[rage] I think that this review is a TOTAL BS^2, only 55%? Why? Only one answer...because it's f'ing CDPR , not Bioware, not stupit Bethesda - CDPR. Unknown studio that gave its best to create as entertaining game as possible...and those f'ers gave it 55%. If ploughing Bioware made TW2 they wouldn't f'ing dare to give it less than 7, I'm sure of it. [/rage]

Uh, nope. They gave Dragon Age 2 a 25 if i'm not mistaken ;)

He called the story Tolkien-esque? I'm sorry but that's crazy. I've read most of Tolkien's work and in many ways The Witcher is like the anti-Tolkien.

The one valid complaint he has are the control/input delays.

GameCritics? Never heard of 'em.

You can't take bad reviews personally. Some reviewers are prone to ragequits at the first sign of difficulty, and letting some nobody reviewer that no one has ever heard of get to you isn't a good precedent to set.

The big reviewers loved it. Let's assume they're bigger for a reason, chalk it up as a win, and move on :)

who are Gamecritic's? never heard of them either

Well now you've heard of them, and the only reason is that they gave TW2 55%.

He's the same guy that gave the Witcher 1 a bad review and had not even finished it. I think he quit in chapter 2 or smthg.
He had the balls of defending that and claim he got "enough" of the game to make a judgement... Yeah, a "real pro"... scumbag.

Whatever ... all reviews are opinions, and the opinion of someone who gets too frustrated with a game to finish it (TW1 was buggy as hell on launch) is going to be a negative one.

Heck, I'm sure a whole bunch of people who couldn't get past the prologue thought TW2 is a terrible game.

So long as a review is rational, that is ... if someone says "this game sux. why? err .. just 'cos" then they are just retarded.

Apparently its the same wherever you go with critics. Look at movie critics. It used to be about presenting the movie to viewer in a 'you might like this, you might dislike this" format so you could judge for yourself, now if the movie doesn't fit their 'political agenda' its bad.

On average, movie that critics say are utterly terrible and acts of sin against nature - tend to be the ones that are awesome and make hundreds of millions of dollars. The ones they praise as being saintly, are usually backhanded political soap box speeches.

Inevitably it had to boil over into the game industry.

There's the point. It is a poorly designed, mostly unknown website. This wouldn't be the first case when someone tried to raise visitor count with low score reviews...

Judging them for using old/beta screenshots rn. Couldn't they take their own?

All critics occasionally wield their status as critics to tear into the games they find too difficult. Yahtzee (whom I like very much) had an epic ragequit in both Witcher and Witcher 2.

Them's the breaks.

Critic doesn't need to love the game, but he HAS to be FAIR...and this prick obvieously underrated TW2. I understand 7/10 - someone doesn't like Witcher lore, but he has to give such a score because of visuals, sound, and storyline( these 3 are undoubtedly game's pros)
Other critic fell in love with the lore and gave the game 9 or even 9.5. No matter how you hate Geralt, his world and CDPR...score less than 6.5 - 7 is just ridiculous.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions. No need to take it personally or accuse them of being pro-BioWare or Bethesda fanboys. Furthermore, even the best assets of W2 (plot, choices, graphics) have their flaws. In my opinion, TW2 suffers from being perceived as overhyped , so I can understand why some critics can be particularly harsh with this game, as well some disappointed gamers, who thought TW2 is a second coming of cRPGs. As long as their criticism is valid and isn't about bashing for the sake of bashing, it's okay.

Unless they're ignorant douchebags who don't even finish the games they 'review'. Then it's not okay.