Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Review Of Monsters, Men and BROche

Mangoose

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
25,045
Location
I'm a Banana
Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity
Mrowak said:
1)
http://rpgcodex.net/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=1666461#1666461

Vault Dweller said:
I agree with the statment that the story-driven nature of the game somewhat limits player's freedom. However, I cannot say the end result makes the game flawed. Especially when I think of great story-driven RPGs which did C&C part much worse than TW2 such as Betrayal at Krondor, or Planescape.
Betrayal at Krondor was a huge game with tons of places to explore and mini adventures at every step. Planescape had stronger writing and interaction with the world.

The Witcher IS a great game, there is no doubt about it. However, I wouldn't call it an RPG and I wouldn't say that choices & consequences is a strong aspect of the game.
2).

http://rpgcodex.net/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=1667008#1667008

Vault Dweller said:
Then again, I think no one lamented that you couldn't join Delekhan in Betrayal at Krondor, or you had to fight Ravel in Planescape. There's simply a limit for C&C in story-driven RPGs, in the same way there is in a well prepared Pen&Paper campaign led by a competent DM.
Isn't that what I said?

The Witcher 2 is a very enjoyable game. I like it more than the first game, but the C&C aspect isn't strong and I suspect it's because the game is too story-driven, much like PST, which also wasn't known for non-linearity or choices & consequences.

3).

http://rpgcodex.net/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=1668651#1668651

Vault Dweller said:
Black_Willow said:
Gragt said:
Black_Willow said:
But it's still insignificant. Who needs one more way to deal with Myrkul or yet another soul devourer ability?

How's that insignificant? You arbitrarily decide that there is no need for those, but C&C is about closing some doors and opening others.

I't insignificant because it doesn't change the gameplay. It's like choosing weapon A or B as a reward for a quest.
Multiple quest solutions and alternative ways to play the game (it's almost impossible to beat the game with high hunger without the devourer ability) aren't the same as different weapons or costs rewards.

Either you just don't get it, in which case trying to explain is a waste of time, or you see absolutely no value in multiple quest solutions and paths, in which case, why are you arguing? Nobody's saying that the Witcher 2 is a bad game.

4). This one is from IronTower forums

http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/index.php/topic,2064.msg67660.html#msg67660

So, basically, it sounds like a well done adventure game with actiony combat and a fork in the middle. The game's short, from what I've heard, so instead of doing a lengthy linear sequence with minor options, they did a Y design, shortening the game.
You do realize all these quotes were from the beginning of last month, when he was STILL IN CHAPTER 2. Let me quote you the first line of the 4th link that you put up:

VD said:
Played some more, still in Chapter 2. Random thoughts:...

So, yes, VD did change his fucking mind after he finished the game, or at least passing Chapter 2. Especially given that the talent selection overpowers your character when you play past Chapter 2.

The review's conclusion is very simple, if you have some reading comprehension and don't miss out on important details (see above): The game is bad except for graphics. That's it.
 

commie

The Last Marxist
Patron
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
1,865,249
Location
Where one can weep in peace
Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Divinity: Original Sin 2
Excidium said:
Clockwork Knight said:
Stop putting quotes around review, you damn potatos. This bears repeating.

treave said:
Had VD & VoD done this with, say, Oblivion, the butthurt wouldn't have been anywhere near as strong and the same people claming that this wasn't a 'review' would be lauding their literary skills to the heavens.
True.

"Somebody is not treating my video game national pride with the respect it deserves!" :x

Bullshit. The merits of the 'review' as a review would still be called into question whether it's Oblivion, DA2 or TW2. Check out Roxor's Arcania review for a look how to write a critical review, full of jabs while still preserving the actual review aspect.

Of course it doesn't help that the whole premise on which some of the critique is based is fallacious namely the raging at the (lack of) MEANINGFUL C&C. This is doubly bad when you consider that the 'esteemed' author of this opinion piece had nothing but praise for the C&C of Dragon Age Origins despite empirically it not being in any way better than that of TW2 and for the most part inferior.
 
In My Safe Space
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Messages
21,899
Codex 2012
commie said:
This is doubly bad when you consider that the 'esteemed' author of this opinion piece had nothing but praise for the C&C of Dragon Age Origins despite empirically it not being in any way better than that of TW2 and for the most part inferior.
Maybe he finally understood the wrongness of his opinion about DAO and decided to repent?
 

Kaanyrvhok

Arbiter
Joined
May 1, 2008
Messages
1,096
Heavy Rain, Demon’s Souls or Arkham Asylum

For a single player action RPG they could do a lot worse. From what it sounds like they just didnt live up to it. You combine the challenge and progresion of Souls, the acting and pace of Heavy Rain and the mechanics of Arkham and you have the best action RPG ever made.
 

Regdar

Arcane
Joined
Apr 24, 2011
Messages
665
Kaanyrvhok said:
You combine the challenge and progresion of Souls, the acting and pace of Heavy Rain and the mechanics of Arkham and you have the best action RPG ever made.

I actually think the game would do better if the combat was based on combos, like in Arkham Asylum. They even have "cool, spectacular finishers", so why not go all the way?
 

Kaanyrvhok

Arbiter
Joined
May 1, 2008
Messages
1,096
^^ Devs are afraid to work backwards
Sea said it best

sea said:
The thing about making an action RPG is that you basically just need to make an action game outright, and then layer the RPG mechanics on top of that. If you can't make one, you have no place making action RPGs, it's that simple. The depth in such games comes from character development, skill selection, non-combat gameplay, and so on, so in actuality it's even more work to make a good action RPG than a good turn-based RPG, or a pure action game!
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
commie said:
Bullshit. The merits of the 'review' as a review would still be called into question whether it's Oblivion, DA2 or TW2.

It's easy to say when the game you consider shit doesn't have such review

Check out Roxor's Arcania review for a look how to write a critical review, full of jabs while still preserving the actual review aspect.

Oh wait lol

Of course it doesn't help that the whole premise on which some of the critique is based is fallacious namely the raging at the (lack of) MEANINGFUL C&C. This is doubly bad when you consider that the 'esteemed' author of this opinion piece had nothing but praise for the C&C of Dragon Age Origins despite empirically it not being in any way better than that of TW2 and for the most part inferior.

Ah I see where the problem now.
The famous selective reading.
"OMG I just saw the first two strings of them bashing mah gaem fuck this "review" "

I guess you completely missed points about the combat system, unlockables system, non-stop cutscenes, QTEs, bad progression design and unbelievable characters.

And why it doesn't have any of your C&C that every fanboy praised in the game is written in-depth too.
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
35,823
Liked reading this, though the tone felt inconsistent at times, some of the humor fell flat, and it could have elaborated more about how why specific features were bad. Overall the impression I got is that The Witcher 2 is worth playing if you think good graphics and certain story elements (characters, setting) are enough to make up for outright bad to meh everything else. Reminds me a bit of that Torment thing a lot of people like so much.
 

el Supremo

Augur
Patron
Joined
Jan 1, 2011
Messages
548
Location
City 13
Tormented Seph said:
Gordon Freeman said:
Tormented Seph said:
7 --- Why the Iorveth Path is more coherent (with the "Witcher's Code") than the Roche Path?

This I find an interesting statement, as my own feelings were exactly opposite. While I liked the Iorveth path's quests more, I cannot imagine why Geralt would folow a bunch of murderous elves all of the sudden. And fighting on the walls of the Verden, I, as a witcher, felt being really out of place. There shoud be an option to say "It is not my fight, bye, I'll be on my way".
Because the Scoiatels apparently seem to be a "bunch of murderers", but the truth is different...
They represent the idea of "diverse" (racism) and Iorveth has an ideal to fulfill...
Their methods are violent because they have suffered many wrongs,
and not coincidentally Geralt points out that the Wild Hunt is made by a race of Elves who did not suffer the same wrongs (If you read the books know that this is a group of Elves called Aen Elle, who comes from a parallel dimension, where no racism exists for Elves)...
It is exactly because I have read the books I have trouble to support murderous elves. Ideals and anti-rasism is nice and swell, but that noble race fights for their ideals by slaughtering every human they can find, just some random traveler on the road, some farmers working in the fields. Join them? Noble ideals and difficult past cannot give you licence for killing.
As for Aen Elle, read the last book again, I'd suggest. The world they are now living in, it is not their own. Ciri finds out what has happend with original, human population.
So what's wrong with the "Code"?
The problem is that Geralt like to support the "weakest", not the "strongest" (King, Noble, ecc)...so in that context who is the weak one? King Foltest? King Hanselt? The Lodge?
Or the poor people of Vergen and the Scoiatel?

Geralt, in the books, hates to support King and Noble.....it happens sometimes that he does it, but for two specific reason: make money and survive.
I have no problem with supporting Verden and it's inhabitants most of the time, once I get there.
My problem is the Flotsam. Joining the Elves back then is just weird. It makes no sense at all. I'd really like some expansion taking place between chapter 1 and 2, were you can switch sides.
Where is Shani?
Is this point not important for you?
Why Geralt start in love with Triss? Where's the real reason? Never explained...and why the imported savegame has no effect on this event? Never explained...
Geralt do not start in love with Triss. He just starts in bed with Triss. When you grow up you'll understand ;)
It is not important. Apparently Shani could not go, for whatever reason. And Triss have been available. Geralt being Geralt, he is not going to sleep alone. End of the story.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,035
I've decided to rewrite the review in a more appropriate tone.

Here is the intro:

Four years and one botched console port later, CD Projekt gives us The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings – a streamlined experience the studio’s hoping will appeal to a much wider audience. Now, being a massive RPG nerd, I understand that “streamlined” has become somewhat of a dirty word in the role-playing community as of late. Let me allay your very valid fears, friends. When I say that The Witcher 2 is streamlined, I don’t mean dumbed-down pants-on-head simple (*cough* Dragon Age II *cough*). I mean CD Projekt has replaced or improved all the needlessly cumbersome design decisions that plagued the first game, Mass Effect 2-style. Whereas the first game was a flawed gem that fell short of being a classic, The Witcher 2 is a masterfully crafted experience that ties the very best game mechanics from across the entire RPG spectrum to an engrossing story you won’t soon forget.

On combat:

Some people think the combat is too hard or too defensive in this game, but i disagree. Combat actually feels real, as if I am a real person with flesh and blood in a sword fight. When you pull off that perfect fight, parrying and dodging all swords thrown at you, using bombs to lower enemies guard, it's an amazing feeling. If you aren't switched on during a fight, you will die. This is how it should be in all RPG's.

The encounters are frantic and require skill, but not in a way that the developers needed to throw a tactical pausing mechanic in the mix that slows down the flow of combat. I'm finding the combat more satisfying than any RPG I've played before, action or turn-based. If only the story was a bit more interesting I'd be able to call this the best RPG I've yet played. This is coming from a CRPG vet so my bar's pretty high for game stories.
 

VentilatorOfDoom

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2009
Messages
8,600
Location
Deutschland
Sorry VD, but I do sense a certain underlying sarcastic tone, as if you're trying to make fun of your readers. Are you really that cynical?
 

Antihero

Liturgist
Joined
May 8, 2010
Messages
859
I'm not saying the game shouldn't have the piss taken out of it where piss taking is due (it was kind of a disappointment), but parts of the article just seem misleading, even in their humour. Sure, maybe I'm being too nitpicky, but...
The Witcher had a very old school interface that was too busy and too distractive, with portraits of monsters, key NPCs, and various descriptions. Maybe, just maybe such journals were all the rage when games had wire-frame graphics, but as we’ve mentioned the game is absolutely gorgeous and there is no need to clutter the journal with crude drawings.
Humourtrons at ambient levels, so I'll bite. TW2's journal has pictures and descriptions of key NPCs and monsters in it as well. Maybe not the same style as in TW1, instead going for a darker look. So I don't see the point in only showing TW1's journal to back up that claim. The UI itself of course is ugly and consolized.
The fist fighting tests your reflexes, practically removing the boundaries between you and your character. As Geralt watches his opponents, you’ll be watching flashing letters and quickly pressing A or D or even W and then quickly A, to be rewarded by mini-cutscenes of Geralt kicking ass.
I believe you forgot about the all important S. While you suggested the arm-wrestling is easy enough, all the QTEs are devoid of real challenge unless you have fine motor skill problems (not to belittle those who actually do). Besides the fact that QTEs universally suck in one way or the other, the real point is that it's just a prolonged waste of time. You could exploit the animation timings in TW1's boxing, but at least they tried to make it its own unarmed combat system. Thankfully they didn't keep using those button mashers to fill up a bar, which I personally found the most egregious. You might infer the QTE easiness from what was written, but it's too vague to really say anything useful unless you've experienced it yourself already, besides "QTEs. 'Nuff said."

Spirit Oil, for example (useful against spirits like wraiths, etc), did bestow +100% damage vs spirits in The Witcher, but in the sequel it does merely +20% damage, which means that a sword with 12-20 points of damage will be doing 14-24 points of damage instead.
Theoretically anyway. In reality there's a bug preventing silver swords from doing the extra damage. Should be fixed in the upcoming 1.3 patch, but meh. It's not like it was essential, but it stops people from trying to rebalance the combat themselves in that direction, which is overall easy enough to mod at least.

Some skills can be further enhanced by mutagens. Think Diablo 2’s item sockets. Some skills have sockets and you can shove there some mutagens dropped by monsters to increase your strength, which increases your armor since there is no Strength stat anymore, damage, vitality, spell range, and so on. If you like the idea, you should invest in Impregnation – an Alchemy skill that can increase the mutagens’ effect up to 500%. Sweet!
My math could be off, but did you mean 50%? Just looking at the GameBanshee chart quickly here, unless you're somehow saying that's the total effect over multiple mutagens... And you'd have to invest 5 to 6 points in the alchemy tree, no? And it isn't retroactive. Also, you can't loot another skill tree to put more powerful mutagens in it. It could be considered another flaw (in fact 1.3 is going to allow alchemy with mutagens), but most people seem to wait until they have the most powerful mutagen instead of wasting a slot on a lesser one.

While some opponents are fairly easy, be warned that some opponents are almost impossible to defeat even on Normal without the use of advanced tactics. Take the shield bearers, for example. The only way to beat them are either to hit the spacebar, roll behind them, and while they look around wondering where you went, stab them in the back, or to hit E to block, wait for him to attack you getting staggered in the process, then quickly hit him twice, rinse and repeat. It’s a bit too complex and we are well aware that many people have found it very challenging, being thoroughly confused as to whether to press E or spacebar in the heat of a battle, which, of course, is completely understandable. It’s clearly a case of too much catering to the hardcore audience.
Slight elevation in humourtron levels detected. Not that it's suddenly becomes all perfect, but there's always the Yrden and Axii signs as well, if not also Igni and Aard. Although I will say shield bearers felt artificially challenging. More just a thorn when there's a group of other enemies you need to dispatch first to have more leeway to take the shield bearers on.

I’d say that the group style is gone, but that would be incorrect. First of all, now that the artificial restrictions are gone, nothing stops you from attacking several enemies at once. However, if you’re a hardcore role-player who only acknowledges abilities that have skills, you can unlock a skill that does damage to multiple enemies. Voila! The problem is solved.
Care to elaborate? I think it was patch 1.2 that allowed you to hit multiple enemies without investing in the whirlwind skill, but supposedly the "splash damage" is zero although you probably get other effects (like stun maybe): (geralt_basic.xml:group_hit_mult->min/max = 0). Still, it's mildly annoying they did that. But the game does become easy mode when you get whirlwind and an upgraded Quen.
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
3,181
Vault Dweller said:
[review in a more appropriate tone]
:lol:
Professional. :thumbsup:

VentilatorOfDoom said:
Sorry VD, but I do sense a certain underlying sarcastic tone, as if you're trying to make fun of your readers. Are you really that cynical?
I don't think he was being serious about "rewriting the review". It was just an elaborate answer to our defiant potato comrades complaining about the original.
 

Mrowak

Arcane
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
3,947
Project: Eternity
Vault Dweller said:
I've decided to rewrite the review in a more appropriate tone.

Here is the intro:

Four years and one botched console port later, CD Projekt gives us The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings – a streamlined experience the studio’s hoping will appeal to a much wider audience. Now, being a massive RPG nerd, I understand that “streamlined” has become somewhat of a dirty word in the role-playing community as of late. Let me allay your very valid fears, friends. When I say that The Witcher 2 is streamlined, I don’t mean dumbed-down pants-on-head simple (*cough* Dragon Age II *cough*). I mean CD Projekt has replaced or improved all the needlessly cumbersome design decisions that plagued the first game, Mass Effect 2-style. Whereas the first game was a flawed gem that fell short of being a classic, The Witcher 2 is a masterfully crafted experience that ties the very best game mechanics from across the entire RPG spectrum to an engrossing story you won’t soon forget.

On combat:

Some people think the combat is too hard or too defensive in this game, but i disagree. Combat actually feels real, as if I am a real person with flesh and blood in a sword fight. When you pull off that perfect fight, parrying and dodging all swords thrown at you, using bombs to lower enemies guard, it's an amazing feeling. If you aren't switched on during a fight, you will die. This is how it should be in all RPG's.

The encounters are frantic and require skill, but not in a way that the developers needed to throw a tactical pausing mechanic in the mix that slows down the flow of combat. I'm finding the combat more satisfying than any RPG I've played before, action or turn-based. If only the story was a bit more interesting I'd be able to call this the best RPG I've yet played. This is coming from a CRPG vet so my bar's pretty high for game stories.

:bravo:

I especially liked the

Some people think the combat is too hard or too defensive in this game, but i disagree. Combat actually feels real, as if I am a real person with flesh and blood in a sword fight. :troll:

bit.

But say in all honesty VD, would you recommend this game to anyone if the person in question was interested in quality entertainment, but not necessarily in an RPG (as defined by Arcanum, Fallout etc. frame of reference). Can you imagine anyone in the right mind with IQ > 100 to derive enjoyment from it? If so who would these people be, (and do they have to be masochists)? In other words is TW2 an unredeemable piece of elky shit, or entertaining game?


VentilatorOfDoom said:
Sorry VD, but I do sense a certain underlying sarcastic tone, as if you're trying to make fun of your readers. Are you really that cynical?

You guys are amazing. Best :obviously: trolls evah. :love:
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
I was thinking new VD's review is a proper review because it praises my favourite game but then I saw this

VentilatorOfDoom said:
Sorry VD, but I do sense a certain underlying sarcastic tone, as if you're trying to make fun of your readers. Are you really that cynical?

Fuck you VoD! You just hate new games and haven't played TW2. VD writes a proper objective review here
 

latexmonkeys

Augur
Patron
Joined
Apr 6, 2010
Messages
233
Location
Walmart Land
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Multiple Sarcasm said:
VentilatorOfDoom said:
Sorry VD, but I do sense a certain underlying sarcastic tone, as if you're trying to make fun of your readers. Are you really that cynical?
I don't think he was being serious about "rewriting the review". It was just an elaborate answer to our defiant potato comrades complaining about the original.

I think a more accurate moniker for you would be "multiple failures to detect sarcasm," cumbersome perhaps but appropriate.
 

Tormented Seph

Scholar
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
90
Location
Italy
Gordon Freeman said:
It is exactly because I have read the books I have trouble to support murderous elves. Ideals and anti-rasism is nice and swell, but that noble race fights for their ideals by slaughtering every human they can find, just some random traveler on the road, some farmers working in the fields. Join them? Noble ideals and difficult past cannot give you licence for killing.
As for Aen Elle, read the last book again, I'd suggest. The world they are now living in, it is not their own. Ciri finds out what has happend with original, human population.
You're right, sorry I forget this particular...
Anyway, I think that the motives behind the actions of the Elves are fairly shared in the context of the world of The Witcher...a cruel and mature low fantasy world...
What would you do in their social and political situation?

I have no problem with supporting Verden and it's inhabitants most of the time, once I get there.
My problem is the Flotsam. Joining the Elves back then is just weird. It makes no sense at all. I'd really like some expansion taking place between chapter 1 and 2, were you can switch sides.
Loredo is a bastard, so I agree with the actions of Iorveth, maybe not in all actions or the shape a little too violent (in some cases) with which they act, but then again, they have strong motives for me...

But the point is that the choice between Roche and Iorveth is a choice between "Two Evils", as it has always been in the world of The Witcher (this concept is often repeated in the books, too)...
For this reason I hadn't too much problems to prefer Iorveth (in the first playthrough Iorveth, in the second Roche)...

Geralt do not start in love with Triss. He just starts in bed with Triss. When you grow up you'll understand ;)
It is not important. Apparently Shani could not go, for whatever reason. And Triss have been available. Geralt being Geralt, he is not going to sleep alone. End of the story.
Come on, forgive my English...(it's not my language ;) )...

I meant to say that Geralt and Triss start the game into bed without a real motivation (Geralt like to fuck, sure, but not to use a friend like Triss, I mean) , without someone has explained the real reason, or why Shani seems to no longer exist in that context (I imported a savegame that contains a romance with Shani)...
I hope is more clear in this way...






Anyway, new VD review is ---> :thumbsup:
Best troll evah! HAHAHHAHahahahahH!!! :lol:
 

Antihero

Liturgist
Joined
May 8, 2010
Messages
859
Tormented Seph said:
I meant to say that Geralt and Triss start the game into bed without a real motivation (Geralt like to fuck, sure, but not to use a friend like Triss, I mean)
Seems like something Triss would want anyway, although I've only read yet what was translated to English.

Anyway, new VD review is ---> :thumbsup:
Best troll evah! HAHAHHAHahahahahH!!! :lol:
Yes, but what, I ask, is the point unless it incites ominous legal threats from the developer to take the "review" down?
 

Tormented Seph

Scholar
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
90
Location
Italy
Antihero said:
Tormented Seph said:
I meant to say that Geralt and Triss start the game into bed without a real motivation (Geralt like to fuck, sure, but not to use a friend like Triss, I mean)
Seems like something Triss would want anyway, although I've only read yet what was translated to English.
Triss loves Geralt, we perceive this from the books...but Geralt loves only one woman in his life: Yennefer...
Now, in the first game CDP makes a choice: using the trick of "Amnesia" for using Triss as a romance option...
It's ok for me, also in the second game...but what about the real Geralt's feelings now? And what about the romance with Shani?
I understand some design decisions, but remain with the doubts about it...

And again, about Triss, for what we know from the books, Geralt look at her as a good and trusted friend, not as a "sex whore" with whom have sex when he wants...

Anyway, new VD review is ---> :thumbsup:
Best troll evah! HAHAHHAHahahahahH!!! :lol:
Yes, but what, I ask, is the point unless it incites ominous legal threats from the developer to take the "review" down?
CDP read the Codex? I don't think so... :lol:
 

Antihero

Liturgist
Joined
May 8, 2010
Messages
859
Tormented Seph said:
Now, in the first game CDP makes a choice: using the trick of "Amnesia" for using Triss as a romance option...
It's ok for me, also in the second game...but what about the real Geralt's feelings now? And what about the romance with Shani?
I understand some design decisions, but remain with the doubts about it...
I think it's already been mentioned she probably wouldn't leave to come with them, and in TW1 she harboured delusions about them becoming a real family with Alvin. And going by the BoE book anyway, she slept with Geralt the first opportunity she got like a witcher-groupie. I don't see her fitting in too well as field medic in Foltest's army. Also, just for the record, all of this romance talk is OK because it's not Bioware.

And again, about Triss, for what we know from the books, Geralt look at her as a good and trusted friend, not as a "sex whore" with whom have sex when he wants...
You have a point, but I think it only comes up twice in the game. In Flotsam, until you get to the ruins, she just teases you about getting on with one of the soldiers there. Plus can't you admit your "love" as one dialogue choice to Renuald aep Matsen? It's already sort of non-canonical, but there's still that pesky amnesia to consider even if he has recovered more memories of Yennefer. The opening tent scene might just be one of those things they later regretted.

CDP read the Codex? I don't think so... :lol:
Just officially rate it 1 potato out of 360.
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
3,181
Well, hey, be thankful it isn't "multiple successes to shrug at the off-chance of VoD being suddenly subtle in his sarcasm". Couldn't shove all that up your butt then, could you? ;)
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom