13812 réponses à ce sujet

[DragonRageGT]

MDT1 wrote...

As I said first I had no problem with finding that information.
When I press J nothing awesome happenes, I just find some lists of themes that are not even sorted by alphabet nor do have a search function. And I also can't access the entry from the item in my inventory I have a question about.
This is just lazy.
If you want nowdays to minimize bad reviews you have to implement such things. If you don't implement them, don't complain.
Oh yeah, CDProject doesn't complain, only you do ...

Huh... 52 positive critics review versus 5 mixed reviews at Metacritic... bad ones are pretty minimized, imho. And zero punctuation is no review, it's humor, specially when the guy didn't even finish the game. Ive read many reviews of lousy games by GameSpot, for example, and no matter how bad they were, those guys had to go thru them all before calling it a review!

Search function? Really???

[Dragoonlordz]

RageGT wrote...

MDT1 wrote...

As I said first I had no problem with finding that information.
When I press J nothing awesome happenes, I just find some lists of themes that are not even sorted by alphabet nor do have a search function. And I also can't access the entry from the item in my inventory I have a question about.
This is just lazy.
If you want nowdays to minimize bad reviews you have to implement such things. If you don't implement them, don't complain.
Oh yeah, CDProject doesn't complain, only you do ...

Huh... 52 positive critics review versus 5 mixed reviews at Metacritic... bad ones are pretty minimized, imho. And zero punctuation is no review, it's humor, specially when the guy didn't even finish the game. Ive read many reviews of lousy games by GameSpot, for example, and no matter how bad they were, those guys had to go thru them all before calling it a review!

Search function? Really???

I think people to be honest are trying to pick on the only things they can, namely the smallest things and blow them up huge to belittle the quality of the game because they lack any massive thing they can tear it down with.

Arguing their 'preferences' as actual game faults.

[billy the squid]

RageGT wrote...

MDT1 wrote...


Before I start arguing: I read the manual and I found mutagens well described there.

But still I would prefer an Ingame solution, like an ? in the right corner I can klick on, my cursor turns into an ? and I can klick on an item/spell/whatever I want info about and it open the according manual pages.
Because I agree once you started the game its better if you don't have to switch to desktop to read the manual and reading it while installation before you actually ever played the game doesn't help that much imho.

No complete and easy accessable ingame documentation is lazy from the developer.

What part of IN GAME JOURNAL is not spelled right?

Press J for awesome!

It would imply that people actually bother to read, or at least try and comprehend what has been written, rather than being spoon fed everything. But, as we have seen from much of the current discussion, it is apparantly too much to ask.

Personally, I find it refreshing that the game does not labour under the assumption that the user is a drooling moron who can't read and is incapable of completing quests without golden arrows and sad/ happy faces for dialogue options.

[MDT1]

RageGT wrote...

Huh... 52 positive critics review versus 5 mixed reviews at Metacritic... bad ones are pretty minimized, imho. And zero punctuation is no review, it's humor, specially when the guy didn't even finish the game. Ive read many reviews of lousy games by GameSpot, for example, and no matter how bad they were, those guys had to go thru them all before calling it a review!

Search function? Really???

Search function? Sure!!!

When people nowdays have a question, they open google, its just natural.

To be clear: Everybody knows there are reviewers out there that don't even find the toilette alone if their mom doesn't help them. And some of them will never understand a game like TW2. This is no surprise.

And I too find it sad when TW2 gets a bad review because the reviewer can obviouly be outsmarted by every chimp on the planet.
But I can't claim TW2 does enough to prevent this, thats all I'm saying.

Modifié par MDT1, 09 juin 2011 - 03:42 .

[Costin_Razvan]

True enough, the issue however is that it shouldn't matter.

I didn't read the tutorial or the manual since I figured everything on my own. Yes I did die 4-6 times in the Prologue ( and since I was playing on Insane, well go figure ), but I learned it the hard way. When I didn't know how to open the panel to access sign/bomb selection and meditate button I just went to the game launcher options and looked through what each individual key did, and then realized it.

Mutagens...well I was halfway through Chapter I before I learned to use them.

Some people just like to do this, figuring stuff out on their own. Some people just like a very challenging combat system or do you realy think World of Warcraft is so popular just because of it's story, socializing aspect and polish? Hell no. It's popular - in part mind you - because the combat can be VERY challenging. I personally stopped when the game stopped offering me any challenge whatsoever, and the only reason I was dying to things was that the other people in my raid were screwing up.

Are Bioware games challenging. Yes for the first playthroughs the hardest difficulties are quite hard...but then you learn it it's a breeze.

The Witcher 2? Never going to be a breeze through on Insane ( and not just because you lose all your saves if you die ) but beause it does depend on reflexes AND thinking ( build, item, potions, enchantments etc.) The latter is learned in a few playthroughs and becomes inconsequential to the challenge of the game, the former is something that will always be variable, not a constant.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 09 juin 2011 - 03:57 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

True enough, the issue however is that it shouldn't matter.

I didn't read the tutorial or the manual since I figured everything on my own. Yes I did die 4-6 times in the Prologue ( and since I was playing on Insane, well go figure ), but I learned it the hard way. When I didn't know how to open the panel to access sign/bomb selection and meditate button I just went to the game launcher options and looked through what each individual key did, and then realized it.

Mutagens...well I was halfway through Chapter I before I learned to use them.

I read the manual, specifically the controls and such things as combat and mutagens as examples. Because I knew they changed the controls from TW1 so common sense applies which is something a lot of people here seem to lack. I say read controls before jump into the game as takes a mere 2-5 minutes of their life and either way would have to read it even if in game. So read it prior to starting it and they shouldn't moan about it just because they never bothered to do so.

I did same as you I replayed some of the initial fights in the prologue in order to learn the timing and get it right before get too far into the game it makes life easier long term while still being a difficult game. I improve myself in order to play rather than dumbing down the game because I can't be bothered to put in any effort like some want to do. I read the manual section on signs incase they changed them from the first in any way its a mere few dozen lines in manual for gods sake its not the end of the world to read something, I then knew what they did again followed by practicing using them in game itself which is how should be done.

I have no desire for every game to be dumbed down or simplified to accomodate laziness and incompetence or appease instant gratification crowd with every title. If something is not their type of game then buy something else. But diluting every game to make it playable for every single person who just pops out their mothers womb is having a massive negative effect on gaming imho.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 09 juin 2011 - 04:03 .

[MDT1]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

He complains that there is no way for us to know what kind of fight we are going to have, so we can't prepare potions adequately. I am 90% sure he just went off the forest immediately without thinking.

First off, there is a reason potions last 10 minutes, if you know you're going somewhere dangerous

 
Though some thinking certainly helps with potions I personally see the need of a little revamp. As example:
Perhaps its a bug but last time I fought with letho (act1) I drank potions before the dialog an when the fight started I had only 2 min and something left.

But perhaps I made a mistake there don't know.

And I don't want the game dumped down!

Modifié par MDT1, 09 juin 2011 - 04:06 .

[DragonRageGT]

MDT1 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

He complains that there is no way for us to know what kind of fight we are going to have, so we can't prepare potions adequately. I am 90% sure he just went off the forest immediately without thinking.

First off, there is a reason potions last 10 minutes, if you know you're going somewhere dangerous

 
Though some thinking certainly helps with potions I personally see the need of a little revamp. As example:
Perhaps its a bug but last time I fought with letho (act1) I drank potions before the dialog an when the fight started I had only 2 min and something left.

But perhaps I made a mistake there don't know.

And I don't want the game dumped down!

I am totally with you on this! Cutscene should freeze potions timer!

First thing I did when I installed the game was to remap the control to suit my preferences! I still prefer Q & E to Steel and Silver Sword, just like TW1.  Hmm... forgot to map signs to 1-5 like TW1 but I'm pretty used to 5-9 now. 1 to cast the selected sign (though I use more the sign key itself), 2 for block and 3-4 for next spell/item. Space for quick menu, Alt to roll, Tab for medallion and X to lock. MB4 for Adrenaline, MB5 to sheath weapon (or Q&E too).

I haven't died in a long time now! =)

P.S.: If you pay attention, everything in the Journal is written by Dandelion. I had a great time going through every single entry because of that. I think that even the metagame stuff (tutorial) may have had his touch!

Modifié par RageGT, 09 juin 2011 - 04:15 .

[Costin_Razvan]

One amazing thing is how they used so few voice actors for the game....yet most of the time you can't tell.

[Dragoonlordz]

What surprised me is how well made the game is now as far as optimisation since the few patches came out. I held off installing it for while trying to complete TW1 for imports. When installed and ran it with my new system which is barely above the recommended in all aspects from CPU, GPU and RAM it ran on maximum settings (Uber) and even further increase viewing distance and went higher than the default uber+sampling mode and runs like a dream still on my x4 Phenom II 955/4GB RAM and GTX460 all stock not even needed to OC anything. I was expecting to have to OC in order to get great framerates and no lag in combat but I never needed too. Though I did turn off motion blur for when spinning around as got annoying as a preference but apart from that they did an amazing job quality for performance specs.

Only issue I had was tried keyboard and mouse works fine but then tried controller too just too see, that needs some work still or fine tuning my end assigning what keys to what buttons and such to make it easier to use. However both I found acceptable to play with.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 09 juin 2011 - 05:19 .

[YohkoOhno]

I think people to be honest are trying to pick on the only things they can, namely the smallest things and blow them up huge to belittle the quality of the game because they lack any massive thing they can tear it down with.

It's not a question of picking on it, it's actually having the emotional maturity to like a game and yet recognize its possible flaws in the marketplace. I like the Witcher 2 but can still see it's flaws.

I'm finding there are two sets of people--people who understand, accept this, and can debate this civilly without resorting to attacking the critic, and then those who think that any criticism is a personal assault on TW2 and all the people who like it. I don't think arguing about the tutorial or the flaws in the story presentation is "bashing" the game.

Modifié par YohkoOhno, 09 juin 2011 - 05:53 .

[orbit991]

YohkoOhno wrote...

My perspective on survivability of human race solidifies bit by bit - we wont survive another millenium.

The real survivalists aren't wasting their time playing video games.

Yea they are sitting in a bunker in Idaho eating their mre's.

[Chromie]

YohkoOhno wrote...

I think people to be honest are trying to pick on the only things they can, namely the smallest things and blow them up huge to belittle the quality of the game because they lack any massive thing they can tear it down with.

It's not a question of picking on it, it's actually having the emotional maturity to like a game and yet recognize its possible flaws in the marketplace. I like the Witcher 2 but can still see it's flaws.

I'm finding there are two sets of people--people who understand, accept this, and can debate this civilly without resorting to attacking the critic, and then those who think that any criticism is a personal assault on TW2 and all the people who like it. I don't think arguing about the tutorial or the flaws in the story presentation is "bashing" the game.

Fine my biggest complaint is the game isn't hard enough. I think I died maybe twice in Act 1 and once in Act 2 so far. Prologue I died at least 15 times. 

[Costin_Razvan]

Henselt: You stole the child?
Radovid: Little girls need to be looked after, King.
Henselt: Noble attendees, I must stress that the Kind of Redania present here has ploughed me without tallow.....I am checkmated.

Ah so epic. Who needs to kill Henselt when he can do this?

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 09 juin 2011 - 06:14 .

[Anathemic]

Bejos_ wrote...

Anathemic wrote...

Bejos_ wrote...
What nobody's brought up yet-- and I'm anticipating flames -- is that the story isn't very well told. Whatever the merits of the story, they really aren't highlighted sufficiently. This is a long game, and few people are going to get through it in a week, let alone one sitting. Cf the info-dump that happens in the epilogue. That's a very big faux pas in the literary genre. Even if you disregard conventions, it's still sloppily done. Staring at [Spoiler!]'s face for 20 minutes while he explains what the entirety of TW2 was about is a very heavy-handed, tiresome way to round up loose threads.

So like many other's stated before, the only real gripe you have in TW2's story/storytelling is the Epilogue? I'm sorry but if this the only real main gripe, then your claim that "the story isn't very well told" is null and void, because you completely ignored 95% (at the very least) of the game's storytelling.

Have you read Agatha Christie's books? Particualarly the one of Twelve Dancing Indians or some sort. The book is highly critically acclaimed, despire what you called a "literary faux" of having an info dump in the end.

Now don't get me wrong, the Epilogue isn't some masterpeice constructed by Tolkien, but it's not weak/bland either.

Anathemic, the murder mystery genre is entirely removed from other genres in what it requires to tell a story: It absolutely relies on the twist at the end. Other genres do not. Movies like The Usual Suspects or the Sixth Sense also rely on this convention to do their stories justice.

TW2's story doesn't rely on this end-of-game reveal to make its story enjoyable. Take away the mystery, and you've still got a decent (for gaming) story. Also, consider that a game is, by definition, interactive: The writers don't have to rely on gimmicks to engage the player, because they're already engaged.

All that considered, the epilogue is bad, yes: The player has to sit on his couch/lie on his bed/stand on his head, staring at a face for an entire 20 minutes, in order to have threads tied up.
The fact that that must happen in order for the entire thing to make sense, is a testament to how badly the rest of the story does at explaining things. So it's not just a critique of the epilogue: The very fact that the epilogue was done the way it was, is evidence that the rest of the story wasn't that well done, either.

Again, I'm pointing out the flaw in the storytelling, not the story. And I'm not saying it's some of the worst storytelling I've ever come across. I'm merely saying it's inexpertly done. And considering the medium, is that really a surprise?

Ahh however, Geralt's main quest throughout the game is the muder mystery. If you take the murder mystery out of the game, there would be no "Assassins of Kings" nor would there be important flashback sequences into discovering what happened to Yennefer. So I must counter that the muder mystery is indeed an important factor of the story.

And I know you're point is the storytelling. However my point is that if you're just going to bash the Epilogue IE conclusion of the story, you are completely ignoring the other parts of the game's storytelling. It's like me bashing the Fellowship of the Ring because the damn beginning took brain power to figure through.

So in your opinion the epilogue is bad, that's fine. However that's not the universal opinion, this is why "people have yet to comment on it" because they know some people really enjoy the epilogue (I enjoyed it personally to understand both Letho and what happened to Yennefer, not to mention cliffhanger for TW3) and some people dislike it.

[Dragoonlordz]

YohkoOhno wrote...

I think people to be honest are trying to pick on the only things they can, namely the smallest things and blow them up huge to belittle the quality of the game because they lack any massive thing they can tear it down with.

It's not a question of picking on it, it's actually having the emotional maturity to like a game and yet recognize its possible flaws in the marketplace. I like the Witcher 2 but can still see it's flaws.

I'm finding there are two sets of people--people who understand, accept this, and can debate this civilly without resorting to attacking the critic, and then those who think that any criticism is a personal assault on TW2 and all the people who like it. I don't think arguing about the tutorial or the flaws in the story presentation is "bashing" the game.

Your fanaticism of that critic who actually attacked another group of people shows your own true colours like I said don't be a hypocrite.

If you want to critisize the game do it in your own words exactly what is it you hate? No generalisations because can't come up with something... Be specific. For example don't say just tutorial, say what about it you dislike and why.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 09 juin 2011 - 06:56 .

[YohkoOhno]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Your fanaticism of that critic who actually attacked another group of people shows your own true colours like I said don't be a hypocrite.

Since when did I give any indication of being a die-hard follower of Yahtzee. I pointed out that the man is entertaining since he uses sarcasm and satire to get across some very good points. The problem I see is that you are demonizing anybody who even brings up any flaw in the game, and taking any criticism of the game personally. Saying things like "true colors". In short, you seem to be getting too emotional about any criticism of this game.  (In other words, forgive the joke but you're behaving similar to that graphic avatar you've used in your profile).    And if you look back on the thread, I did point out my concerns about the games lack of a tutorial and its flaws in story structure compared to Dragon Age: Origins. And I did explain how the tutorial was lacking in several ways. Dismissing these criticisms as "RTFM" is ignoring the criticisms.

It would help if you could make lucid comments without bringing your own emotions into play. I'm actually seeing some decent discussion about the story flaws in this thread right now.  People who disagree with you should not be demonized as being "stupid", which is where you seem to go with your arguments regarding the tutorial and difficulty.

Again, I think the game is a solid B+.  But it pales in comparison to DA:O except perhaps for the graphics engine itself.  

Modifié par YohkoOhno, 09 juin 2011 - 07:07 .

[Anathemic]

YohkoOhno wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Your fanaticism of that critic who actually attacked another group of people shows your own true colours like I said don't be a hypocrite.

Since when did I give any indication of being a die-hard follower of Yahtzee. I pointed out that the man is entertaining since he uses sarcasm and satire to get across some very good points. The problem I see is that you are demonizing anybody who even brings up any flaw in the game, and taking any criticism of the game personally. Saying things like "true colors". In short, you seem to be getting too emotional about any criticism of this game.  (In other words, forgive the joke but you're behaving similar to that graphic avatar you've used in your profile).    And if you look back on the thread, I did point out my concerns about the games lack of a tutorial and its flaws in story structure compared to Dragon Age: Origins. And I did explain how the tutorial was lacking in several ways. Dismissing these criticisms as "RTFM" is ignoring the criticisms.

It would help if you could make lucid comments without bringing your own emotions into play. I'm actually seeing some decent discussion about the story flaws in this thread right now.  People who disagree with you should not be demonized as being "stupid", which is where you seem to go with your arguments regarding the tutorial and difficulty.

Again, I think the game is a solid B+.  But it pales in comparison to DA:O except perhaps for the graphics engine itself.  

Drop it down a letter grade (IE 10 points) for the tutorial lacking? Personally i think TW1 and TW2 by themselves did a better job in the story department than DA:O ever did.

[orbit991]

I don't know why you guys take Yahtzee seriously , he is an entertainer not a critic. Sort of like the conservative/liberal talk show hosts on tv, they are there to entertain you, not to give a well thought out presentation. Besides can you really imagine someone wound up like a rubber ball sitting down and concentrating on a heavily story based game? He's just there to poke at some holes and make some up if there is not enough material, it's funny but it's just showbiz in the end.

[YohkoOhno]

Regarding, the problem to me is, that, I was lucky enough to read The Last Wish before I played TW2. Yennifer's introduction in the story is really not handled well. The biggest flaw for the story is that it seems way to dependent on the hard to get books to get the whole picture. The combination of amnesia for the main character as well as using supposedly familiar characters instead of growing to know new companions as you play the game and find out about the world as you play is lacking in this game unlike DA:O where you learn everything about the world through play and you are invested in your companions by getting to know them.

So, while it's a good game, I think I'd be more impressed if they came up with their own world and introduced in through the game. And that's one of the reason why I can't give it more than a B+.

[orbit991]

YohkoOhno wrote...

Regarding, the problem to me is, that, I was lucky enough to read The Last Wish before I played TW2. Yennifer's introduction in the story is really not handled well. The biggest flaw for the story is that it seems way to dependent on the hard to get books to get the whole picture. The combination of amnesia for the main character as well as using supposedly familiar characters instead of growing to know new companions as you play the game and find out about the world as you play is lacking in this game unlike DA:O where you learn everything about the world through play and you are invested in your companions by getting to know them.

So, while it's a good game, I think I'd be more impressed if they came up with their own world and introduced in through the game. And that's one of the reason why I can't give it more than a B+.

Huh? if they came up with their own world? It wouldnt be the Witcher then would it, the whole  point was to take the world from the books. Thats like saying the makers of Lord of the Rings should have made up their whole world.
I really dont get what your problem is, yes I've read you saying the same thing several times, but I get the world. I didnt read the books, just the info in the glossary and played the first game, the story and the world is pretty clear to me. I know what is required to play. Geralt died, strangly came back to life, was with Yennefer at the time, has some friends, Nilfgard is a big empire trying to expand into the northern kingdoms, whats the problem?

[Anathemic]

YohkoOhno wrote...

Regarding, the problem to me is, that, I was lucky enough to read The Last Wish before I played TW2. Yennifer's introduction in the story is really not handled well. The biggest flaw for the story is that it seems way to dependent on the hard to get books to get the whole picture. The combination of amnesia for the main character as well as using supposedly familiar characters instead of growing to know new companions as you play the game and find out about the world as you play is lacking in this game unlike DA:O where you learn everything about the world through play and you are invested in your companions by getting to know them.

So, while it's a good game, I think I'd be more impressed if they came up with their own world and introduced in through the game. And that's one of the reason why I can't give it more than a B+.

If they created their own world, then we wouldn't have The Witcher franchsie to begin with. CD Projekt RED wanted to continue Geralt's story from where the saga left off, and I applaud them for that, for not only keeping true to Sapkowski's writing style but continuing it in a way that really makes the Witcher games it's own saga or seperate books if you will.

But going into a straight comparison of stories between DA:O and TW2. I'd say TW2 succeeds. In DA:O you have the classic (and cliched) story of a hero gathering allies to combat a great menace with obstacles in their path (whcih has been done by BioWare repeatedly). In TW2 you have mystery/manhut main quest which takes you into the midst of a war only to end revealing that you're next journey will take you into the impending invasion of an old enemy/empire.

Modifié par Anathemic, 09 juin 2011 - 07:24 .

[Dragoonlordz]

YohkoOhno wrote...

And if you look back on the thread, I did point out my concerns about the games lack of a tutorial and its flaws in story structure compared to Dragon Age: Origins. And I did explain how the tutorial was lacking in several ways. Dismissing these criticisms as "RTFM" is ignoring the criticisms.

It would help if you could make lucid comments without bringing your own emotions into play. I'm actually seeing some decent discussion about the story flaws in this thread right now.  People who disagree with you should not be demonized as being "stupid", which is where you seem to go with your arguments regarding the tutorial and difficulty.

Again, I think the game is a solid B+.  But it pales in comparison to DA:O except perhaps for the graphics engine itself.  

All games should be self-contained and treat the user as it is potentially his or her first game. Companies that ignore that will end up suffering. Even sequels do this.

There are two basic flaws with TW2 that I think will hurt it in the long run. The first is this tutorial problem, as well as a lack of getting a good background on the character--who Geralt is, for instance. (TW1 did a better job introducing the character to people who don't get it).

That's not to say I didn't enjoy the game, but I also recognize its flaws. Don't think for one second CDPJ is looking just at the PC gamers. They're actually going to need that XBOX money to turn a profit on this.  If the XBOX port tanks, I have a feeling you may not see a TW3.

Everything I highlighted you are wrong about 100%.

The prologue is the tutorial, so you were wrong with the (first) highlighted part. It did a great job in terms of setting the story for the game, it's a sequel if you want to know everything about him that happened in the previous title then go and play it. There is zero reason to cover everything about the previous title in the sequel.

Origins is a bad comparrison and a flawed one because it set the scene from the get go as the first title just like TW1 did the same thing. Your moaning about the fact the second game doesn't cover everything the first one did which is flawed way of approach in the first place. NO sequel will cover evrything from the first if you want it too then you truly are deluded.

TW2 did enough to introduce the main character of the game if never knew was previous title same way devil may cry does, same way metal gear solid does and same as every single CoD title does. Are they suffering? Hell no which is where your making a small issue bigger than in reality it is, making claims you not only can't back up but facts say otherwise and are opposite to your opinion.

There is no tutorial problem other than you being overly dramatic making mountains out of molehills and expecting support for it using a review of someone who is himself critisized for being childish and over reacting for humour.

Your also making the big mistake of assuming that everyone wants to know EVERY single thing about the background of the world and the characters and the lore. Google does that, the major flaw is these people you think require a game to be 100% self contained will care about the same depth and detail as you do. Most do not and those who do can access more information if they want it, it does not have to be all in game.

@ orbit991 ~ The problem is YohkoOhno is trying to make an issue out of something that only exists in a very, very few peoples minds. It's nothing more than a preference being put as a flaw.

If anything I think it is one of the most enjoyable prologues I have played in recent years in games. Same way ME2 did not cover every single thing that happened in ME1, I was content with what they told me as was most people plus I had the option of finding out more if I so wished to delve deeper either by going online or playing the first. If anything it's the smart thing to do as it increases the sales of the first title as people might want to find out more.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 09 juin 2011 - 07:49 .

[Bejos_]

Anathemic wrote...
[...] Geralt's main quest throughout the game is the muder mystery. If you take the murder mystery out of the game, there would be no "Assassins of Kings" nor would there be important flashback sequences into discovering what happened to Yennefer. So I must counter that the muder mystery is indeed an important factor of the story.

[...] if you're just going to bash the Epilogue IE conclusion of the story, you are completely ignoring the other parts of the game's storytelling. It's like me bashing the Fellowship of the Ring because the damn beginning took brain power to figure through.

So in your opinion the epilogue is bad, that's fine. However that's not the universal opinion, this is why "people have yet to comment on it" because they know some people really enjoy the epilogue (I enjoyed it personally to understand both Letho and what happened to Yennefer, not to mention cliffhanger for TW3) and some people dislike it.

What does "universal opinion" have to do with it? It's a subjective topic, so whether there's a universal opinion or not is irrelevant. Also, an opinion can never be universal.

I don't know where "bash the epilogue" came from, either. I'm entitled to my opinions and my critiques. The word "bashing" has a different connotation to the word "critique"; synonyms of "bashing" would include "slagging" and "trashing".
I also specifically stated the epilogue is not the only part of the story that is badly told. But these would all be my opinions, and since everyone has an opinion ... But I'll play along: the quest that follows from [Spoiler!]'s poisoning is badly handled; the escape in the prologue is badly handled; the [Spoiler!] Battle in Act 2 is a bit of a mess ...
Like I said, I enjoy the story overall, but some of it's not very well told. It's also cliched, but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy it.
Similarly, my opinion of the story shouldn't prevent you from enjoying it all and praising it all, if that's what you wish to do.

Finally, Geralt's main quest throughout the game is not the murder mystery. He finds out very early on who the King's assassin is. The rest of the story hinges on the kidnap of [Spoiler] and/or the clearing of Geralt's name, or both, depending on how you choose to play the character. The fact that [Spoiler Alert! Don't read past this point if you haven't finished Act 2!] Letho isn't ultimately behind the murder(s) doesn't factor into Geralt's actions until the very end of Act 3. And that's more a case of, "Well, while I'm here I may as well clear this little problem up" than "I have to end this evil! They'll **** everything up for the rest of us Northerners!"

Again, it's all just opinion. I have a different idea of what good storytelling is than you do, obviously. Also, I don't like to be in awe of stuff; it's all just human-made, so there's no reason to be amazed by it. This kind of approach to things might be why I consistently score things lower than other people would That same philosophy is also why I regularly get in so much trouble with people in general

Modifié par Bejos_, 09 juin 2011 - 07:57 .

[YohkoOhno]

orbit991 wrote...

Huh? if they came up with their own world? It wouldnt be the Witcher then would it, the whole  point was to take the world from the books. Thats like saying the makers of Lord of the Rings should have made up their whole world.
I really dont get what your problem is, yes I've read you saying the same thing several times, but I get the world. 

I'm playing devil's advocate a bit, and am trying to think like a game designer.  With DA:O, we are not only introduced to the world, but we also have the option to read codex entries.  The codex entries in TW2 are lacking somewhat--you either have to pay money for some books, or they depend on prior knowledge.  I'm pointing out a couple of concerns, mostly based on how accessible the game becomes to newcomers.

Granted, this could mostly be a pop-culture thing.  Batman games depend on you knowing who Batman is, and I doubt it would be the same thing.  The problem is, The Witcher is not well known as much in the west, so I guess I find it a little frustrating.

What I am saying is that the most satisfying of all games come from the game being the primary experience.  I will always feel constructed worlds do better than licensed worlds if they provide the user with all the information they need to know about the world.  I feel TW2 does a less than satisfactory job of introducing it's setting to the player, and I feel DA:O is superior in that stance.