The Witcher II

[sirdilznik]

Reasons Witcher 2 sucks:

1. No mouse-movement. What this means is that you're constantly trying to negotiate your character while at the same time hoping nobody comes up and kills him.
2. Because of the above: horrifyingly difficult to choose people to attack and attack them.
3. Apparently impossible to identify who's friendly and who's an enemy.
3. Switching swords is a hassle.
4. Switching signs is a hassle.
5. Difficult to manipulate things.
6. No power-ups or chained attacks. So much for Geralt's super-human speed.
7. Even on Easy: virtually impossible not to die. This is even aside from #1 and #2. And I'm not somebody who prefers to breeze through a game -- I thought the original Witcher was way too easy. But... I prefer strategy... and the ability to move efficiently.
8. No save files. You only get to save in-progress.

Am I angry? Fuck yes. I'm pissed as hell. Because these are things that will not be fixable by patch, and they were so goddamn close. They seem to have made a truly great game, but it's all been ruined by horrific mechanics.

It's like a great novel that you can't read because somebody put it in the dishwasher.

It's like you're playing a completely different game from the one I'm playing.

1) I'm confused on this. Does the mouse not work for you at all or is wonky? I play the game with a combination of mouse and the WASD keys, pretty much like any standard first/third person shooter and the controls work very well. I've also heard that the game can be played with an XBOX 360 gamepad (not sure if any gamepad will work).
2) Ties into #1
3) I'm not even sure I understand... Of course you cannot distinguish an enemy from an ally until they identify themselves as such though their actions. Should NPCs wear signs over their clothes with the words "Friend" or "Foe" on them? I'm confused. Edit: OK I figure you're probably referring to the battles during the Prologue where there are soldiers loyal to King Foltest on your side and the LaVallette soldiers on the other side and it's hard to tell who's who since they look similar except for the crest on their tabards. I take it you would like something along the lines of a glowing red outline around enemies? Personally I like the confusion as it's a somewhat realistic representation of the chaos of combat. Throughout history, right up to modern day, hundreds, if not thousands, of soldiers have died due to friendly fire precisely because during a chaotic skirmish it can be difficult to distinguish between friend and foe. In the game mousing over an enemy shows a small targeting reticle while no such reticle appears over a friend. I guess it would be cool if they had an option to have a glowing outline around enemies in the config for those that would prefer to have friend and foe more easily distinguished. Perhaps it's something they can add in with a patch.
3a) Press 1 for steel sword, press 2 for silver sword. I'm not sure I could devise a more simple method of switching weapons if I tried.
4) Hold down CTRL and switch signs with the mouse while time is in super slo-mo. I personally find it to be quite easy and intuitive. Same thing applies to switching bobmbs and traps.
5) Don't understand.
6) The combat system takes some getting used to. You can chain as many attacks together as your heart desires but it takes some timing. The combat plays more like an action game and less like an RPG (I consider this a compliment). It took me days to get better, but I'm breaking out sick 4, 5, and 6 hit sword/sign combos on enemies now, and not just single enemies, multiple enemies too.
7) The game is really challenging I will not dispute this. There is actually quite a gap between "Easy" and "Normal" and a smaller gap between "Normal" and "Hard". The difficulty settings should maybe be called "Normal", "Hard", "Brutal" and "Freakin' Impossible" It gets a bit easier once you get the combat down, which again takes some getting used to.
8 ) The game autosaves constantly and you can save manually anytime there aren't enemies in your vicinity. Save files are in "C:\Documents and Settings\XXXXXXX\My Documents\Witcher 2\gamesaves". It's a rather standard savegame location actually.

Did you get like a counterfeit copy from Amazon or something? It seems like you're playing a completely different game. Anyway according to the website a patch should be out this coming week that adds inverted mouse and addresses some people's issues (I've had none myself).

[quasimodo]

The problem is I played The Witcher 1 in the zoomed out "high isometric" mode with point and click movement and generous use of the pause button.

The Witcher 2 has none of these features and instead only allows the OTS view with WASD movement, and needs the type of gaming skills I don't possess and am unlikely to develop at my age.

So the gaming industry has done again what they did with Dragon Age 1 to DA 2 and Divine Divinity 1 to DD2. i.e. They have changed from a format I can play to one I cannot.

[Evnissyen]

Well... okay, now that I've gotten used to the controls, it seems I've changed my mind. I still don't like the keyboard movement (which is really the main thing that really, really bugged me, and I still don't like it at all), but I find it tolerable now. Actually... by now I'm hooked.

What I meant by not knowing who the enemy soldiers... your guess was right: it was because of the original melee where I didn't really know whom to attack and by the time I got around to arranging Geralt into position they were nearly all dead, and the only way I knew they were all dead was because I couldn't hit any of the ones that were left.

Games generally have some sort of marker indicating whom the enemy is. Admittedly, Witcher 2 does this as well, with a glowing yellow plus sign on the person's chest... but I didn't find that out until later.

By "difficult to manipulate things" I was partially referring to things where I couldn't figure out whether or not they could be used, and also not being able to figure out how to use potions or bombs or anything else.

By switching swords being a hassle... not sure why I put that in there, to be honest. I already knew how to switch swords. But switching signs, at the time, I thought required the radial menu... I didn't know at the time that I could use keyboard shortcuts.

I rearranged the keyboard shortcuts so I could manipulate it better. The assigned keys just weren't working.

I also had to switch the mouse to my right hand, since all the manipulation was by keyboard. Annoying, but... I guess that's how it is.

I also didn't realize that it was saving a separate file each time I saved -- I thought that the absence of a save menu meant only one save. Come to find out you can't save over a save, or delete saves unless you open up the saved games folder... annoying. That's one thing that should be able to be fixed in a patch (the ability to delete saves, that is -- being able to save over a save would require notable recoding), and I hope they fix it.

Also... I found out that Easy really is not very hard at all. Once I got the hang of it and restarted again, I only died twice during the entirety of the prologue. So I should move up to Normal.

Apparently no Group Attack this time, I liked that option in the original Witcher.

As for chained attacks... not really evident, and no super-fast swinging like in the original. When I start seeing blurs, I guess that's the super-fast chained-attack indicator. But it's really not at all as satisfying as seeing Geralt swing his weapon insanely fast.

[sirdilznik]

It took me a little while to get better at the combat and I'm sure I still have a ways to go. Part of it is I had to unlearn some things that have been ingrained in my mind from years of playing previous RPGs, both turn-based and real-time. Part of the problem was I was conditioned to concentrate on a single enemy when faced with multiple opponents and even if it meant taking some blows in the process it was worth it to take that enemy down and thin out the ranks. Now it's still a good strategy to try to lure one enemy away from the group through maneuvering to where you can get a few blows in on him before the rest of the group catches up, but ultimately you're going to be faced with enemies all around you fairly often unless you spend the whole battle sprinting around, and even then you're bound to get surrounded sooner or later.

In the first Witcher game, faced with that scenario, I would switch to group style and I could still concentrate on a single target while Geralt would swing wildly all around him hitting everybody plus their grandmother that was within a couple feet of him. Plus Geralt could mostly just walk through damage and just keep going unless he got hit with a critical effect (stun, blinding, etc...). In this game if you get hit it makes you flinch for a moment and breaks any string of blows you had going on (which makes sense) so concentrating on a single enemy while you're surrounded is impractical. While you're hacking away at one guy you're bound to get hacked in the back by one or more of the other enemies and those attacks not only do great damage, they also interrupt your combos and make you flinch. Just those few moments of flinching is enough for the group to collapse on you and tear you to shreds. So I've had to adjust my fighting style to where I'm constantly switching targets (which is actually pretty easy and intuitive since clicking the mouse button while pushing one of the WASD keys makes you attack the target in that direction even if it's flanking you or behind you. When properly executed this not only results in Geralt being able to keep the enemies from collapsing in on him since enemy time you hit an enemy it tends to knock them back a make them flinch, but also makes for cool looking combos where Geralt is rolling back and forth and pirouetting on the battlefield while stabbing and slashing various enemies.

I didn't get to play that much this weekend, what with The Rapture going on, but I did go through the first boss fight. It took me well over a dozen tries but I got the big meanie down. Pretty epic God of War type stuff. I'm still early enough into leveling up that I haven't committed fully to a path yet, but I'm leaning toward going all in on magic and taking some alchemy to supplement as well as a few defensive swordsmanship talents. I have to fight my own nature to take that route though as I'm generally more inclined to play fighters.

[Evnissyen]

Now that I've gotten the hang of it, I restarted the game under Normal, and I thought the game was truly awesome until one specific point where I spent I think three whole hours on and still haven't gotten through, no matter what techniques or strategies or potions or other tools I use... frustrating as hell. Poor balancing. (The original Witcher was poorly balanced, too -- super easy with three or four insanely difficult points.)

In games like DA:O -- or Eschalon for that matter -- you're able to bottleneck your foes. No such opportunities here.

I still don't like the absence of overhead view, or the lack of being able to pause (since while Geralt knows exactly what to do at any moment, the player doesn't), or the inability to use the mouse to pinpoint exactly where you want to go. All of this hurts the strategic aspect. I've never liked the industrial push toward "realism". I've always hated fps games and their like.

And so, it's truly annoying when Geralt gets stuck in some bushes and can't get out because 1. I can't see him and 2. I can't pinpoint for him where he should go.

...So, the keyboard controls are still annoying. (I had to remap to sdfe, so i'd have all the options on either side, while using the mouse in my right hand -- instead of my left -- to direct the camera.)

So... I like being able to push an opponent out of the group by tumbling and chained attacks, in order to escape the ambush -- and when the others come along you tumble off and head on to somebody else at some distance away. It usually works well... not always. I'll PM you the part I'm having insane trouble with so it doesn't spoil it for anyone else. (I'd post it on the GOG forums but I already put in two posts last night, and somebody else brought up the issue, and nobody answered.)

[Evnissyen]

...and of course, as Quasimodo suggested, I also wish I could move the camera back.

...Nor do I understand how my screen gets wet. Apparently there's somebody filming the whole thing and we don't know it until a certain scene comes along.

[sirdilznik]

Yeah I do wish I could zoom the camera out a bit and it would be cool if you could go overhead or isometric view, though in this particular game I don't really miss it, it's in games where I control multiple party members and/or are played more like a strategic RPG where I really want an overhead/isometric view, action RPGs like this I usually play in first/third person view anyway. Still would have been nice to have that option. Maybe they can patch it in if enough people clamor for it.

[Arkos]

Here's an interesting review for it.

Does it really have a cliffhanger ending?

[sirdilznik]

Interesting that's the first review of the game I've seen that wasn't overwhelmingly positive. It was bound to happen I guess, you can't please everybody. To each his own. Personally from what I've played so far I'm definitely more inclined to agree with the 27 out of 28 reviews basically saying the game is superb.

As far as the ending, I don't know I haven't finished it yet and probably won't for quite a long time. I'm taking my sweet time with the game doing side quests, taking in the breathtaking scenery, and mingling with the locals before I move along. If it is a cliffhanger ending then I guess that means this will be a trilogy. It's certainly not uncommon for the middle installment of a game series to have a cliffhanger ending. Book II did after all. Supposedly there are 16 different endings to the game, though I imagine they all must have some kind of common thread if there is to be third installment in a trilogy.

Anyway I've gotten to where I've made what I think are some important choices. I've read that choices have far reaching consequences that are not easily predicted and not always immediately apparent. And I don't mean just some different dialogue options, but rather winding up in a completely different town or region, possibly country, with a different set of companions, possibly some of your former companions meeting their maker. I'm tempted to reload some of my earlier saves to see how it changes things but since I plan to play the game again sometime in the future, probably several times, I decided I'm just going to go with my gut, not look back, and just accept whatever consequences my choices have created, for better or worse. When I play the game again down the line, whenever that is, I'll choose a different path and see where that leads me.

[Evnissyen]

Okay, I feel obligated to respond, here, probably mostly because I made such an excoriating attack on the game mechanics to begin with. Also, I suppose in a way it sort of takes a harsh critic to refute a harsh critic.

The Witcher was an interesting little game, at once strangely compelling and pointlessly tiring. It had serious potential, but the slow pace and backtracking held it back. Still, it was something of a triumph, especially for Polish game development.

Totally disagree. Aside from not being "little", it was more than 'interesting', and the 'pointlessly tiring' and 'slow pace' was actually something I felt refreshing. I mean... not all of us are into fast-paced thrilling shooter games. Some of us like to explore a little. There were many reasons why the third chapter of the original Witcher -- the pastoral chapter -- was my favorite, and the slow pacing and relaxed atmosphere was one of them. How often do we see such treatment in a game? I can imagine the debates that the writer must've had with her coworkers over this chapter (yes, the writer was a she -- she admitted being the primary writer of that chapter in the forums, way back) -- her argument: the player needed a break from all the action. I think she was right. There were also other little touches in that chapter that help raise this game above so many other rpg games I've played or tried. (Like the little stone idols here and there, the little faerie-like creatures running all around on the ground and giggling... etc.)

The auto-targeting system is dreadful, with Geralt constantly switching opponents halfway through attacks and diving into a group of enemies to attack a monster, while ignoring the three that were far closer.

When I see Geralt do this -- roll away from somebody who's about to strike him and instantly skewer some standabout enemy with his sword -- I'm so happy to see it. To me it's as if Geralt is using his dodge as an opportunity to quickly reduce his enemies and -- just as importantly -- modify the field and force his opponents to reconfigure. I take it as part of how he's learned to handle a threatening mob: you attack, dodge, go after the one most vulnerable, then return again. One of a swordsman's largest concerns: don't get ambushed, and if you do: modify the ambush.

...and the adult nature of the narrative -- which doesn't skimp on the brutality, swearing, and sex -- might not exactly be mature, but can at least amuse in spite of the overall plot's dull nature.

First: The 'mature' stuff (which is not narrative -- let's get that out of the way) -- the swearing and so forth -- can also be called realism, something very few games possess, though they try to replace it with things like fp camera views and splattering blood and so forth. War is tough, brutal stuff, and when the soldiers or the people doing the more dismal menial work try to keep their spirits up, what do they do? They make up bawdy songs, etc. However do you see this in other games? If you're considering 'mature' to be 'behave yourself', then I suppose cute adventure games are probably your lot.

Second: in comparison with almost all rpg's, the plot is sure as hell not dull. Nor is the narrative.

The voice acting ranges from hilarious to embarrassing, though. Welsh accents aren't exactly the most dramatic, especially when they're attached to characters we're supposed to take seriously. As for Geralt, his voice actor still straddles the line between amusingly dry and unpleasantly emotionless."

I couldn't disagree more. I love the voice acting, and Geralt is actually played quite well -- he has a certain kind of character, of course, he's a seasoned monster-slayer with spooky yellow cat's-eyes, covered in vicious scars, used to being ill-treated, hated, feared and stuffed into dungeons and betrayed by people in power... is he supposed to be all cheery and jocular? "Good day to you! Off to another 'venture, whadya say, eh, chap?"

Interestingly, he made no mention of the keyboard-movement mechanics -- or did I miss it? -- which leads me to wonder if he didn't play this game with a controller . . . the implications there should be obvious, of course.

The two things I agree with him on are 1. the poor balancing, 2. the fact that you can only use potions in specific places, out of harm's way. I supposed it's better than the system of the first game, where you have to choose only one that you always use, then only two, then at end-game only three... but it's still not good.

[KillingMoon]

I just read one review of it, but that one also had some critical notes, especially about the ending: http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/05/19/the-witcher-2-review.
Still a very positive review, though.

I'm not desiring a new game myself now, and I wouldn't be looking for an action game anyway, but I like reading what you folks are writing about it.
Know I'm subscibed to your posts about new games, Sirdilznik.

[Evnissyen]

I think Sird is awesome too, Moon... I'm glad he's on here.

You know... one of the first things I've noticed about this game is that it really, really helps if you've played the original Witcher. So much of what you've gotten out of the first -- and learned from it -- gets automatically poured into the sequel. I like how it does this, though it can bewilder people who haven't played the first.

One of the commenters was complaining that the amnesia didn't make sense if he knows the characters names, and how the hell do you know what they're talking about when they refer to a certain town?

Obviously my answer to #1 is: there's a reason why this game is called Witcher 2.
Obviously my answer to #2 is: look at the damn map that came with the game. Or go with the flow and find out.

Ironically, I rarely ever read the comments, because they're usually stupid and rarely thought-provoking, but in this case I couldn't help myself.

...And I wasn't about to add to the fray by adding my own comment. I'd rather keep it here.

[sirdilznik]

Awww shucks, you folks are making me blush

For those that have the game, I just want to give you a heads up that the 1.1 patch is now out. It promises to fix a bunch of issues, add the ability to invert the mouse, increases performance, and includes the Troll Trouble DLC among other things.

[Evnissyen]

Yeah, I've been having an impossible time trying to download the "Ultimate Swordsman Suit" as well... the downloading procedure with all the DLC seems to be messed up, there's no registration procedure any longer with the website so I can only assume I'm already registered... .

I'll try it again later and see if it's been fixed yet.

Thanks for letting us know that 1.1 is finally out, Sird... been waiting for that.

[sirdilznik]

You're not the only one having problems downloading the DLCs. They have a fix for that too here.