133 réponses à ce sujet

[IntoTheDarkness]

The plots of TW2 are good but it's not what makes the witcher 2 outstanding; it's depth of literally every character who shows up in the game.

I'm deeply impressed that none of characters were 'dumbed down' or 'adjusted' to make the gameflow smoother. There are so many antagonists and political schemes that you might even get confused, but in the end the complexity and many characters involved each with motives make the game feel so much more realistic as opposed to ME3. ME3 has a great storytelling but one can't dismiss the feeling that the game is a bit too centred around the protagonist.

If you get decieved in the withcer 2, you will get captured and head straight to a torture room. In ME3, with the same case, you would be given 2 choices of one paragon and one renegade path; persuade enemies into surrender or kill them although it is you being surprised

It's but one example of how much more focus was placed on non-protagonist factions of the game. I've just finisehd the game and its one of few games I feel I got more than what I paid for.

[Roflbox]

Some excellent write-ups by KoP here if you wanna see just how complex they are.


The Politics of The Witcher 2. Part 1

The politics of The Witcher 2. Part 2

The Politics of The Witcher 2. Part 3

[Addai]

Agreed. One of the best parts about it is that Geralt's companions have their own lives and agendas, not always in concert with his. His friendships are probably my favorite part of the series. The sorceresses in TW2 were also very well drawn.

[PaulSX]

I would say they are complex but not necessarily deep. I found most characters in TW2 are single layered. For example, Triss is a much deeper character in TW1 than in TW2.

[Savber100]

Addai67 wrote...

Agreed. One of the best parts about it is that Geralt's companions have their own lives and agendas, not always in concert with his. His friendships are probably my favorite part of the series. The sorceresses in TW2 were also very well drawn.

 

Well for one thing since it's not a party-based RPG like Bioware games, the developers probably had more flexiblity to allow Geralt's companions to go on their own lives. 

Dragon Age 2 attempted the whole "companion does his/her stchik" but had... um varied success. 

[IntoTheDarkness]

Roflbox wrote...

Some excellent write-ups by KoP here if you wanna see just how complex they are.


The Politics of The Witcher 2. Part 1

The politics of The Witcher 2. Part 2

The Politics of The Witcher 2. Part 3

Thx! reading it now

[Chromie]

Savber100 wrote...
Well for one thing since it's not a party-based RPG like Bioware games, the developers probably had more flexiblity to allow Geralt's companions to go on their own lives. 

How exactly? 

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

No ANOTHER witcher 2 topic plz ... also inb4dalock

[slimgrin]

suntzuxi wrote...

I would say they are complex but not necessarily deep. I found most characters in TW2 are single layered. For example, Triss is a much deeper character in TW1 than in TW2.

She was modelled after Yennefer in TW1 (my theory).They actually made her like Sapkowski's Triss in TW2. Don't let the poor english VO's fool you. She has some of the most interesting and veiled motivations in the series.

Modifié par slimgrin, 07 décembre 2012 - 06:21 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Roflbox wrote...

Some excellent write-ups by KoP here if you wanna see just how complex they are.


The Politics of The Witcher 2. Part 1

The politics of The Witcher 2. Part 2

The Politics of The Witcher 2. Part 3

The Politics of The Witcher 2: Part 4 

Thanks for sharing!

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

It certainly is refreshing the way that characters all have their own motivations for doing what they do beyond basic "herpaderp I am archetype" and those motivations are carried through their actions, alliances and the like.

I wouldn't necessarily say it's "deep", because there's no greater message to be gleamed from it all, but I don't think it was intended to be so, either. People in real life can be simple, too. I see the depth as coming from how the different factions and nations intertwine, interact and generally play their own game.

It's a sort of grimdark hyper-realism that's really an extension of the setting. It says to the audience "life is sh*t, people do good/bad things, but most of 'em have reasons for doing what they do. You might not like it, but it is what it is". The great part about it is how you can drill down the actions of most of the characters in the series and relate to it. Not necessarily agree, but at least understand it.

The overarching premise from all the characters seems to be that they are logical actors. You rarely catch someone doing something because hurr durr. That's something that's not really implemented well in video games as a whole and it's something I appreciate.

I won't boil my thoughts down to something simple like a base judgement on whether it's better/worse than other games, because that ignores the purposes and goals other games set for themselves.

Merely for what it attempts to accomplish, it does quite well and the idea of having character actions be logical and relate-able through the prism of their personality/motivations is pretty basic and ought to be looked at more for video game narratives that attempt to be grounded as opposed to whimsical or theatrical.

Modifié par CrustyBot, 07 décembre 2012 - 06:53 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

CrustyBot wrote...
I wouldn't necessarily say it's "deep", because there's no greater message to be gleamed from it all, but I don't think it was intended to be so, either. I see the depth as coming from how the different factions and nations intertwine, interact and generally play their own game.

I think the depth of their character stems from the overall theme of the series: change and how people react to it.

TW characters all react, in their own way, to volatile changes and transformations towards an uncertain future. Which is pretty poignant imo.  

[TEWR]

This thread makes me want to play the Witcher series.

But it also reminds me that my computers cannot handle the Witcher games, and thus I go back to being sad.

So maybe I'll just watch a Let's Play of it. Not as fun, but at least I'd see something.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

I can make a Let's Play for you.

But it wouldn't really be an accurate representation of the series...

[slimgrin]

CDPR focuses on plot, Bioware focuses on characters.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

slimgrin wrote...

CDPR focuses on plot, Bioware focuses on characters.

Yet CDPR does both better.

*inb4 rage about how I'm wrong*

Modifié par CrustyBot, 07 décembre 2012 - 07:43 .

[eroeru]

It's an outstandeh gamez.

[Cyberarmy]

CrustyBot wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

CDPR focuses on plot, Bioware focuses on characters.

Yet CDPR does both better.

*inb4 rage about how I'm wrong*

You'have just opened Pandora's Box... Brace for impact!

[frustratemyself]

And ******, don't forget the ******.

[Damariel]

frustratemyself wrote...

And ******, don't forget the ******.

I don't care about them in this game somehow.... I wonder why .

Anyway on topic please. If someone wonders why characters are so good - check the books. But I admit CDPR did great job to show it in games.

[Savber100]

Skelter192 wrote...

Savber100 wrote...
Well for one thing since it's not a party-based RPG like Bioware games, the developers probably had more flexiblity to allow Geralt's companions to go on their own lives. 

How exactly? 

Compare Dragon Age: Origins and The Witcher 2... 

From a story standpoint, Bioware generally focus on companions supplementing the main character. Everything they do is for the empowerment of the player's character. Seeing as there are multiple variables of companions for your group, it's difficult to for a developer to know who the players will generally favor or don't. Now why do I point this out?

Mainly because in comparsion, CDPR doesn't have to worry about that as Geralt generally goes solo.  His "companions" can go plot their schemes and live their lives without CDPR needing to calculate whether Geralt will be bringing Triss or Zoltan along for his next quest. For example, it's unlikely that Letho would  have kidnapped Triss if she was accompanying Geralt on his quests etc. 

In Dragon Age, you pretty much have the companions accompanying you 24/7. There's no space for companions to suddenly dozey off to do their own things since they're with you most of the time. Sure their is the whole companions back at camp but as I mentioned, it's difficult to play for all possbile group variables. Instead for Bioware, companions are heavily interwined with the protagonist with what the main character experience so does the companions. 

Either way, I'm not saying it's impossible since we have deep characterization  in some party-based RPGs but I can see it affecting the way you would develop the character and the possible inflexibility of it. 

Mind you this is just how I see it. 

Modifié par Savber100, 07 décembre 2012 - 12:02 .

[Milan92]

What I mostly liked about The Witcher games was that their is no Good v.s Evil battle going on. Every choice you make is grey. 

What also always makes me chuckle is how everybody seems to know Geralt. Was he like the most famous person in the Witcher Universe?  Oh and Triss, she is the one that makes The Witcher games so much beter 

[Naughty Bear]

I liked the drunk troll and The Lord of the Rings reference.

'Next thing I know I'm running up a volcano bare foot'.

Modifié par Naughty Bear, 07 décembre 2012 - 02:39 .

[wolfsite]

CrustyBot wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

CDPR focuses on plot, Bioware focuses on characters.

Yet CDPR does both better.

*inb4 rage about how I'm wrong*

I have to disagree, Geralt, though created by someone else I do understand, is a character I hate more than anything.  It's hard to play such a flat character that is unable to express any emotion and seems to not care about anything around him.  I played Witcher 1 from beginning to end and even when you try to get him to be close to a character he's just so lifeless.

Got turned off by the Witcher 2 when they let you import your Witcher 1 save then ignore everything you did.  For those who complain about forced narative they obviously ignore this since it makes playing Witcher 1 pointless and also made it felt like you will be forced down a specific path no matter what you choose.