The Witcher 2 first impressions

Originally Posted by crpgnut
Hmmm, I must be the only one who is not super-thrilled with the game. It's pretty, but it is also 100% story-driven. I keep feeling like somebody is saying we now interrupt this boring story so that you can swing your sword for a few minutes….Carry on. Outside of the wonderful graphics, I find the game to be mediocre.

I stated the same. A long succession of cutscenes and minigames. But I wont tell the game is mediocre. It is a great action adventure games. Not a RPG.

Originally Posted by kalniel
You can learn loads about the gameworld from the inhabitants, not sure what you mean. You don't usually have to ask them anymore though, they just talk about it with each other in front of you.

First, the level of interaction. You no long have to ask and convince people into telling you.

The main point being that they empoverish TW2 comparatively to TW1. In TW1, you have several ways to get (actual) knowledge on monsters/potions and the rest as you could buy books or ask inhabitants. In the swamp for example, if you tour the old man around it, everytime you enter a new area, the man might reveal a portion of his vast knowledge.

They scrapped this way to acquire knowledge. A bad move.
As it was a strong point, I expected they expanded on it rather than removing it.

Originally Posted by LuckyCarbon
Tried Magicka? That's about the neatest "weaving" I've seen, a similar mechanic where there were no wrong combinations would be neat for a WoT game.

No haven't tried it yet. It does sound fun though.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
First, the level of interaction. You no long have to ask and convince people into telling you.

The main point being that they empoverish TW2 comparatively to TW1. In TW1, you have several ways to get (actual) knowledge on monsters/potions and the rest as you could buy books or ask inhabitants. In the swamp for example, if you tour the old man around it, everytime you enter a new area, the man might reveal a portion of his vast knowledge.

They scrapped this way to acquire knowledge. A bad move.
As it was a strong point, I expected they expanded on it rather than removing it.

And yet they added other ways as well - you now acquire knowledge the more you encounter and interact with the monsters themselves for example.

Originally Posted by kalniel
And yet they added other ways as well - you now acquire knowledge the more you encounter and interact with the monsters themselves for example.

Exactly, you don't need books, if you kill few or come in contact with few you learn about them as well.

Also you can talk to NPCs and learn info about what's going on or what's their view on this. I found lot of this in Ch2. Some time they will have 3 or 4 things you can ask them but they will only tell you about 1 or 2 but not all. I found this alot with the soldiers in the king camp. I guess may be its less interaction compared to TW1.

Originally Posted by kalniel
And yet they added other ways as well - you now acquire knowledge the more you encounter and interact with the monsters themselves for example.

TW1 monster lore ability reworked, not that new.

You might need books for one shot monsters.

Originally Posted by Maylander
I must say, one particular ending seems to yield a significantly better result than the others.

Indeed.

I replayed the game from the end of chapter 1 and I´d say the route has overall a bit more fleshed out content.
Dandelion and Zoltan are a bit more involved, environments a bit more varied, more main story/character aspects are revealed, there´s also more choices, side quests (including one pretty good "treasure hunting" one), slightly better itemization and generally a bit more gameplay variety.
Playing this route I´ve finished the game with level 37 worth of experience (level 35 is cap) whereas similarly quite completionist play through the other one yielded only level 33.
Besides some general complaints I´ve already mentioned in this thread, my only two complaints specific to this route would be that one of the monster contract quests is rather badly explained and the LotR references (not one, but at least three!) would be better cut out as they all feel very out of place.

Anyway, even though I think this iteration of ch2 + ch3 provides overall somewhat more fulfilling experience, that definitely doesn´t mean the other one lost its merit - it is significantly different story/character-wise, its version of chapter 2 has more unique feel and, well, is awesome and remains my favourite character in the game.

Yes DeepO, I also feel that path was a bit more fleshed out overall. Still, the difference between the two paths is impressive, considering it's based on the player's decision.

@JDR-There is no doubt that I prefer the sandbox type of games. I'm kinda enjoying TW2, but it has some serious flaws in my opinion. The biggest flaw is the game forces Geralt time and time again to take an action to fit their story, instead of letting me, the player, choose.

There are many times where Geralt will surrender to a single foe or group of foes, when he has just defeated 50 times that number in a previous scene. Player choice is completely gone, replaced by story choice. I absolutely hate that. Why would the deadliest blade in the world, turn over his weapons to anyone? Hmm, here's a spoilery situation that also drove me nuts. Don't read if you haven't done the Squirrel path in Chapter 2:

Originally Posted by crpgnut
There are many times where Geralt will surrender to a single foe or group of foes, when he has just defeated 50 times that number in a previous scene. Player choice is completely gone, replaced by story choice. I absolutely hate that. ]

There are player choices as well though, and at least they actually matter in this game, which is more than you can say about 95% of crpgs.

Originally Posted by Maylander
Still, the difference between the two paths is impressive, considering it's based on the player's decision.

Definitely.

One other thing in regards the very end (path independent):

1/4 or 1/3 through Chapter 2 …
The only thing I would say is I do find the wilderness environments a bit restrictive as I did the Witcher 1.
They are not actually that big and the boundaries seem more artificial than, say , Risen. But its a completely different game I know.
I guess Dark Waters will return for my exploration fix.

New Vegas got distances between towns and lairs about right from a realism standpoint.

The other thing I would say, is in Ch1 you can do a bit of sneaking at a large house. This really reminded me of the thief series and would happily have a whole game set in a larger city based on the Flotsam architecture and Red engine. Only if the loading screens were gone though.

I dunno. There is something I can't put me finger on re: depth of gameplay. There should be more player reward for creative thinking and climbing into places, changing plot events. (Is there any actual reason not to do violent guard takedowns?). There is a lot it does right - maybe I need to replay again and choose different paths to see everything.

Also equipment upgrades seem oddly paced, this may be due to non-linear ability to complete quests.
These are all only minor points really. It generally feels very similar to the first game.

Originally Posted by huggster

The other thing I would say, is in Ch1 you can do a bit of sneaking at a large house. This really reminded me of the thief series and would happily have a whole game set in a larger city based on the Flotsam architecture and Red engine. Only if the loading screens were gone though.

There are 2 sneaking events in ch1 in that house. In the first event if you sneak and got behind the house and look through the window you get some additional story info by way of conversation(cut scene) which you don't get if you kill people. Its not much but something…

Originally Posted by lostforever
In the first event if you sneak and got behind the house and look through the window you get some additional story info by way of conversation(cut scene) which you don't get if you kill people. Its not much but something…

Originally Posted by crpgnut
@JDR-There is no doubt that I prefer the sandbox type of games. I'm kinda enjoying TW2, but it has some serious flaws in my opinion. The biggest flaw is the game forces Geralt time and time again to take an action to fit their story, instead of letting me, the player, choose.

I think I get what you are saying in relation to how the choices are related to their story and not exactly what you as player will do. However the choices the game gives are still within the character of Geralt . I think I prefer it this way. Let explain.

This is is not sandbox game and but rather a story driven game series. They are going to make a follow up and the story has to continue there and sort of make sense. So I think they can't just let the player make any old choices they want. If they did that the follow up will be way to complicated to make and it will be a let down to player who do not see their choices and consequences in the follow up.

Take Dragon Age 1 and Dragon Age 2. You had many different choices but many were simply not followed through in the second game. They simply ignored many of the choices in DA1.

So given TW2 is not sandbox and rather a story driven game, once has to accept that there is going to be limitation and you just can't simply make any choices you want.

Originally Posted by DeepO

Spoiler

You also get a component neeeded for a special kayran trap (afair not obtainable otherwise) and a pretty good armor that way.

Oh yes forgot about that

Originally Posted by lostforever
So given TW2 is not sandbox and rather a story driven game, once has to accept that there is going to be limitation and you just can't simply make any choices you want.

I'm okay with this, but the choices sometimes are not logically what Geralt would choose to do. Why would Geralt give up his weapons to a single guard, when there is absolutely no reason to do so? Illogical.

I should again point out that I'm having fun with the game, it just gets a little dull being led by the nose constantly from one plot point to the next. I don't find much motivation to do the things I'm required to do. I kinda doubt I'll finish the game because I'm not strongly enough tied to the story. The game wants you to play at a fast pace too, and I'm a "stop and smell the roses" type of guy. I do feel I've gotten my money's worth out of what I have played. I replayed the Prologue and Chapter 1 three times.

Yes related to sneaking, those events are what made me crave more! I guess I have been spoiled by Looking Glass studios ….
Arx Fatalis had a bit as well.
And risen come to think of it, about the same light sneaking.

Just feels like your using your wits.

Originally Posted by crpgnut
I'm okay with this, but the choices sometimes are not logically what Geralt would choose to do. Why would Geralt give up his weapons to a single guard, when there is absolutely no reason to do so? Illogical.

What is this instance that you keep referring to? Please don't tell me you're talking about having to leave your weapons at the door to Loredo's place. Why would that be illogical?

Originally Posted by crpgnut

Spoiler

You get a quest to clear a mine to find an ingredient. The game decides to allow the 3 stooges to accompany you. They're nearly useless in a fight, they don't say hardly anything in the mine, and they absolutely get in the way nearly every step of the way. That was just brutal.

They are useful for an alchemist. Most encounters happen after opening a door. Without them to soak damage and attract attention, characters with alchemy that provides nothing to deal with closed space situation are simply cooked.