It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
The Witcher 2DESTRUCTOID Review(152 posts)(152 posts)
(152 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
This is my favourite topic
Posted May 23, 2011
ALL net and games mag reviews should be printed on toilet paper to at least make them slightly useful.

I still remember missing fallout 2 for 5 months because i read a mag review from some turd who simply didnt like the genre,

now i just read forums first,as here is where you can get an honest idea of a game.

most reviewers will give a crappy review if they dont get a free copy and a gift pack.
Posted May 23, 2011
avatar
therpgstore: And this is a flat lie:

"That said, there is some notable texture pop-in and laughable character animation, and clothing constantly collides with human bodies, even on NPCs who have armor that should have been designed specifically for them. It's unsettling to try and talk to a character whose shoulder pads are jammed into their face."
avatar
NewYears1978: Yeah, I haven't noticed anything like this at all...animations seem fine also.
Humm there was but not in the conversations, the swords sometimes got kinda crazy and I had to re-equip them do resolve the problem but in conversation I never got that.

Well it is a honest review and some of the problems are there, in fact the act 3 is really bad and rush but I don't agree with some things. The witcher 2 is a solid RPG with good dialogues and excellent VAs *cof*dragonageVAs*cof* in my book it is a game for 8 and not 6.
Posted May 23, 2011
avatar
Red_Avatar: The rolling is vital, though. Without it, combat would become like Oblivion: a game of parry, hit, parry, hit. Dull and repetitive. Rolling means you can flank, attack their backs, quickly evade, etc. How you can call it silly when it adds an important element to the combat ... it really wouldn't work without it. The Demonoid review makes a mistake there as well, calling Geralt slow when the rolling is what makes him fast and is essential to be used.
My own problem with the rolling isn't the mechanic itself; it's that Geralt ALWAYS rolls. Why aren't there alternate animations where Geralt jumps over enemies or flips backwards (for example)?
Post edited May 23, 2011 by BandyGreensacks
Posted May 23, 2011
avatar
ArnoldJ.Rimmer: ALL net and games mag reviews should be printed on toilet paper to at least make them slightly useful.

I still remember missing fallout 2 for 5 months because i read a mag review from some turd who simply didnt like the genre,

now i just read forums first,as here is where you can get an honest idea of a game.
Goodness, I hope you don't mean *these* forums.


avatar
ArnoldJ.Rimmer: most reviewers will give a crappy review if they dont get a free copy and a gift pack.
I have noticed some reviewers seem to be bit irritated at the lack of an advance copy, and the game will probably suffer for that a little.
Posted May 23, 2011
avatar
TheRedGuy: I played the Witcher 2 and even though I loved it and plan to play it a second time, there's no denying the rolling is silly and the auto targeting is even more grating with a controller (ironically). Not to mention enemies seem to have some sort of aggression perimeter making something that should be advanced and tactical, like traps, simply turned into rolling in front of the enemy and waiting for them to trigger a bomb.
avatar
Red_Avatar: A game like this, is what you make of it. I had an argument with someone on another forum because he basically said "the combat sucks, you have to run away to recover health all the time". I said: if you play the game in such a way that you constantly lose health, then you need to improve or work on it because this is not the way you're supposed to play it.

It's similar to you with your traps: that's not the best way to use them so don't blame the game for that. Traps are for covering exits (when you suspect enemies might appear) and this happens a lot in the game. I managed to take out a whole gang of elves because I suspected an ambush. Put snares everywhere and they never even got to me - died within seconds. For what you want to do, bombs are much more suitable.

And nearly every RPG has an aggression perimeter so that's a bit of a weak point as well. It's just the way these games work - otherwise you could just lure them towards guards. The RPGs that I can think of that let you lure enemies far ahead, were always exploited this way (Ultima Online for example) and that's hardly fun.

The rolling is vital, though. Without it, combat would become like Oblivion: a game of parry, hit, parry, hit. Dull and repetitive. Rolling means you can flank, attack their backs, quickly evade, etc. How you can call it silly when it adds an important element to the combat ... it really wouldn't work without it. The Demonoid review makes a mistake there as well, calling Geralt slow when the rolling is what makes him fast and is essential to be used.
But you've mentioned the forest which is arguably the only liberating portion of the game, as opposed to the slightly more linear portions later on. The Queen fight for example, traps had to be deployed whilst avoiding her, which bring up the aggression issue. If you stepped out of her "nest" she would retreat giving the player breathing space which is exploitable. I sometimes couldn't get an enemy to trigger my trap because it would simply turn away.

And there's nothing wrong with the rolling apart from how it's *always* done. That Letho's fight had me rolling like a ball downhill the entire time. Acrobatic moves would've worked as well as maybe more defensive options with the sword.
Posted May 23, 2011
6 seems harsh but the guy did give dragon age 1 a 7.5 at its release time. So it seems he is usually harsh when it comes to final scores.
Posted May 23, 2011
I read the review and it's very obivious he decided to give Witcher 2 low score before he even started to play the game with most likely motive being pissing off PC RPG players and getting page views.

He just nitpicks about some things, throws in some blatant lies (like quests being mainly "kill these" and "collect these" type) and ignores _all_ the strong points this game has. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't even play through the game and just picked complaints from forums and wrote a "review".

edit: Some people pointed out in comments that this same reviewer has trashed other harder than average games in his reviews... Castlevania 5/10 (85 on Metacritic) and Vanquish 5/10 (84 on Metacritic). And no, it's not case of him giving poor scores to all games, he gave COD:MW2 9.5 and Brink 7.5.
Post edited May 23, 2011 by aop
Posted May 23, 2011
avatar
Cyjack: I have noticed some reviewers seem to be bit irritated at the lack of an advance copy, and the game will probably suffer for that a little.
Spoiled. I reviewed it. It's understandable they wanted to wait for the first (major) patch. If that would affect your review, you're an awful reviewer with little integrity.
Post edited May 23, 2011 by chautemoc
Posted May 23, 2011
The Witcher 2 is a great game, a better one than many recent cRPGs by a whole order of magnitude, or two. Its design however isn't one of this strengths.

I have to say that I can see why some people, especially new or less grizzled players feel the prologue to be unusually unforgiving. If we can get through it quite easily I thought it shouldn't mean that their feedback is to be discarded. Playing TW2 for a second time, I think I understand now where they're coming from.

Teaching some of the most essential combat features, like blocking, using signs, using potions and traps, through tool-tips that remain displayed only for a brief time during deadly dragon attacks, or hectic melee combats, seems indeed a pretty irrational design decision to me.

Yes, there is the journal and the manual, but seriously, players don't read those anymore till they're at least good couple of hours into the game (The sad thing is that the journal is a very good read, and so is the manual ).

The same goes for the first boss battle ("Kayran"), which leaves a good part open to guess work, and, dare I say, way too many players out in the dark, clueless as to how proceed, unless they check some online resource, like these forums.

Then, there are the chapters 2/3, during which the combat becomes so easy that I had a hard time believing I was playing the same game.

I admit I have a strong bias to see Geralt as an elite sword fighter, not some silly potion guzzler, trap juggler and weak circus-acrobat. I would very much prefer him to be able to stand toe to toe with enemies, duking it out a la Mount & Blade, which in my opinion still has the best (and yet pretty deadly) combat system to date.

I don't agree with the review, and its conclusion (6/10, and 7/10 for Dragon Age II, you've got to be kidding me ??), but the below makes pretty much sense to me.
Yet, by the time the game ends, you'll be cleaving through enemies like butter. If you spam your shield spell and unlock finishing moves, regular fights go from almost impossible to an insulting joke. It seems CD Projekt couldn't strike the right balance between character development and challenge, so just didn't bother. This is evidenced in the boss fights, which often rely on guesswork in order to beat, as players figure out the one convoluted, obscure strategy required in order to win. There's no challenge in that, it's just throwing shit at a wall and seeing what sticks
Post edited May 23, 2011 by nissa
Posted May 23, 2011
People are overreacting to this all. It's not like they set out to do something wrong or not enjoy a game. Destructoid is the most reputable gaming site out there since it doesn't take sides and has such a variety. Anyways, here's my copypasted post from the article:

"I find it to be a great game in many aspects, especially the story. Whilst I could never understand why someone finds it "dry", I can get why one would find it confusing due to the fact that a lot of it has to do with world and atmosphere rather than always about the dialogue. They actually tend to be rather sparce with dialogue, which I think is one reason that The Witcher and its sequel excel over the Mass Effect and Dragon Age series. There is something to care about rather than just having someone. On that regard, I also find the characters pretty cool as well.

The voice acting, I will admit, has its major downsides but there is a lot to be said about how each one is rather unique. Geralt's definitely improved even though Triss has taken a dive. Vernon Roche is great I feel and Foltest was just amazing to have for the opening. Power, respect, and comedy all in one. Most of the dwarves are pretty good, and Dandelion has improved greatly as well. Overall, massive improvement from the first in making the world inviting.

I will admit the combat is rather iffy and has a steep learning curve, but as you said it can get very good once you're knee deep in. It's still strategic though, which is contrary to what you said, and reaps enjoyment from me. Maybe I just suck and still need to keep fighting the Witcher's way in the later part of the game, I don't know. What I do feel though is that it's very different but very effective.

It's an acquired taste, but I would heartily recommend it to anyone on the fence about it. Astounding RPG, and a few hiccups shouldn't sway you from it. These sorts of things are typical when you have such a massive experience."
Posted May 23, 2011
He brings up some good points but I feel like 6/10 is way too low.
Posted May 23, 2011
Jim Sterling review=nuff said.That guy is anti PC and thinks were all "wankers" his words not mine
His words:http://www.destructoid.com/wankers-world-of-goo-has-a-90-piracy-rate-111343.phtml

Hes an attention seeking numbnut and hes done this for pure site attention and controversy only.Im not even going to read his drivvle as he a complete "insert rude words here"
Post edited May 23, 2011 by Scott3vil
Posted May 23, 2011
avatar
Skoltnik: So if i dont like something you like, im a moron? Great...
avatar
NewYears1978: No. But it is true that this review sucks. There are some valid things said in the actual review..but the score of 6/10 is ridiculous.
Its not ridiculous its LUDICROUS (also my stage name)
Posted May 23, 2011
actually hez a well know troll and a pc gaming hater
Posted May 23, 2011
avatar
GoodGuyA: People are overreacting to this all. It's not like they set out to do something wrong or not enjoy a game. Destructoid is the most reputable gaming site out there since it doesn't take sides and has such a variety. Anyways, here's my copypasted post from the article:

"I find it to be a great game in many aspects, especially the story. Whilst I could never understand why someone finds it "dry", I can get why one would find it confusing due to the fact that a lot of it has to do with world and atmosphere rather than always about the dialogue. They actually tend to be rather sparce with dialogue, which I think is one reason that The Witcher and its sequel excel over the Mass Effect and Dragon Age series. There is something to care about rather than just having someone. On that regard, I also find the characters pretty cool as well.

The voice acting, I will admit, has its major downsides but there is a lot to be said about how each one is rather unique. Geralt's definitely improved even though Triss has taken a dive. Vernon Roche is great I feel and Foltest was just amazing to have for the opening. Power, respect, and comedy all in one. Most of the dwarves are pretty good, and Dandelion has improved greatly as well. Overall, massive improvement from the first in making the world inviting.

I will admit the combat is rather iffy and has a steep learning curve, but as you said it can get very good once you're knee deep in. It's still strategic though, which is contrary to what you said, and reaps enjoyment from me. Maybe I just suck and still need to keep fighting the Witcher's way in the later part of the game, I don't know. What I do feel though is that it's very different but very effective.

It's an acquired taste, but I would heartily recommend it to anyone on the fence about it. Astounding RPG, and a few hiccups shouldn't sway you from it. These sorts of things are typical when you have such a massive experience."
Destructpoid the most reputable site? BWHAHAHAHAHAHA< BWHAHAHAHA. jim sterling has a history of not liking PC games and PC rpg's in general and has been accused many times of giving good games bad scores to increase site hits. Hes a troll reviewing games.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
This is my favourite topic
Community
The Witcher 2DESTRUCTOID Review(152 posts)(152 posts)
(152 posts)