618 réponses à ce sujet

[Chromie]

Maverick827 wrote...

Why is it that every Witcher video I see focuses entirely on its action-oriented combat and really not much else? 

"Clearly we need to increase the boob to non-boob time ratio in the fourth quarter if we're going to meet these quotas." I enjoy action games (I'm looking forward to Dragon's Dogma, for instance) so I'll probably give TW2 a shot, but games where I don't get to define a character (but instead play a pre-defined character.

Clearly your not  looking.  Dragon Age 2 seem to be ontop of the boob ratio imo.

Dev Diary 1 Video talking about the story. Google man.

Dev Diary 2 Talks about what can be achieved with the engine. Not just the graphics but the ease of making quests, new environements and more content efficiently.

Part 2 of Dev Diary 2

Dev Diary 3 This video talks about the different character we will meet and how they want factions, armies and such to be distinct.

Dev Diary 4 This video talks about the locations in the game and how people who enjoying exploring can be rewarded.

Dev Diary 5 This is just ONE video talking about the combat. I know a lot of the interviews talks about the combat mainly because it's one of the most changed things from Witcher 1.

Obviously there are more but these 5 videos are from the developers themselves.

And the Witcher games are based off a book series so it's not new that you can't create a character but that doesn't mean you shouldn't try it. The game looks amazing and the attention to detail is something that can't be denied.

Modifié par Ringo12, 03 mai 2011 - 10:20 .

[Bryy_Miller]

Ringo12 wrote...
You sound like Fox news to me. Next you'll be saying the scenes in Mass Effect 1 were porn and it let you take full control of Shepard and your partner.

Whatever. You can villify me all you want because I dared say something negative about fan reaction to your game (of which I'm looking forward to, btw).

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 03 mai 2011 - 10:58 .

[orbit991]

Maverick827 wrote...

Why is it that every Witcher video I see focuses entirely on its action-oriented combat and really not much else?

The videos where you actually do see some dialogue, it lasts for one minute out of the twenty-five minute combat demonstration and then the presenter is always like "now, up here we're about to talk into a really cool area with some cool combat, but let me talk about a UI screen or seven first."

Then they apparently turn into John Madden and try to play up mundane and obvious things. "As you can see, when you hit his shield, you don't do very much damage." Cool?

When he started talking about game mechanics like time passing affecting potions...it honestly sounded like a marketing meeting that is held in a movie theater to make things seem not us boring. "Clearly we need to increase the boob to non-boob time ratio in the fourth quarter if we're going to meet these quotas." Maybe it's just a language barrier issue, but everything about The Witcher just sounds so...perfunctory. "Nice. Nice use of the mechanics." - "Indubitably." /golfclap

I enjoy action games (I'm looking forward to Dragon's Dogma, for instance) so I'll probably give TW2 a shot, but games where I don't get to define a character (but instead play a pre-defined character, like Aragorn in the game adaptations of the movies) just never resonate for me as much as games that do.

Mainly because one of the most critisized aspects of the first was the combat. But I would think not giving away spoilers as well. If you want dialogue there are 4-5 video links I posted on page 9.

[conan.cimmerian99]

I already pre-ordered TW2, can't wait to play it in 2 weeks time!

[Monica83]

i want puchase it in store.. thats because i love have original boxes of games!

[Romantiq]

Not sure if this has been posted yet , but here is a german site that provides detailed description and image comparisons from super high to low of what graphic settings will appear like in game.\\

http://www.gamestar....50,2322215.html

[Khayness]

Maverick827 wrote...

but games where I don't get to define a character (but instead play a pre-defined character, like Aragorn in the game adaptations of the movies) just never resonate for me as much as games that do.

Only the gender and appearance is fixed.

One of the main quests in The Witcher is filling the blank about what person Geralt really is, and he comments on it in his journal.

[orbit991]

Romantiq wrote...

Not sure if this has been posted yet , but here is a german site that provides detailed description and image comparisons from super high to low of what graphic settings will appear like in game.

http://www.gamestar....50,2322215.html

Looking at the kings armor the medium settings have more detail then most games on high. Medium as far as armor goes doesnt look that different then high, but the lighting is gone. Interesting comparison.

[Romantiq]

Yeah , the depth of field , focus, blur strength, particle strength, and vegetation seem to be affected a lot.

[ErichHartmann]

Not to sound pretentious but I notice enough differences to only want to play on "ultra" settings.

[Nashiktal]

Well I worked up the gumption and attempted to play The Witcher again. I finally made it pass the swamp (which has been my main block for playing the game, that swamp is terrible) and opened up into the new part of the city...

I'm still having trouble playing though. I'm starting to think the witcher isn't for me. I can't quite put my finger on why, but there is just something about this game that is putting me off from playing it. It might be the jilted combat, it might be the *off* dialogue, or maybe something else.

Would the witcher 2 require playing Witcher to enjoy it? From what I hear many of the problems of the Witcher is being "fixed" in the sequel.

[Chromie]

Well the developers say you don't but who knows.

I do know that Act II in Witcher 2 will be different depending on which save you import actually.

@Khayness That quest line is great. Your basically seeing how you can change Geralt. My favorite quest in the Witcher 1.

[Maverick827]

Khayness wrote...

Maverick827 wrote...

but games where I don't get to define a character (but instead play a pre-defined character, like Aragorn in the game adaptations of the movies) just never resonate for me as much as games that do.

Only the gender and appearance is fixed.

One of the main quests in The Witcher is filling the blank about what person Geralt really is, and he comments on it in his journal.

So they just ignore the series of novels about him?

And even then, fixed appearance alone is more than enough to limit my experience.

Again, it might be a fun game, but I struggle to see how it will be memorable for me.

[TheMufflon]

Maverick827 wrote...

So they just ignore the series of novels about him?

Not quite. The writers decided to take the soap-opera route and gave Geralt a dose of convenient bump-on-the-head induced amnesia (a.k.a. the worst plot device ever).

Modifié par TheMufflon, 04 mai 2011 - 09:12 .

[Maverick827]

TheMufflon wrote...

Not quite. The writers decided to take the soap-opera route and gave Geralt a dose of convenient bump-on-the-head induced amnesia (a.k.a. the worst plot device ever).

That's actually besides the point. While amnesia is pretty cliche, the fact remains that you're playing a character who is already defined in a very, very specific way.

Sure, Hawke is from Lothering and has a family, but who Hawke is has yet to be defined when the game opens. A character is defined most by what he or she does, and I'm going to assume in the novels there's a whole lot of doing happening on the part of Geralt. Did he save kittens from trees in his "past life," or murder innocent people? Was he indifferent towards a cause about which I would want my character to care? It doesn't matter whether or not he's forgotten what he has done: it still exists. Modern science posits that personality change rarely if ever accompanies amnesia, though I suppose that is picking too many nits (willing suspension of disbelief, etc.).

I guess the point is the game has another barrier to overcome: will I like the character of Geralt enough to play him? Does the very existence of the necessity to overcome this barrier inherently shatter immersion?

[Addai]

Maverick827 wrote...
I guess the point is the game has another barrier to overcome: will I like the character of Geralt enough to play him? Does the very existence of the necessity to overcome this barrier inherently shatter immersion?

Well... do you?

I like Geralt.  He's easy on the eyes, broody/ snarky, but generally has integrity and an intent to help people (that's my sense of the character, anyway).  It's a fixed character by all means, but he's a pretty easy character to slip into, I think.  It's up to you if the fact that it's a fixed character is an absolute no-no or if you can live with it.  The wins for me about The Witcher are in the world- it is beautiful and dismal and invites exploration.  It's satisfying as a history and mythology nerd.

After reading the PC Gamer preview, I'm very excited!!  Got my pre-order from GOG.com this time.

Modifié par Addai67, 04 mai 2011 - 10:56 .

[Chromie]

I find Geralt more like able then Hawke.

1 week, 5 days and 16 hours Steam is telling me...I have to stop checking it >.>

[Romantiq]

Jesus man...how could you even compare those too? Hawke is complete  :sick:champion of parcel delivery

[slimgrin]

Character customization is overrated. I don't think it gets to the heart of an RPG. Sure I like it, but how my pc looks doesn't make him/her 'mine' and I have yet to play an RPG that doesn't have a predefined character to some degree. The difference is, Geralt is a compelling predefined character. Hawke seems like a paper cut-out.

The amnesia device is indeed cliche, but it was unavoidable given how they wanted to present the story. It allowed us to form Geralt's ( the player's ) philosophical bent as we progressed through the game. This goes a bit deeper than other RPG's.

[Chromie]

Shepard > Hawke? =D

[orbit991]

Ringo12 wrote...

Shepard > Hawke? =D

No contest.

[Addai]

Ringo12 wrote...

Shepard > Hawke? =D

Both of them are dull as rocks.  Sorry Sheploo, but it's the truth.

Having a mostly defined character that has to appeal to a mass market means you're going to get bland sauce.  For me it's about on par with having a completely defined character.  I still prefer bland sauce all in all, though, since I don't like to play a male PC.

Modifié par Addai67, 05 mai 2011 - 04:46 .

[Chromie]

Addai67 wrote...

Ringo12 wrote...

Shepard > Hawke? =D

Both of them are dull as rocks.  Sorry Sheploo, but it's the truth.

Having a mostly defined character that has to appeal to a mass market means you're going to get bland sauce.  For me it's about on par with having a completely defined character.  I still prefer bland sauce all in all, though, since I don't like to play a male PC.

Femshep? >.>

[Persephone]

Addai67 wrote...

Maverick827 wrote...
I guess the point is the game has another barrier to overcome: will I like the character of Geralt enough to play him? Does the very existence of the necessity to overcome this barrier inherently shatter immersion?

Well... do you?

I like Geralt.  He's easy on the eyes, broody/ snarky, but generally has integrity and an intent to help people (that's my sense of the character, anyway).  It's a fixed character by all means, but he's a pretty easy character to slip into, I think.  It's up to you if the fact that it's a fixed character is an absolute no-no or if you can live with it.  The wins for me about The Witcher are in the world- it is beautiful and dismal and invites exploration.  It's satisfying as a history and mythology nerd.

After reading the PC Gamer preview, I'm very excited!!  Got my pre-order from GOG.com this time.

Hmmmmmmm..........interesting preview. Still VERY unhappy with the Geralt redesign....but now I do want to pre-order this. Nyargh!

[Romantiq]

Ringo12 wrote...

Shepard > Hawke? =D

Sarcastic Hawke sounds pretty cool but its underdeveloped as hell. Shepard is a much better badass heroic character imo