witcher 2 is too short

hey guys,
I've got this feeling like this game was so short… I dunno I did most of the side quests. I just feel like it ended fast… and it looks shorter when I compare it to the original witcher.

It was definitely shorter than I wanted it to be. Something was off in terms of length and overall structure.

That said, I'm just not a big fan of chapter divisions and a linear progression through closed-off areas. It tends to ruin the illusion of a "never-ending" experience - which is something I like to pretend when I immerse myself in fantasy worlds.

Silly, I know, but I really enjoy the sensation that I could play in that world indefinitely - even though I'd never actually want to.

That's a big reason why I prefer fully open games like Fallout and Oblivion (in terms of structure).

It seemed much shorter than TW1, and I was a little disappointed by that.

If they could have just made Chapter 3 as long as the other chapters, and gave it better pacing, it would have made a big difference imo.

Well, I think there are a lot of games that start out completely great and can't keep up as you play further ?

One that comes to mind is stonekeep after I played for some hours I was thinking WOW! after I played for 10 hours I was thinking yeck and had already stopped playing. Risen also comes to mind…..

It is really hard to keep a even quality throughout the entire game. I actually prefer it starts out good only to become better and better, compared to starts out really great and becomes worse and worse… however from a business perspective start out great makes a lot more sense!

True, it was shorter than the first part. In TW1, despite that there were closed-off areas and chapters as well, I took my time. I enjoyed simple gathering herbs and drinking at inns. Now it looked like that there was no time for that in TW2, and the areas seemed smaller. I don't understand why Geralt was banned from buying alcohol at inns, it was really strange, somebody could offer him a drink, but no one would sell it to him And I wasn't impressed by the final dialogue-cutscene sequence.

Originally Posted by GothicGothicness
One that comes to mind is stonekeep after I played for some hours I was thinking WOW! after I played for 10 hours I was thinking yeck and had already stopped playing. Risen also comes to mind…..

Risen is awsome! I didn't stop playing it.
Now… I must see what's "stonekeep" about.

Originally Posted by JDR13
It seemed much shorter than TW1, and I was a little disappointed by that.

If they could have just made Chapter 3 as long as the other chapters, and gave it better pacing, it would have made a big difference imo.

This is spot on I think.

Risen comes to mind in this regards as well. I was bored of the last Act in Risen given how good the previous Acts were. However I wasn't bored of Chapter 3 in TW2.

Actually, I don't really know how big Chapter 3 was. I kinda followed the main quest primarily - and I gave up on the Gargoyle thing. I don't know how much sidestuff there really was - but my impression was that it was minimal.

I think I spent ~5 hours in Chapter 3 - which is MUCH less than the previous 2. But AFAIK, there's no way to see time spent playing - so it's just an estimate.

Still, overall I think it must have been 30-40 hours all in all, and the fact that I wanted more is a very good sign

I remember REALLY wanting DA:O to be over near the end, and that's not really a preferable situation.

I think my main problem with TW2 length was the structure - and I knew I would likely have that problem, going in. The Witcher games are obviously not about huge freeform worlds - and so I can't really blame them for not changing the basics for my sake.

I'm a great believer in a freeform structure, and I honestly think you can combine a strong narrative with a less linear progression - but I understand that it's a big design/QA challenge, and that most people don't agree that it's truly possible - or even much of a plus.

If you just follow the main quest in your chosen path then Chapter 3 will be over in say 2 - 3 hours tops.

In Roche's path, I came across the following side quest,

Gargoyle - May take about an hour.
Mystic river - Again hour or less.
Those puzzle rooms - This can 1 -2 hours on how quickly you solve them
Operator - This can take ages depending on which difficulty you play on.

So all in all Chapter 3 can take about 3 - 7 hours depending on how you play it.

However its important to note that Chapter 3 plays quite differently based on your choices in Chapter 1 and Chapter 2. For example even on Roche's path you either get to save the children or go after Triss. This are also quite different of Ivorth path.
etc. So at any one play through you are only seeing like 1/3 of the available content in Chapter 3.

Considering there are two substantially different versions of the second half of the game, I think the shorter length per playthrough is understandable and personally I have no problem with the game´s length per se.
I also think chapter 3 wraps things up nicely story/character-wise, especially given the amount of possibilities how it can play out.
Maybe a part of the problem is the "chapter" label which creates mislead expectations?

That said, I feel the two main branches are not fully equal in quality - I think Iorveth path provides overall more even, fulfilling and better paced experience. It has a bit more main story content, more side quests, more fleshed out environments and also provides players with more choices and gameplay diversity.
I´m pretty sure the game is longer when going this route.



What I think is somewhat problematic in relation to the game´s length is item and character progression - "pacing" and balancing of these two elements doesn´t account for the pacing of story elements and the game´s overall length too well.

Best items are usually acquired near the end of a chapter only to be quickly replaced by better ones available ïn the beginning of the next one (draug armor is particularly hilarious). Chapter 3 is worst at this because on one hand it overflows with new items which player can barely put to use and on the other hand it more-or-less makes previous gear development moot.
Missed opportunity in this regard are the mutagens and, maybe to a lesser degree, armor/weapon enhancers.
In the case of mutagens, the fact they can´t be replaced once put in an ability slot renders lesser and normal variants useful only as means of additional income. Allowing players to replace lesser ones with normal/greater ones of the same type, putting some unique ones in the world and decreasing the overall amount of their drops would work better I think.
Similarly, allowing players to increase the amount of enhancement slots on gear pieces might´ve been a good idea.
Basically, lesser amount of equipment pieces on one hand, but more customizability of pieces themselves on the other might result in an equipment progression curve more fitting to the game´s length and even Geralt´s character.

As for the pacing of skill progression, to me it felt good up till the ending stages of the first chapter, but in retrospect such pace would only be sustainable if the game was longer. But since it isn´t, final quests of ch1 provide players with huge amount of experience points, making them jump 6 levels or so higher very fast.
Something similar occurs at the end of ch2.
I think it was an attempt to fit 35 available character levels into available playtime and prevent players to get too powerful early, but as a result character progression feels too tightly controlled and uneven.
Better solution imo would be to make smaller difference between experience gained from side and main quests (this might make optional content crucial on higher difficulties, but personally that´s how I like it) to smoothen the progression curve and couple it with nerfing of some of the more powerful abilities to avoid players´ power getting potentially way out of whack too early - this could also be augmented by making mutagens more powerful or making some applicable only to specific abilities and making these only available in the later stages of the game, or something.

To reiterate, to me the game is of satisfying length from the story standpoint, but some other elements aren´t all that well adjusted to it.

Anyway, the game seems to be relatively easily moddable so maybe in time "mods will fix it", but I hope CDProjekt will attempt to make some rebalance in later patches or in an expansion too.

Sorry for being rather tangential in some bits.

How long is the first Witcher game?

Originally Posted by Gorath
How long is the first Witcher game?

TW1 had five chapters + prologue & epilogue. I don't recall how long (in hours) it took me to finish, but it was substantially longer than TW2. If I had to guess, I'd say it's anywhere from 30-50% longer at least.

Originally Posted by fantasta
I don't understand why Geralt was banned from buying alcohol at inns, it was really strange, somebody could offer him a drink, but no one would sell it to him

I agree it was strange that they removed all the different types of alchohol that were in first game. Even though they didn't serve any major purpose, it was nice to see the large variety of beers, wines, etc. I thought it was a nice touch.

Originally Posted by lostforever
However its important to note that Chapter 3 plays quite differently based on your choices in Chapter 1 and Chapter 2. For example even on Roche's path you either get to save the children or go after Triss. This are also quite different of Ivorth path.
etc. So at any one play through you are only seeing like 1/3 of the available content in Chapter 3.

The problem with the choices in Chapter 3 though..

I think unlike the first witcher where we had choices we didn't have the choice of two completely different games depending on the path you choice. Which gives the game the ability to be played again and have a totally diffent feel. I am going to give it a break for a bit as I just finished the witcher 1, 4 days before this one came out but await trying it making different choices. Which would make the game much bigger than the frist one.

What is really needed was an extended Epilogue where you mooch down to the river and meet the characters for a beer and debrief. I wanted to see them again before the end, watching the sunset.

Final Quest Phase - Find Ale for party.

Originally Posted by Gorath
How long is the first Witcher game?

I finished 'The Witcher' not too long ago and Xfire says that I spent 52 hours in total with 'The Witcher'. Now Xfire is certainly not smart enough to calculate net playing time so if we deduct a reasonable amount of idle time then I'd guess that we'd end up somewhere between 45 and 50 hours for a slow, thorough playthrough with lots of exploration and trying to pick up and finish every quest (I'm the completist type so that's how I played). If you rush and focus then my guess would be that you'd probably be able to finish the game in 35 - 40 hours.

In absolute terms, probably.

But still, if one wishes for one epic story, condensed with intense moments, it is pretty hard to expect a long shot story spanning over one hundred hours.

Some impossibilities are brought by initial decisions. Either you go and wish for an epic story, packed with actions, with no dragging moments, at the cost of length or you go and wish for a story developping rather slowly to climax towards the end.

Eventually, I found that the game dragged a bit towards the end, was a bit lengthy, dying out a bit before the end.

The fetch quest and lots of running back and forth in the Witcher1 are not missed.

I also agree with the 2 posters above me.

The first game was definitely longer and I still remember rushing towards the end. W2 is shorter but its is certainly more "epic" and had lot of intense moments. However I do agree this may not be everyone's cup of tea.

To me the single best this about W2 over W1 or any other game was the characters. In general they are all written well and I think the game made me care for them. For example, King Foltest was there for short while at the start but I thought the game made me empathise with him really well.

Originally Posted by JDR13
The problem with the choices in Chapter 3 though..

Spoiler – Lots of spoilers!

…is that they don't have any real consequences.

I replayed Ch 3 twice on Roche's path so I could see the different outcomes. Unfortunately there's very little difference in the epilogue regardless of what you choose. It doesn't matter if you choose to rescue Triss or help Roche get Anais, both of them end up just fine anyways.

It also makes no difference whether you choose to hand Anais over to the Temerians or the Redanians. Although perhaps that choice may have an impact in the sequel.

Well, it´s the end, the consequence is the state of the political map and fate of some characters (checking updated character entries in the journal often or at least before the ending encounter is highly recommended as it provides something a bit akin to epilogue slides).

Speaking of the path(s) you mentioned: