RPGWatch Feature: The Witcher Review

[Prime Junta]

Well, I just find it absurd when you stigma Half-Life 2 as something more or less "brain-dead", when I consider it to be the finest example of how video gaming as a media can be just as artistic as literature, films etc.

I liked it too. In fact, I've probably played it through more times than any other game I own.

But I didn't get much of an artistic kick out of it.

But to shorten a potential long debate, then Half-life 2 - among other themes - is "about" a dystopian picture of a future where humanity is being suppresed and how people react to this emotionally. It is about struggling to survive in a totalitarian society where every day brings humanity closer to extincton and how uplifting the final rebellion is to observe and partake in. Theses newfound prospects instead of pessitimism and constrainment.

Interesting. Could you point at some specific examples where this is addressed? I'll give you the building being raided in Insertion Point, but once past the point where you get your crowbar...?

It is about immersiveness.

Just like porn is about erections.

Don't get me wrong -- Half-Life 2 is one of *the* top dopamine-hijack games I've played. But I really, truly, honestly cannot see any more plot or thematic dimension in it than you can find in the average porno-with-a-plot, and a lot less than some. (Not that I'm an expert or something.) There are no conversations, no meaningful interaction with any of the characters beyond "My God! It's Gordon Freeman!", precious little meaningful interaction *between* the characters, no moral dimension at all, and so on.

Edit: To make this perfectly clear, I really, really liked Half-Life 2. I still like it. But *why?* Because:

(1) The visuals are fantastic. It's really well done, believable, and immersive, and it looks a lot like the nastier parts of the former Soviet Union too, and the moldy-copper-look of the Combine artifacts make a great contrast with it.

(2) The pacing is great. You get frenetic action interspersed with calmer bits of running, climbing, driving, or boating through that marvelous scenery.

(3) The action is great. "Bang bang you're dead" has rarely been as much fun as in this game.

(4) The gameplay was very innovative for its time: the physics-based puzzles and the grav gun in particular.

(5) It's very, very polished. There are no ugly warts that suddenly jolt you out of it -- it starts out great and only gets better towards the end; the final cliff-hanger is one of the best endings of any game I've played.

In other words, in pure game terms it's an easy 5/5. However, in my opinion it only rates 1/5 (if 0 is the lowest mark) on the "about" where The Witcher rates 4/5. That's the point I was trying to make.

To put this into context, here's how I'd rate a few other games on these scales:
DOOM 3: Game 4/5, "About" 0/5
Far Cry: Game 5/5, "About" 1/5
Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay: Game 4/5, "About" 2/5
VtM: Bloodlines: Game 3/5, "About" 3/5
Planescape: Torment: Game 2/5, "About" 5/5
Fallout: Game 4/5, "About" 4/5
S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Game 5/5, "About" 2/5

Another edit: funny, after compiling that list I can see a pattern: if I rank them by product of the scores above the line, I get

The Witcher (16), Fallout (16)
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. (10), Planescape: Torment (10)
VtM: Bloodlines (9)
Chronicles of Riddick (8)
Far Cry, Half-Life 2 (5)
DOOM 3 (0)

This ranking, and these points, match pretty well the order and strength of preference I hold for the games. I never quite managed to finish DOOM 3, but have replayed and still replay all of the others, with the lasting impression they have made matching the score quite well.

 

[Asbjoern]

Interesting. Could you point at some specific examples where this is addressed? I'll give you the building being raided in Insertion Point, but once past the point where you get your crowbar...?

The whole beginning is about showing you this situation. The train station, the trash can behaviorism, the flying cameras, the video screens of Dr. Breen (fantasticly ambiguous character), the poor state of the buildings/environments/streets showing you economic failure and the degeneration of a free civilian culture, the grafitti sprayed on the falls all contain emotional messages, the rooms where a man is comforting a woman, people wearing monotonous clothes like if they were cattle (this complete disregard of people as individuals that totalitarian societies often/always have), the abandoned playground symbolizing - of the course the lack of children - but also that there's no joy but only death, the fact that we experience City 17 in the autumn is both ambiguous but also extremely emotional, Nova Prospect where people are stored like a database. And all this is a general trait of Half-Life 2. It continues throughout the story.
Half-Life 2 is constructed around these two feelings of hopelessness and hope. The first part of Half-Life 2 you witness the hoplessness and at the end of Half-Life 2 the people rebel and the hopelessness is replaced with this overwhelming sense of hope.

Just like porn is about erections.

Don't get me wrong -- Half-Life 2 is one of *the* top dopamine-hijack games I've played. But I really, truly, honestly cannot see any more plot or thematic dimension in it than you can find in the average porno-with-a-plot, and a lot less than some. (Not that I'm an expert or something.) There are no conversations, no meaningful interaction with any of the characters beyond "My God! It's Gordon Freeman!", precious little meaningful interaction *between* the characters, no moral dimension at all, and so on.

But if you listen carefully to Dr. Breen then there's a lot of interesting dialogue filled with moral questions. He tries to manipulate and justify the suppresion of humanity. The violation of human rights is all about ethics and Half-Life 2 is all about the violation of human rights. And please don't compare the FPS genre with the RPG genre. FPS games aren't supposed to have dialogue trees or moral choices, so don't consider them to be universal elements of a great video game. If I interpret what you are saying then every game should be similar to The Witcher because it has meaningful interaction and moral choice.
But Half-Life 2 is an FPS, which means it can have meaningful dialogue and moral questions, but not meaningful interactive dialogue and moral choices.

But I agree with you that the story and characters of Half-Life 2 can sometimes appear very Hollywoodish but this is overshadowed by the narrative immersiveness and atmosphere.

 

[Prime Junta]

Half-Life 2 is constructed around these two feelings of hopelessness and hope. The first part of Half-Life 2 you witness the hoplessness and at the end of Half-Life 2 the people rebel and the hopelessness is replaced with this overwhelming sense of hope.

I see what you mean, although I wouldn't use the word "overwhelming" -- the reason being that there are no individual characters to follow and identify with. The "hopeless" to "hopeful" people are statists with identical voices and faces who get replenished if they get shot down during the missions; the identifiable characters (Alyx, Eli, Breen, Judith, Father Grigori etc.) experience no progression or change; they simply plow through their pretty much caricatured roles the same way through the whole thing.

If there is art in HL2 -- and yeah, on second thought I think you can make a good case that there is -- IMO it lies in the visuals and, as you put it, "immersiveness." But this is not the same as the game being "about" something the same way as The Witcher, Deus Ex, Planescape: Torment or even Bioshock, KOTOR, VtM:B, or Riddick are "about" something. It's qualitatively different. Whether it's better is a matter of opinion, but in *my* opinion it is better.

But if you listen carefully to Dr. Breen then there's a lot of interesting dialogue filled with moral questions. He tries to manipulate and justify the suppresion of humanity. The violation of human rights is all about ethics and Half-Life 2 is all about the violation of human rights.

I did listen to Dr. Breen quite carefully, but again I found that dimension pretty thin. The dialog *could have* been about manipulating the population with appeals to fear, commonalities, loyalty, or what not, but it wasn't -- I didn't get anything out of it beyond "how to hoodwink the people."

And please don't compare the FPS genre with the RPG genre. FPS games aren't supposed to have dialogue trees or moral choices, so don't consider them to be universal elements of a great video game.

I'm not, Asbjoern. For example, Bioshock didn't have dialog trees or moral choices (OK, other than the largely cosmetic one about the Little Sisters), but it was most definitely "about" something. It had carefully drawn, well-written, interesting, and well acted characters with believable motivations for their respective madnesses, a set of underlying thematics that were internally consistent, rich, and informed most aspects of the game world, it had a plot with twists, and so on.

If I interpret what you are saying then every game should be similar to The Witcher because it has meaningful interaction and moral choice.

And if I interpret what you're saying, you're dumb as a post or can't read. Which is why I don't, 'cuz you're clearly not; you're just not understanding what I'm saying for some reason.

But Half-Life 2 is an FPS, which means it can have meaningful dialogue and moral questions, but not meaningful interactive dialogue and moral choices.

But it doesn't -- compared to Bioshock, Deus Ex, or Chronicles of Riddick, to pick three FPS's. In HL2, the dialog, morality, and background story serve as mortar to hold the bricks of the excellent, excellent gameplay together; in the games that score more than 2/5 in my little list they inform most aspects of the gameplay.

But I agree with you that the story and characters of Half-Life 2 can sometimes appear very Hollywoodish but this is overshadowed by the narrative immersiveness and atmosphere.

That, Asbjoern, is pretty much my point. HL2 is all about the visuals, gameplay, atmosphere, and "immersiveness." The thematics, the characters, the story, the morality, the writing, and the internal logic of the world are peripheral to the experience (although not totally absent -- I would give it 1/5 in this respect rather than the 0/5 of DOOM 3).

Look, let me illustrate. What are the major impressions or memories you retained from HL2? With me, it's things like...

...the ant-lion assisted assault on Nova Prospekt
...trying desperately not to step on sand
...clambering on a creaky steel bridge
...shooting buzz-saw blades at zombies in Ravenholm
...being pinned down on a rooftop by a Strider

In other words, all action, all the time.

Whereas with some of the other games, my most lasting impressions are...

...the voice and face of a sarcastic Nosferatu explaining to me what's what
...holding off an assault of Men in Black because I stayed behind to protect my wounded brother, although I could have taken off
...the moment after the slam preacher operated my eyes, and Riddick's voice as he says "I can see _everything_"
...facing off a one-time friend, swords drawn, in a burning city
..."Would you kindly?"
...meeting the ghost of a lost love in the Fortress of Regrets, and being faced with the consequences of my actions in this life, and past ones

Do you see the difference?

 

[Asbjoern]

I see what you mean, although I wouldn't use the word "overwhelming" -- the reason being that there are no individual characters to follow and identify with. The "hopeless" to "hopeful" people are statists with identical voices and faces who get replenished if they get shot down during the missions; the identifiable characters (Alyx, Eli, Breen, Judith, Father Grigori etc.) experience no progression or change; they simply plow through their pretty much caricatured roles the same way through the whole thing.

The reason to why I used the word "overwhelming" is because I was filled with overwhelming hope when seeing the rebellion. Not that the characters in Half-Life 2 expressed overwhelming hope. They didn't need to because you had seen the despair in the citizens eyes and when they finally rebelled then this sense of hope and power automatically appeared (At least it did with me).

I did listen to Dr. Breen quite carefully, but again I found that dimension pretty thin. The dialog *could have* been about manipulating the population with appeals to fear, commonalities, loyalty, or what not, but it wasn't -- I didn't get anything out of it beyond "how to hoodwink the people."

Well, I thought he was a very ambiguous character that tried to manipulate and justify the current situation with kindness, rational argumentation and benevolence. A humanist trying to justify the extinction of humanity.

But it doesn't -- compared to Bioshock, Deus Ex, or Chronicles of Riddick, to pick three FPS's. In HL2, the dialog, morality, and background story serve as mortar to hold the bricks of the excellent, excellent gameplay together; in the games that score more than 2/5 in my little list they inform most aspects of the gameplay.

That is your perception. I find the environment/background story of Half-Life 2 to be essential and the gameplay more or less unimportant.

Do you see the difference?

Don't patronise me. I am very well aware of what we are discussing and how to distinguish themes from gameplay.
The thing is that we just don't agree on how we perceived Half-Life 2. I can see themes present in the game that I find to be "about" something other than just fighting off hordes of zombies. I don't remeber Half-Life 2 for the things you mention, instead I remember the deformed cyborgs that once were human beings.
I remember the combine war machines (strider, dropship etc.) as machines that were sentient, organic creatures who made this very emotional sound when they died, as if they were living creatures.
I remember a totalitarian society. I remember the feeling of being part of a minority.

But let me ask you. You don't find the below as a valid theme? And if you do then I guess we have nothing more to discuss, because whether or not you find that theme present in Half-Life 2 is unimportant to me. I find it present. And many others do too (Not that quantitative figures define what is right and wrong).

But to shorten a potential long debate, then Half-life 2 - among other themes - is "about" a dystopian picture of a future where humanity is being suppresed and how people react to this emotionally. It is about struggling to survive in a totalitarian society where every day brings humanity closer to extincton and how uplifting the final rebellion is to observe and partake in. Theses newfound prospects instead of pessitimism and constrainment.

Or well, we do have something to discuss. Otherwise there was no reason to why I posted in the first place. If you agree that what I'm saying holds just some truth, then is there any possibility that you could replace the Half-Life 2 part of your review with another game that definitely contains nothing more than gameplay? It would ease my pitiful existence.

 

[Benedict]

I'm actually quite tempted to give Half Life 2 a go now Asbjoern, sounds potentially more interesting than I gave it credit for

 

[Prime Junta]

Don't patronise me. I am very well aware of what we are discussing and how to distinguish themes from gameplay.

A bit tetchy today, are we?

The thing is that we just don't agree on how we perceived Half-Life 2. I can see themes present in the game that I find to be "about" something other than just fighting off hordes of zombies. I don't remeber Half-Life 2 for the things you mention, instead I remember the deformed cyborgs that once were human beings.

My goodness, a difference of opinion. How shocking.

But let me ask you. You don't find the below as a valid theme? And if you do then I guess we have nothing more to discuss, because whether or not you find that theme present in Half-Life 2 is unimportant to me. I find it present. And many others do too (Not that quantitative figures define what is right and wrong).

Yes, I do find it a valid theme, and yes, it was present in the game. I just found it to be as incidental to Half-Life 2 as the plot is incidental to the average porno flick, and pretty unoriginal, clichéd, and derivative at that. Therefore, I'd rate it a 1/5 for "content."

I've done my best to explain why I experienced it this way the numerous times I played it, and why I experienced games like Deus Ex, The Witcher, or Bioshock differently. I have no problem with you disagreeing with me on this point -- we are talking about experience, which is inherently subjective.

However, if you consider this genuine attempt at explaining myself as "patronizing," I have no desire to discuss this topic -- or indeed much anything else -- with you.

Edit: no, there is no chance that I'm changing the review. It is what it is. I will only request a change to it if I've made a factual error somewhere -- as to the rest of it, I stand by my opinion.

 

[Benedict]

Arrrgh, now I'm wondering whether I wouldn't like it.

Someone tell me what to think, please.

 

[Prime Junta]

I'm pretty sure you would like it, if you're not completely put off by first-person shooters. It sets the gameplay standard for the genre: the gameplay is rich, varied, evolving, and just plain fun, and it looks and sounds pretty good even by current standards.

And, of course, if you're like Asbjoern you might even get an artistic kick out of it. But if that happens, consider it a bonus.

 

[woges]

HL2 delivers it's sci-fi horror really really well. It may not have the options that a game like The Witcher has but it's concise character actors are much more believable than most even today. It has some excellent level design as well.

As for The Witcher, I'm more happy when I'm running around exploring/fighting/reading/playing dice than I am talking to most of the characters. I'm not really happy with the way Witcher handles it's script - the music is really spot on for the medieval game world. Voices and sounds/music are really important to get right otherwise I'd rather they were just text.

They are both great games though - I've enjoyed them both.

Not quite finished Witcher yet on act 5 - not sure how much longer I have to go (but I guess act 5 is a fair way in).

 

[Asbjoern]

However, if you consider this genuine attempt at explaining myself as "patronizing," I have no desire to discuss this topic -- or indeed much anything else -- with you.

I have no wish to be hostile and I think if you would reread your previous post then you might agree with me that it could be interpreted as patronizing. "Look, let me illustrate." and "Do you see the difference?" are sentences used when you consider yourself understanding the situation better than other. But I accept that your post wasn't intended as patronizing so end of topic.
But please don't use the same maneuvre with me as you used with Corwin some time ago. To boycot me purely out of principle is absurd. You almost make it sound like I violated you in some way and that you are the righteous person.

Edit: no, there is no chance that I'm changing the review. It is what it is. I will only request a change to it if I've made a factual error somewhere -- as to the rest of it, I stand by my opinion.

Yes, I can understand what you mean, but the problem to me is that labelling Half-Life 2 as "brain-dead" is a factual error. Whouldn't you consider calling The Witcher "braind-dead" as a factual error?
But I respect your stance. So end of topic.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

To chime in on the discussion: It seems clear to me that Valve was mostly aiming to produce a great looking piece of action gameplay. But it is to their credit that they actually went a little bit beyond that. The things Asbjoern mentioned are there, and they added just enough "art" to keep me interested in the game. while I usually get bored after some time with shooters, no matter how good the action is. The graphics (both the technical as well as the art direction side) are one part of this, but it also shows that someone spent a few hours thinking about the larger universe we play in. HL2 is pretty subtle about this, so it is easy to miss, but its there. The game left me with questions - that is always a good sign.
A nice source: http://members.shaw.ca/halflifestory/timeline.htm

 

[Prime Junta]

Removed because this post was mean and stupid. Sorry about the bother everybody.

 

[Benedict]

I'm pretty sure you would like it, if you're not completely put off by first-person shooters. It sets the gameplay standard for the genre: the gameplay is rich, varied, evolving, and just plain fun, and it looks and sounds pretty good even by current standards.

And, of course, if you're like Asbjoern you might even get an artistic kick out of it. But if that happens, consider it a bonus.

I did enjoy doom when it came out, but that was about as far as I got.

I don't know if I'll have any time though, I think Mask of the Betrayer, The Witcher and Mass Effect will probably take most of my time for a while then there'll probably be something else worth playing.

Very much enjoying mask of the betrayer at the moment even though it's at an early stage.

 

[Asbjoern]

[Post deleted due to it serving no purpose.]

Kind regards Asbjørn

 

[Cm]

I was enjoying reading both of your opinions guys. It is great to see differing sides of a topic. But not when you start taking stuff/making stuff personal. How about you both move this to pm's or just agree to disagree and let the rest of us enjoy your thoughts.

 

[Asbjoern]

Agreed. I better take a walk instead of this. I'll delete and correct some of my posts in a day or two when things cool down a bit.

EDIT: I think I'll do it immediately instead.

 

[Corwin]

Yes guys, thanks. You know the rules; NO personal attacks!! Shoot down each other's opinions all you want, but please play nice!!

 

[Jaz]

Thanks .

Arrrgh, now I'm wondering whether I wouldn't like it.

Someone tell me what to think, please.

I loved HL (the first one) because it was so intense, but I was bored by HL2. I actually was sorry I bought it... it felt exceedingly bleak when compared to the first game. Concrete building levels with a variety of two or three different types of enemies were intermingled with endless vehicle chase levels. There were puzzles or intelligent enemies? I don't remember any of them, but I do remember that there were outstandingly unintelligent allies of Gordon who always got killed. Pity, because I found the Marines (enemies) from the original game to be rather clever. The robot Dog was interesting, and the game started to pick up once the gravity gun (or whatever it was called) finally showed its real potential, but that was primarily because of the childish joy of throwing people around and not because of how the story progressed or about what happened to any of the characters. Okay, Barney was in it, but that's about it.

Out of all the sequels to/reboots of my old favorites HL, Doom and Quake 2, HalfLife 2 regrettably ranks last. My personal favorite happens to be Quake 4 which managed to recapture the tone and visual style of the original, at least to a certain extent. Doom was an entertaining game, but unfortunately felt nothing like Doom. HL2 to me felt like watching the sequel to a movie I once saw at a theater through an unaligned channel on TV: I got a certain idea what it was all about and was glad the story I had enjoyed finally continued, but it was pale and grainy.

 

[txa1265]

Hehe ... I agree with Jaz - but wasn't going to chime in because it was getting nasty and I didn't have the time in the airport to get into things at that detail level

I look at HL2 as having a much weaker plot than games like the whole Dark Forces / Jedi Knight series, Star Trek Elite Forces game, and even something like Soldier of Fortune 2. Where it succeeds is by leveraging the popular 'scenario-set piece' design of WWII shooters into a 'the chase is the game' setting (ala Rune) but with some amount of plot ... and with Breen as the 'background' to make it seem important, spewing dialogue that sounded like DW Bradley was writing it ...

 

[woges]

Oh please the HL2 story is surely better than that valley of the jedi nonsense.

JK games were great but not for the story.

Although the hammy actors did make me laugh.