No, from the first book on, all of Geralt's horses have been named Roach (Rutilus rutilus - the fish). The guy was named Roche.

I got it downloaded at last, but it's saying I need to download one more file, where is this file, I used the GOG downloader, as at the moment I find galaxy a resource hog.

All the best

[edit] I'll hazard a guess and say it's that patch 1.02

[edit2] all installed *fingers crossed /toes /legs * TW2 makes my cpu scream..

if you don't see me post in the next day or so, it means my system died!

Well I tried it on low, and it's looks fine to me, my cpu Wasn't going mental, the frame rate seems ok [well there were only two movable objects on the screen!!] I'll have to rebind the keys, I was trying to punch everything, jumping was fun, esp when I jumped off the wall and died.

Well done CDPR / GOG

I'll play it once I finish TW2

Phenom II X4 965BE [not overclocked]
GTX 750 ti 2GB OC [low profile]
8GB Ram 1600
1024 x 768 [native screen res [10 year old 14" Vga monitor]]
Win 7 64

I had a quick look at the user.settings file, and some settings are on high, even though I selected low from the in game options] it will need a tweak.

Hmm, Guess I need to expand my knowledge of the Witcher Universe as I wasn't aware their were books out, I knew of a couple comic books but don't have those.

Thanks for the heads up I'll go check out Amazon and see what I can dig up and maybe have some extra reading material.

<Thumbs up>

Still would have been funny naming it after the guy in TW2 though, hehe.

That seems like a pretty accurate review to me. It doesn't even stoop to just calling it pretty? What exactly are you looking for in a review?

Can't tell you what exactly Trilarion is looking for, but at least for me a review is by definition a critical evaluation. The example in question reads like an ad instead. Its superficial, no pros and cons, no comparisons, no info about gameplay/UI/Quests, nothing specific whatsoever. Therefore I wouldn't consider it helpful.

FYI: the game works smoothly (40-50 fps depends on area size) on High settings on my FX6100 + R9 270X.
I haven't experienced single crash after first 4h of the game.

BTW... W3 looks good even on Low setting :p

That's a professional review you're describing. These are user experience reviews, and the quoted piece certainly matches the experience that the Witcher 3 offers. Frankly, unless you feel like shelling out a bit of cash for it, you're lucky to get "the game is good" from a user-experience review, and the one quoted actually makes the attempt to go into some level of depth. Seems to me like this is a case of bitching for the sake of bitching, or perhaps straight up entitlement issues.

Maybe "some level of depth" is open to debate. The first thing that came to my mind when I read the example was "sounds like an insomia-sale Jack Keane 2 review".
Besides, I doubt that "the game is good" is all you can get from a user-experience review. Sure, there are plenty of those, here and anywhere else. But usually there are also some that qualify as "review" by the defition I gave earlier. And the latter I rate as helpful.

In my view there is nothing accurate inside, just very general buzwords. And it is really very boring to read. What I'm looking for is a specific, detailed, balanced, believable, plain language, summary of the game, not a general statement of praise or disapprovement. This is not helpful as a review, even if it is of course a valid opinion. But this would be for the rating, not for the review.

In short: don't tell me if you like it or not but why you like it and in answering why be as specific as possible. Everything else is not helpful and should not even be written.

As it is currently reading reviews here about Witcher 3 (and quite some other titles) is a big waste of time. Basically writing most of the "game is good" or "game is not good" reviews was already a big waste of time. You won't learn much about the thing by reading them. So I won't do it again.

I get that you're looking for "becauses", not just subjective statements of unqualified opinion - I'm just saying that's a lot of thought to ask of someone who isn't doing it professionally.

Since writing a review is optional (and no one asks you to), you could as well deliver some reasons. Otherwise you could simply rate the game and stop there. It's pretty obvious that "the game is good/bad" reviews don't help anyone, isn't it?

Terrible game

Bugs. Unplayable on a pc.

Controls are mud.

Story is childish. Violence and nudity doesn't make a game.

Yeah, I agree, blatantly ingore everything good about this game and bitch about one specific thing: the PC port, which I haven't had a single problem with so far. good going, really shows how smart and passionate gamers are about their hobby.

You didn't know?

The Witcher (games and comics) is based on a series of short stories and novels by Andrzej Sapkowski.

Those books are among the best of fantasy literature I've ever read. Unfortunately (and inexplicitly) they are not yet all available in English (although fan translations may be around for most, some of pretty good quality).

I really recommend reading them all (as far as they're available). I did so before my second playthrough of TW1, and it was incredible to actually know about people like Triss Merigold, Zoltan Chivey and Dandalion (important characters with a lot of depth) and to understand the the references dropped in half-sentences and cut-scenes. The intro of TW1 is a direct adaption of the finale of the first short story "The Witcher" of the first book "The Last Wish". Nowadays I couldn't even imagine playing TW3 (or TW2 with Geralt's returning memory) without knowing about Yennefer of Vengerberg or Ciri.