Consolefag talks shit about Witcher 2 - The Article

[Darklife]

I would say the final chapter was maybe a little problematic in that respect. What is this council of mages everybody's concerned about, what's this Thanedd Island incident they're talking about and why should I care.

Oh, and I didn't get how the Lodge of Sorceresses was supposed to be this SUPER-SECRET big deal, either. It seemed weird to me that people in the game world were in shock by the fact that the sorceresses were conspiring. I mean, no shit!

Pretty much this.

 

[Gregz]

Oh yes, he cried, the Witcher II.
I can win by pressing ENTER too!

 

[DraQ]

That's one more thing I don't like about the second one. It was way too lore heavy on the books. The game assumes that everyone already bought all of the books and therefore it doesn't have to bother introducing a lot of the characters, locations and events to the player. Although I never read any of Sapkowski's work, I still managed to understand what the hell went on in the Witcher 1, but its second iteration was really confusing.

A game should be judged on its own merit, as should its plot. It shouldn't just be a circlejerk for people that get to see their favourite book characters rendered in 3D.

No. What the fuck. Get a brian.
The game has so little to do with the books, you can play without any knowledge and lose nothing. The plot relies mostly on CDP ideas, not borrowings from Sapkowski's novels. The characters and events are either a theatrical property, whose role is fully explained in game (important figures: kings, diplomat, sorceress, the great war with fantasy germans), or minor cameos to reward players knowing the books, not relevant for plot.

It's like someone said he don't get James Bond movies, because he didn't read any of the original novels.

It didn't seem that way to me. Friends that had read the books all remarked how the second one took so much more from them. After more than a year I can't really remember any specific example, but that was definitely my impression. That and the whole lack of player control, in favor of a much more independent Geralt really diminished the game in my eyes.

TW1 borrowed a lot from the books - there was a lot of recycled dialogues, situations and characters in it, almost as if CDPR couldn't make up their minds about whether they wanted to make an adaptation or continuation of the novels.

TW2 was more based on lore established in books, but at the same time a far more independent story and it was much better for this reason in terms of plot.

Yeah, interface sucked, cinematic killcams sucked, QTEs sucked, carry-over gear devaluation sucked, and alchemy was much worse, but as plot centric experience TW2 was superior to TW1.

 

[MikeHaggar]

It took me six and a half minutes to drink one potion in TW2. It was so slow that I usually didn't even bother with potions even if I knew they'd be useful. You can't even drink potions before some of the toughest fights, and even if you can, their effects will probably run out during a cutscene or something. I think there was only one place in the entire game where you neede Cat (Vergen tunnels), and stuff like Swallow and Tawny Owl weren't exactly useful either even though I carried them with me all the time in TW1. I really can't understand why and how they managed to screw up something that was done so well in the previous game.

yeah, what is the crap being able to DRINK FUCKING POTIONS while MEDITATING ONLY?!

prolly a way to make sure you dont drink them during battles. it wouldve been fine if we didnt have to watch him slowly drinking it everytime lol

 

[Carrion]

prolly a way to make sure you dont drink them during battles.

I thought Quen was in TW1 for exactly that reason. TW2's system just encourages metagaming since the potions have so short durations. Drink a couple when you think you'll need them and they'll probably run out right in the middle of a battle or a cutscene.

 

[made]

but as plot centric experience TW2 was superior to TW1.

No. TW2 writing felt generic and americanized compared to TW1. TW1 was perfect until the point when Alvin and the Chipmunks started to play the dominant role in the story. It may have copied passages word for word from the books which I guess lead to some wtf moments if you were familar with them, but for someone who never read them that wasn't a problem.

 

[DraQ]

No. TW2 writing felt generic and americanized compared to TW1.

Compared to pretty much comic-book plot of TW1?

I didn't find TW1 writing to be bad, I definitely enjoyed it, but it had clear hurr-durr evil villains and epic, world-changing plot, not to mention lore inconsistencies with the books.

TW2 was much more of a political clusterfuck with a lot more ambiguity, consistency and was much more original. It was therefore better.

TW1 was perfect until the point when Alvin and the Chipmunks started to play the dominant role in the story.

So in other words TW1's writing was good until the actual plot began? That's not exactly whgat I would call praise.
Yes, running around hunting monsters in order to not be completely broke was fun, atmospheric and welcome departure from epic shit, but the actual writing was much inferior.

It may have copied passages word for word from the books which I guess lead to some wtf moments if you were familar with them, but for someone who never read them that wasn't a problem.

Unfortunately I'm not someone who has never read them, so it was pretty baffling because I never figured if it was a tribute, fear of not getting the right feel or creative bankrupcy.

In any case it was pretty cheap.

 

[MikeHaggar]

oh yhea, i bought the first witcher book and read like 50 pages and then i stopped because i got sucked into icewind dale harder then a rich fat mans cock gets sucked in by a taiwanese whore. i should start reading it again.
was quite good i think. nothing spectacular but deffinetly good so far atleast.

 

[made]

I've said before that the game would have been better off without Alvin and the whole prophecy/time travel mumbo-jumbo, just focusing on the Salamandra on the personal story side, with the civil war as the backdrop. Hence why I think the plot peaked halfway through and went downhill from there.

But that's not all there is to writing. NPCs were more memorable, dialogue more interesting, Geralt himself a deeper character vs. the All-American Action Hero he was in pt2.

TW2 had Letho, that one elf that dies in ch2, the "nietoperze!" scene, and... uh, that's about all I recall atm.

TW1 had Vesemir, the young Witcher that dies defending KM, the grumpy Witcher, villagers that try to scam Geralt, the Fistech addict guard, Talar, the detective, depraved witch vs. depraved villagers moral ambiguity, and a much more worn-down, philosoraptoring Geralt. All of which contributed to an outstandingly atmospheric and engaging world, which is what I call good writing.

 

[Gord]

No. TW2 writing felt generic and americanized compared to TW1.

Generic would be more like "discover you are the chosen one and save the world from an ancient evil", something they completely evaded.
Instead we get a morally relatively ambigous and personal story.
I also don't see much americanization there, what are you refering to?

 

[Infinitron]

The two Witcher games are quite different from each other but neither can fairly be described as generic. Though the second game seems to borrow heavily from Game of Thrones, so it might be considered less inspired in that respect.

 

[made]

No. TW2 writing felt generic and americanized compared to TW1.

Generic would be more like "discover you are the chosen one and save the world from an ancient evil", something they completely evaded.
Instead we get a morally relatively ambigous and personal story.
I also don't see much americanization there, what are you refering to?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying TW2 story was bad. It was political intrigue done right, compared to, say, DA's failed attempt at the same.
But the overall presentation, from dialogues, over cutscenes, to characterization felt like a by-the-books Hollywood production aimed at an American audience. Whereas TW1 had a unique, slavic feel to it that was unlike any other game.

 

[Gord]

Well, it certailnly still had a lot of easter-european machismo...

: x

 

[tuluse]

Oh, and I didn't get how the Lodge of Sorceresses was supposed to be this SUPER-SECRET big deal, either. It seemed weird to me that people in the game world were in shock by the fact that the sorceresses were conspiring. I mean, no shit!

That doesn't seem to be a problem with referencing the books so much as just bad writing.

 

[Psquit]

Can we all just agree that the Witcher 2 is Popamole done right by today standards

 

[Roguey]

Can we all just agree that the Witcher 2 is Popamole done right by today standards

Only if they improved combat and got rid of the recursive dialogue trees which are my two biggest pet peeves.

 

[Psquit]

Only if they improved combat and got rid of the recursive dialogue trees which are my two biggest pet peeves.

i can agree to that.