than the new ones. I do not say they are 'Fantabulous' and that you can play them 10 times without getting bored... but they at least do their job the first and maybe second time you play them.

The point is that, while the games improve graphically and have maybe physics engines build into it and other gadgets, the FUN they deliver instead of improving, it gets worse.
As a matter of fact no RPG yet can top Morrowind in my list of favorite games. It is the only RPG I played completely through twice, actually.
Perhaps now that we have such great graphics and sound and gadgets, we should get back at writing interesting plots and quests.

I actually watched a few trailers of 'the witcher', being my curiosity stimulated, and some youtube movies of it... it makes me think that the writers of the game also write porn... The dialog was pretty cheese and lame. It was not too funny to me, in any case.

I have not played the game, but from what I have seen it looks like it targets the sexually frustrated population.

All in all it might not be so bad... perhaps one day I'll give it a shot and it might surprise me... or perhaps future RPGs will be so bad that The Witcher will seem like 'the shit' by comparison and not by true quality...

In the video Yahtzee asks why Geralt the Witcher does not kill witches. The answer is because the term 'Witcher' refers to a man who can use some magic, not a witch hunter. Also a man that can use a lot of magic is a Magician, not a Witcher.

The term Witcher is a translation of 'wiedźmin' from the Polish novels (also in Polish a witch is a 'wiedźma'). The prefered translation by the author (Andrzej Sapkowski) is 'Hexer', while 'Warlock' was used in informal translations of the novel.

entropy3ko:
I bought only recently Neverwinter Nights...not sure to buy NW Nights 2

I've played NWN1 and all its expansions. Just started NWN2 co-op with a friend.

I liked the Witcher much more than either as a single-player CRPG. After playing the Witcher, NWN looks like a game of Peggle (and WoW, heaven forbid, looks like it should be pink with the words "Hello, Kitty" stenciled on its side). There's a grittiness that goes beyond the sex scenes and "your momma" comments.

Even though it's based off the engine used in NWN1, it takes a lot of iron to run Witcher.

Enspik:
I'm glad I'm not the only one to see what a broken piece of trash The Witcher is.

On the contrary - the game is great despite such flaws. That is, if you like story-based games. One could just read the books, I guess, if you can read Polish.

Which brings up a meta-flaw of the game: people who have read the books in their native tongue acting smug on the boards because they know more of the story and background than you, a mere player of the game.* No less annoying than the Tolkein freaks who'd point out NPCs in LOTRO who were dressed in the wrong shade of green. I'm looking forward to WAR, but I just know that the boards will be filled with decades-old Warhammer hobbyists who'll nit-pick the game because on page 32 paragraph 4 of compendium VII it stated the Hammer of Oog is a two-handed weapon and the game represents it as a hand-and-a-half weapon.

* {Edit: not referring to uanime5, who posted while I was writing}

But the Witcher is not "a broken piece of trash" as much as it's imperfect - unless those imperfections ruin your enjoyment of the game (then it's a broken piece of trash). Thankfully, there's a demo that takes you through the prologue and most of Act I. If you don't like it by then, you're not going to like the retail version.

image

lol, well since Yahtzee's Crysis review and his hatred towards RPG's I wasn't gonna take this one seriously, and I ALREADY knew he was gonna hate it, and everything after these reviews cuz apparently no one actually does like it when he enjoys himself, but man Yahtzee.....

you made a HUGE MISTAKE PUTTING THE PAINKILLER THING IN, NOW WE'RE GONNA WANT MORE!! THAT WAS FUNNIER THEN THE ACTUAL REVIEW.

EDIT: Forgot to mention, song choice at the beggining = bloody brilliant!

he should really stay away from RPGs,he says that some games are too lineal and stupid, but when there is a little bit of depth and complexity its just boring crap for elitist pricks

they gave him a game, and he have to complete it in a week... you can't like a deep and complex non-linear RPG if you play it with a time limit like if you were in a race and having a review in mind all the time

the review was fun, but most of the things he saw as flaws, most gamers see them as cool features that they are looking for, he just hates RPG, thats all, I respect it, but what I don't respect is the people that write stuf like "this game is shit because yahtzee didn't like it"

to those: nice decision to not buy the game, because if you can't think for yourself, and base your opinions completely on someone else's, then The Witcher is NOT your game anyway.

Um...TE:
You get the idea. There are real faults with what is, overall, an excellent game. Those are the kind of things I watch Yahtzee to have illuminated for me. All I got was "oooh, it's so complicated my head hurts" when, in fact, the Witcher is one of the most simple RPG games I've ever seen. Simple enough to be a console game. (heh)

This continues to assume that he is obligated to run through the game, exhaustively chronicling every design flaw. He is not. His impression is a valid one, because it quite clearly describes some very simple problems that a certain segment of the gaming population might have with it at the very start of their The Witcher experience.

This is a serious review. It's a real review. It just doesn't do justice to the good qualities of the game, presumably, because its written from the perspective of a person who saw too much bad too quickly to continue. If the first 100 pages of a novel has you bored to tears, you should feel no obligation to continue, even if you're reviewing it. I could shout in praise about it, desperate to convince you that The Great Gatsby is an important work of art (it is, and I would), but that won't change your personal experience at all. The thing is, your review would not be for people like me at all. Unless it was funny, that is. That's why I enjoy ZP reviews so much - even when I disagree (Super Paper Mario, Super Mario Galaxy, Bioshock to some degree), I still have a good time, and I get a perspective I otherwise wouldn't have had access to, or would have otherwise dismissed because of the style of delivery.

razor:
image

Sooner or later you'll all grow out of it and realise that this just ISN'T FUNNY.

Granted, this is the only faux pas Yahtzee has made thus far, but it's still a big one.

Chis:
Sooner or later you'll all grow out of it and realise that this just ISN'T FUNNY.

Now this is funny. I mean, is there anything more funny than someone trying to tell you something that is hilarious, isn't funny? I really do picture one person stamping their foot in a room full of laughter, insisting there is nothing funny.

Chis:

razor:
image

Sooner or later you'll all grow out of it and realise that this just ISN'T FUNNY.

Granted, this is the only faux pas Yahtzee has made thus far, but it's still a big one.

Sorry, but you sound like an epic whiner.

Um...TE made some very good points.

This was probably the least funny Zero Punctuation for me so far. Obviously I don't expect a highly professional, objective review of a game, but as Trevor Griffiths so rightly pointed out in his play 'Comedians': 'Comedy is truth'. The biggest reason why I find Yahtzee's reviews so hilarious, is because I've played the games, and he picks up on the flaws that exist within them, and shines a great big amusing light on them for all the world to see. The biggest problem I had with this review, was the fact that instead of bending, or extending reality for his own comical purposes, he said things which simply weren't true; for example, 'Clicking once on an enemy once, or twice if your advanced'. Unless you can kill an enemy in one hit (which is possible, but not frequent), you never click on an enemy once. In fact you have to click several times, at the right times, to build a combination. He also made the alchemy and general GUI seem complex, when it tends towards the scale of a console game as opposed to a PC one. I never read game manuals, and I, as could everyone else by my reasoning, could work out the game nuances absolutely fine; so yes I would have to call Yahtzee 'Retard McSpackypants'.

Yahtzee could have made incredibly amusing points on the list of things Um...TE made, but instead he focused on things with little relevance or things which weren't true. Personally, I thought The Witcher was one of the best RPGs to come out in a long time, and reminded me how things used to be with games like Fallout and Baldur's Gate. It had a fantastic story, which brought up contemporary issues without patronising the player (e.g. the Fisstech drug trade and the damage it dealt to its users; the persecution of foreigners; the political militancy of the elves, very reminiscient of modern terrorist doctrine). Also as many have pointed out this game /lives/ in the grey area, along with baby eating Mother Theresas. It has none of the black and white Yahtzee usually complains about.

Obviously the above is just my opinion of the game, much in the same way Yahtzee's review is his; it just seems like he was destroying this game for the sake of destroying it. I certainly admit there are issues with the game, many of which would have made for hilarious exposure (I can't believe he didn't mention the loading times), but he didn't seem to focus on them. Instead he looked at it from a very high level and picked things off without much accuracy. That's not to say it was bad... It was just shallower than one might expect from a Zero Punctuation review.

fugori:
This continues to assume that he is obligated to run through the game, exhaustively chronicling every design flaw. He is not.

I'm not saying he's obliged (I don't have his contract in front of me) - I just said he didn't do it.

fugori:
His impression is a valid one, because it quite clearly describes some very simple problems that a certain segment of the gaming population might have with it at the very start of their The Witcher experience.

This is a serious review. It's a real review. It just doesn't do justice to the good qualities of the game...

He called it "First Impressions" precisely because it's not a real review. Playing the first 10% of a game, or reading 10% of a novel, or watching 10% of a movie, or eating 10% of a meal may be enough to form an opinion (especially for personal tastes), but it's not enough to produce an informed opinion (for a general audience).

And that's okay. He comes right out, up front, and says that he didn't get very far. That's fair. I've read some game "reviews" that are passed off as such where it becomes painfully clear that the reviewer doesn't know what he's talking about because he didn't play the damn game. This week's video wasn't that. It certainly wasn't a review, either. It was, ahem, a first impression.

Chis:
Sooner or later you'll all grow out of it and realise that this just ISN'T FUNNY.

The picture, though, is funnier than the line. Give props to razor for the picture.

razor:
Now this is funny. I mean, is there anything more funny than someone trying to tell you something that is hilarious, isn't funny? I really do picture one person stamping their foot in a room full of laughter, insisting there is nothing funny.

Well done, you're living up to your forum tagline.

lol, "Claevage you could lose your dog in", still had me laughing half an hour l8r, keep up the good work!

Well, I laughed all the way through this, especially at 'THIS IS A MUMORPUGER!" Such outrage!

If something bores you enough you can't even finish it, you obviously can't give a fair and balanced review, but you can say 'I couldn't finish this, here's why.' It's like me with Wuthering Heights and The DaVinci Code.

(Confession: The only game I've played out of any of the games Yahtzee has reviewed is 'Silent Hill Origins'. I haven't watched that review yet because I'm still hugely in love with SHO and I know I would get butthurt about criticism. Perhaps you guys, knowing as you do that Yahtzee hates everything, could do the same?)

Yay, a review of The Witcher!! And I only barely hardly pitched the game several times for several weeks ;).

I loved the review, as it (a) has the usual generous helpings of black acidic humour (b)reminded me that I have indeed generously "overlooked" some badly executed features while playing the game (curse that inventory system for one!), simply because the story kept me hooked. It's fully understandable that if Planescape: Torment isn't one's thing then The Witcher probably won't be either.

Also, I have to concur with the points made by Um... Te, Rabbitdynamite, alzxul, and others. I really enjoyed The Witcher, played it from start to finish, and the negatives mentioned in this review do not appear to reflect the true negatives of this game.

Then again, these were Yahtzee's first impressions, so perhaps the negatives he talked about are the ones apparent during first impressions without having had the chance to be replaced with the real negatives after the game sunk in. I can't really tell, since I was having far too much fun deciding whether or not to let the Witch live, or to kick the priest's... fence.

By the way, Yahtzee, if you think Planescape: Torment is boring then - should I find the time - I just might be able to show you a different look at the game in the coming future :).

Most of you people are kissing his ass, don't know for what reason. I admit he's got style, but before you give any opinion, finish the damn game first. Cause it was boring at first to me to, hell...a lot of good games were boring at first, but you have to give a chance to everything. What i'm saying, is finish it and i'm pretty sure you won't pe dissapointed.

Um...TE:

fugori:
Think about it this way: if your reaction to this review is "I loved this game and can't believe that Yahtzee is misrepresenting it so!", then for a minute imagine the reasons that Yahtzee has provided. Obviously you would have a rebuttal to each of them, but I think it's absolutely fair to say that many people would not, and would in fact line up much more with Yahtzee's line of thinking than yours or mine. Now imagine that you're that person. Hasn't this been a helpful experience?

Personally, I have yet to play The Witcher, but I think this review has informed me just as competently as to the content of the game as any of the lengthy previews I previously checked out.

If you're like me, you watch Yahtzee to get a sense of the game's flaws. The serious reviews tend to concentrate on the positive. But he missed many of this game's real flaws.

1. Not enough inventory slots for all the crap you can collect.

2. Tiny item icons, making it hard to tell just what all those twigs and berries are.

3. No at-a-glance means of telling what secondary properties those leaves and guts have.

4. Somewhat confusing talent tree (can I take Slashy II without having Slashy I? Looks like I can! I wonder if it actually does anything, though). You can probably pick talents at random and do fine.

5. Not nearly enough character models! Too many people look alike. The models aren't bland, they're just over-repeated. I guess if the models were generic it wouldn't matter as much. No, you have some really interesting character models (tall, shirtless guy with tattoo of naked woman on this chest, or an obese man with a bell around his neck) that are repeated for both scrub NPCs and main characters (look, another fat man). Not good.

6. Staging the first boss fight after a lengthy cut-scene exchange. Come on. Almost everyone will die, usually repeatedly. Don't make the players click through the cut-scenes every darn time!

7. Ill-timed spell ("sign") acquisition. By the time you pick up the other signs, you'll have Aard and Igni developed to the point where spending points on the others doesn't make sense.

8. Bland side-games. Not as bad as Bioshock's single flow-puzzle they use for everything, but boxing and dice kinda suck. Should have just ripped off Puzzle Pirates for good diversionary games. On the plus side, I guess, the NPCs are so retarded at playing dice that you never lack for funds.

9. Clunky fight mechanics. This is the Aurora game engine's fault, but sometimes when you click to do something it doesn't "take." Very annoying.

10. Auto-sheathing of weapons. Almost guarantees you'll be caught flat-footed at the beginning of every encounter. That also causes you to pause during that animation. You can loot items before and after, but not while precious Geralt is adjusting his accoutrements.

11. Infinitely-respawning scrub creatures at higher levels. Gee, I can take out a half dozen Drowners with a single sword swing in Act V, so why torment me with the little buggers? At least let me kill them all so I don't have to deal with them anymore.

12. Little or no foreshadowing that you're about to enter a boss battle. Let alone any idea how difficult or easy it might be. You go from slaughtering hordes of thrall with a sharp stick and disapproving glance to "die if you open that next door without a half-dozen potions streaming through your bloodstream and Oil of Ickiness on your silver sword" without warning.

You get the idea. There are real faults with what is, overall, an excellent game. Those are the kind of things I watch Yahtzee to have illuminated for me. All I got was "oooh, it's so complicated my head hurts" when, in fact, the Witcher is one of the most simple RPG games I've ever seen. Simple enough to be a console game. (heh)

QFT^2. Excellent points. The Witcher isn't anywhere near complicated. Oh, I dunno, it took me all of 10 minutes (less, actually) to figure the mechanics out, including alchemy and the journal, without ever looking at the manual.

I found The Witcher to have overly simplistic gameplay, actually, a la Jade Empire and Mass Effect. The inventory/alchemy layout was a bit cumbersome, but nothing deadly.

The Witcher is a decent to good game IMO, depending upon my mood, but not great. It feels more like a console RPG than an old-school PC RPG like Ultima 7, PS:T, or Baldur's Gate, so I don't know where the 'PC elitist' crap is coming from.

escapist007:
hell...a lot of good games were boring at first, but you have to give a chance to everything..

Care to name some?

I can't think of any games that were boring at first and didn't stay boring, or at the very least suffer from regular bouts of boring when they returned to whatever game style made them boring in the first place (like Folklore, where the poor translation and shocking narrative style make pretty much every conversation an exercise in frustration and leaves you pressing X rapidly so that you can get back to wandering around smacking things in the face).

Yahtzee Croshaw:

This week on Zero Punctuation, Yahtzee roleplays a pale, lanky misogynist.

Quite the stretch then.

Ah, that's more like it! Nice to see this whole 'humour' thing creeping back in Yahtzee's vids. 8 thumbs up.

SacrificiaLamb

If you're like me, you watch Yahtzee to get a sense of the game's flaws. The serious reviews tend to concentrate on the positive. But he missed many of this game's real flaws.

Several aren't real flaws though.

1. Not enough inventory slots for all the crap you can collect.

Intended feature - you aren't meant to be a loot monger in this game. Instead you are meant to pick and choose while travelling fairly light.

4. Somewhat confusing talent tree (can I take Slashy II without having Slashy I? Looks like I can! I wonder if it actually does anything, though). You can probably pick talents at random and do fine.

Actually each level in the combat styles talents unlocked a particular attack or feature in the combat chain sequence. So pick talents in slashy three, say, and until you chain three blows together then those talents won't do anything for you. The manual even tells you this...

6. Staging the first boss fight after a lengthy cut-scene exchange. Come on. Almost everyone will die, usually repeatedly. Don't make the players click through the cut-scenes every darn time!

This was pretty much the only mis-step like this they made though. (I am currently in chapter four.) I agree it was a mistake but it happens once in eighty hours. Crying shame it is the first boss fight though as it does tend to put people off.

7. Ill-timed spell ("sign") acquisition. By the time you pick up the other signs, you'll have Aard and Igni developed to the point where spending points on the others doesn't make sense.

You don't have to put points into the signs and by the time you gain the other signs, mid chapter II if you have searched thoroughly, there is still plenty of time. Besides there is such a plethora of Bronze talents that generally you have all the first and second stage talents acquired anyway. It is the Silver and Gold talents that take the thought and you don't get those till chapter III.

8. Bland side-games. Not as bad as Bioshock's single flow-puzzle they use for everything, but boxing and dice kinda suck. Should have just ripped off Puzzle Pirates for good diversionary games. On the plus side, I guess, the NPCs are so retarded at playing dice that you never lack for funds.

They are called side-games for a reason. Unlike Bioshock's flow puzzle which was pretty much essential to the game and simply couldn't be avoided.

9. Clunky fight mechanics. This is the Aurora game engine's fault, but sometimes when you click to do something it doesn't "take." Very annoying.

But also very rare. I think I have had it happen three times thus far.

10. Auto-sheathing of weapons. Almost guarantees you'll be caught flat-footed at the beginning of every encounter. That also causes you to pause during that animation. You can loot items before and after, but not while precious Geralt is adjusting his accoutrements.

You always have signs ready to go. If you really need time to prevent being jumped (which given the view distances meant only giant centipedes and Echinopse plants actually can surprise you) then simply always have Quen the protection sign chosen. Then you can dally preparing while people wail on the protection barrier first. Or just use Aard and Igni to knock them back and then draw your sword.

11. Infinitely-respawning scrub creatures at higher levels. Gee, I can take out a half dozen Drowners with a single sword swing in Act V, so why torment me with the little buggers? At least let me kill them all so I don't have to deal with them anymore.

Never found the drowner repellent talisman, huh? You can get it mid-chapter II by purchasing it and are given it as a side-quest item in Chapter IV. Seems like somebody might not be doing side-quests or checking merchants too often. This might well be a side-effect of the small icons issue you mentioned.

12. Little or no foreshadowing that you're about to enter a boss battle. Let alone any idea how difficult or easy it might be. You go from slaughtering hordes of thrall with a sharp stick and disapproving glance to "die if you open that next door without a half-dozen potions streaming through your bloodstream and Oil of Ickiness on your silver sword" without warning.

It did this once and once only to date. Kikimore Queen? Lots of foreshadowing that it was going to be a tough fight because of what you are doing to then reach her. Dagon fight? Plenty of warning - hell the games beastiary warns you it is a god and you deliberately summon it. Fight with the Professor and Azar Javed, both are explicitly marked as being dangerous foes and your first major battle with them in the Swamp is very clearly foreshadowed by the whole murder investigation quest which you cannot skip.

While yahtze's review is funny it doesn't rate highly for me simply because the game he played and gave impressions of is evidently from Bizarro World as it doesn't match what I played. I much prefer his reviews where he does nail real flaws in the game, like Crysis or Bioshock, and still has fun poking valid exaggerated criticism at them. This one just misses the mark.

I really enjoyed The Witcher. Fantastic stories, brilliant protagonist, very interesting (and many quite unclichéd) NPCs, gorgeous graphics, and stunning combat animations. Happily spent a full week over the Christmas holidays doing nothing but playing this game.

I genuinely don't see what's so hard and off-putting about it! Shifting between combat stances was as easy as pressing a single key, and it made a real difference which one you chose to use. Alchemy could often make an impossible fight winnable, and once you read almanacs and/or have conversations with locals about herb lore you can easily brew potions because you know what herbs do what. I liked the way the game information was organised between lots of different screens, because it meant I knew exactly where to go when I wanted to look at anything. Every single bit of info you learn goes into your journal, but with all the subject divisions (alchemy, formulae, people, monsters, etc.) it never got confusing.

Really, I find Zero Punctuation hilarious normally. But this one just left me puzzled.

However, the brief movie at the end was side-splittingly funny, as if to make up for the review. :)

ZP always was shallow. Always meant to be. You watch it for the lulz factor. Seeing people come in to try to feebly defend their game is just silly.

I am getting tired of Yazthee reviewing RPGs, but that's because he did so a lot. Why not attack RTSes instead?

Anyway, the goal of a game is to have fun. No fun=no good. I can't play through 3 whole hours to...reach the 'good part'. Why not just let me skip to the 'good part' and let it be over with?! And, uh, Yazthee...you know, had no real incentive to actually 'continue'. Why continue to go and 'grind' when you already got 3 hot females in your bed? To Yazthee, that's victory.

Is anyone else wondering what the critical mass is going to be on Zero Punctuation before the whole thing collapses on itself and everyone finds the new flavor of the month? I thought this phenomenon had capped at about 180 comments, but with the review of Mario and Crysis, the boards have been getting even crazier, although half the comments are bitching and moaning about how unfunny/terribly misrepresentative the "review" was.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 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