The Witcher 2 Enhanced Edition

[Havoc]

No way. Geralt is like the James Bond of the Witcher universe.

 

[RRRrrr]

What about Letho throwing a bottle of acid at Geralt that destroys his pretty face and Triss leaves him cause he is ugly
Or Geralt retiring and becoming fat. Then Triss leaves him.

 

[Havoc]

That sounds like a sidequest!

 

[Carrion]

The whole fight could've been avoided without the story suffering one bit. For example, you could have made Letho escape in the chaos when Broche attacks (Letho could've thrown a Zerrikanian Sun to momentarily blind/stun Geralt and the others to make the escape more plausible). Then, after the battle Roche's men or Iorveth's scouts could tell you that they saw Letho heading towards Flotsam. Then you could go to the town, find out that Triss is missing and ask around to find out what happened. Since Letho was working with his buddies, you could've also slightly altered the story and made Geralt fight Serrit, Auckes or someone else instead.

 

[made]

The script demands that Letho "spare" Geralt's life, does it not? IIRC he owed him one for something Gman did in the past so that made them even, but correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Havoc]

Geralt saved his life, so the scene where Letho spares his life is needed. Why? Exposition. We don't know who Letho is and him saying that he spares our life, because of something touches the hero's amnesia. Geralt has another reason to search for Letho.

 

[Mrowak]

The script demands that Letho "spare" Geralt's life, does it not? IIRC he owed him one for something Gman did in the past so that made them even, but correct me if I'm wrong.

The script can be altered in any way in order to accomodate better influence of gameplay onto the story. Otherwise any time the GM decides to fuck the player over can be justified by 'script demanding this and that'. Script is static while the game is dynamic. Because it's an RPG we are talking about script should serve the game, and not the other way round. Otherwise we end up with Bioware.

Personally the only way I see the that scene saved is intervention of an earlier esablished third party, invalidating Geralt's victory. For instance Auckes and/or Serrit could come to Letho's rescue (a minor change in narrative necessary) or bunch of underinformed Elves or even Sile who imprisons Letho and teleports with him somewhere (you are lead to believe they work together, wheres the truth is quite different).

In best case scenario this could unlock a number of consequences (e.g. Triss isn't kidnapped, so you have her in act 2 and instead of saving her in act 3 you get a different quest). Bonus points if you get 'better' consequences by actually losing the duel.

 

[hiver]

3. Letho using clever trick to turn the tides rather than simply bruteforcing his way through (see first battle with Javed in TW1) would work.

Do you mean that fight when Geralt fights Javed and the profesor both in the swamps, they knock him out, he falls down unconscious and then instead of killing him, they retreat and run away?

 

[toro]

3. Letho using clever trick to turn the tides rather than simply bruteforcing his way through (see first battle with Javed in TW1) would work.

Do you mean that fight when Geralt fights Javed and the profesor both in the swamps, they knock him out, he falls down unconscious and then instead of killing him, they retreat and run away?

Indeed.

 

[Carrion]

The script demands that Letho "spare" Geralt's life, does it not? IIRC he owed him one for something Gman did in the past so that made them even, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Not really. I mean, you could easily change those couple of lines where that is pointed out. Also, Letho can repay his debt by saving Triss at the end, which kind of makes him a bro regardless of him "sparing" Geralt's life or not earlier in the game.

Geralt saved his life, so the scene where Letho spares his life is needed. Why? Exposition. We don't know who Letho is and him saying that he spares our life, because of something touches the hero's amnesia. Geralt has another reason to search for Letho.

The exposition could've been woven into the dialogue, or there could have been a quest to search for Letho's belongings, notes, journals etc. I think a good investigation quest could've evoked the "who the fuck is this guy?" thought better than all the cinematic dialogues in the game. The story would work very well even without Geralt and Letho's confrontation at that point of the game.

I also completely agree with Mrowak's post.

 

[DraQ]

3. Letho using clever trick to turn the tides rather than simply bruteforcing his way through (see first battle with Javed in TW1) would work.

Do you mean that fight when Geralt fights Javed and the profesor both in the swamps, they knock him out, he falls down unconscious and then instead of killing him, they retreat and run away?

Indeed.

Yeah, their behaviour is derpy, but at least they don't just go "no, u" on you.

 

[Havoc]

Geralt saved his life, so the scene where Letho spares his life is needed. Why? Exposition. We don't know who Letho is and him saying that he spares our life, because of something touches the hero's amnesia. Geralt has another reason to search for Letho.

The exposition could've been woven into the dialogue, or there could have been a quest to search for Letho's belongings, notes, journals etc. I think a good investigation quest could've evoked the "who the fuck is this guy?" thought better than all the cinematic dialogues in the game. The story would work very well even without Geralt and Letho's confrontation at that point of the game.

I don't think it would be better. It would be great to have an investigation into Letho character, but they didn't go for that. It's still BETTER to have it woven into dialogue. Why? It's better to show. He doesn't kill him. Says couple of mysterious things and goes. The way they connected to gameplay was bad. If you lost in the fight, I would leave the cutscene. If you won, I would have Letho cheat - the acid in the face. Say the same things. BUT have the aftermath dialogues differ. Now everybody would say how much of scumbag and cheater the guy is and I would be more inclined to kill him in the end (for that acid). Maybe even a scar - "I've come for this. *points to his scar*"?

 

[Carrion]

I don't think it would be better. It would be great to have an investigation into Letho character, but they didn't go for that. It's still BETTER to have it woven into dialogue. Why? It's better to show. He doesn't kill him. Says couple of mysterious things and goes. The way they connected to gameplay was bad. If you lost in the fight, I would leave the cutscene. If you won, I would have Letho cheat - the acid in the face. Say the same things. BUT have the aftermath dialogues differ. Now everybody would say how much of scumbag and cheater the guy is and I would be more inclined to kill him in the end (for that acid). Maybe even a scar - "I've come for this. *points to his scar*"?

I don't think the cutscene really does the "showing" thing very well as the game still has to rub it in your face numerous times that you lost that fight and that Letho could've killed you if he had wanted to. There are some really neat, subtle things that TW2 does with cutscenes, but in this particular case there's a conflict between what works in movies and what works in games. Instead of being subtle the Letho fight ends up being clumsy, artificial and forced as the game takes control away from the player and does whatever the hell it wants to forward the plot in a predetermined manner. Having different cutscenes for different results would have improved the thing a lot, but I still don't want to see a cutscene decide the outcome of a fight for me. Movies may have the main character fight the main boss halfway through the movie for the sake of the story, but in games it's usually better to just leave that stuff out as the game always has to cheat itself out of that situation in some way. TW2 isn't any worse than most games that do this, but it surely doesn't pass with flying colors or come even anywhere near that.

I think overall TW1 was better as a game because the quests and the story were more player-driven and it didn't feel like the game was playing itself. The story went forward when you talked to people, finished quests, gained new information and in general just played the game and did stuff by yourself. In TW2 you are occasionally just thrown from one cutscene to another while the game basically force-feeds the story to you. The first Letho fight is just one instance where the gameplay of TW2 suffers because of the story, which is something that really shouldn't happen. I may sound a bit too harsh considering that I've enjoyed every second of TW2 on all of my four playthroughs, but I think that it just went too far with the cinematics.

 

[hiver]

Yeah, their behaviour is derpy, but at least they don't just go "no, u" on you.

Its not derpy, its completely dumbfuckingly retarded.

They fight him, then knock him unconscious and then they get frightened of his "provess" and run away into a portal?
Letho fight was designed in exactly the same way. Only done by slightly different means/mechanics and there was some sense that he had some kind of reason to not kill Geralt - although that never turns up afterwards, as far as i know.
What he said didnt make much sense at all.
it only seemed there is something more to it.

Only here Geralt wasnt unconscious and just lying with his face down as in Javed fight.
And there, Javed and Profesor (which are among worst villains ever designed), just wanted to kill him because he was in the way and bugging them.
Then they didnt. Because.... grhhhhhnngggg arrghh unghghghg glooorrrp. (thats the sound of complete retarded stupid shit, no-reason whatsoever)

It was actually worse than Letho fight, although not by much.

 

[DraQ]

Its not derpy, its completely dumbfuckingly retarded.

It doesn't have any bearing on the fact that plot-forced battle's resolution itself is much better in TW1 than in TW2.

We are not discussing characters motivations and brainfarts here - there is really no contest here - we are discussing them asspulling winning moves after getting soundly beaten by protagonist.

Not "why?" but "how?".

 

[made]

script should serve the game, and not the other way round.

The game's designers apparently disagree. Why single out the Letho fight when the entire game prioritizes a cinematic experience over gameplay? The only difference to Bioware is that it's better written; the concept is the same.

 

[hiver]

How it is "much better" you have two guys that only want to kill Geralt, have him unconscious two meters away from them - and then they just run away - because he is unconscious?

wtf Draq?

Im not trying to excuse Letho fight dumb solution. It is dumb.
Im just sayin... that fight with Javed isnt really the one that anyone should be mentioning in relation to this.

somebody in CDprojekt has some serious fucking problems with resolutions to boss fights. its like that someone thinks a boss fight must be the dumbest they can achieve. I think we should be lucky that one wasnt solved by QTEs.
At lest Letho isnt a ridiculous clown.

 

[DraQ]

How it is "much better" you have two guys that only want to kill Geralt, have him unconscious two meters away from them - and then they just run away - because he is unconscious?

Would you please fucking read what I've posted?

Motivations and character behaviour consistency is poo, but plan B gas bomb works much better than suddenly just asspulling Aard++.

 

[Mrowak]

How it is "much better" you have two guys that only want to kill Geralt, have him unconscious two meters away from them - and then they just run away - because he is unconscious?

Would you please fucking read what I've posted?

Motivations and character behaviour consistency is poo, but plan B gas bomb works much better than suddenly just asspulling Aard++.

One could argue that because Letho's Aard was ++ to begin with, there's nothing wrong with the cutscene.

The thing it is - in PnP terms it's just GM declaring 'Letho scored critical hit! You lose!' without even rolling a dice. It's just putting rules on hold, because 'the plot must go on'. From player's perspective it's contrived. As the example of Javed was from TW1 this one is equally (or even slightly less) wrong.

The question is here - what was the entire point of the fight if it doesn't serve any purpose, storywise? To have a pointless arcade boss-battle where I roll and roll around?

The only thing the plot had to do to save that scene was to give you a valid reason for the failure - one that stems from logic and/or gameplay.

Plot-development explenation:

Suddenly Auckes with 10 traitor elves he recruited appear - they surround you and you have no chance fighting them and Letho. The End. Cue the cutscene.

Gameplay explenation:

Letho was just toying with you during this fight. Still in gameplay mode he says something like "Sorry Geralt, I don't have time to waste on you". Then he starts using more powerful attacks (maybe only then he begins casting Aard and Igni) uses Riposte, Daggers, and long chains of quick + strong attacks (preferably he is just Geralt + 30 levels, as opposed to fucking cheat). Once your hp fall to 20% you lose. Cue the cutscene.

 

[Havoc]

The two other Witchers can't show up. They are already on their way to Henselt.
The elves won't help him, because Iorweth ordered them not to. Unless there's a traitor in the mist, but I doubt that. Iorweth is their hero.

I'm still going for ACID IN THE FACE! move, when Letho loses in gameplay.

 

[Mrowak]

The two other Witchers can't show up. They are already on their way to Henselt.
The elves won't help him, because Iorweth ordered them not to.

I already established that - this would require a minor change in narrative. Letho could inform us only that Serrit is after Henselt but say nothing about Auckes or lie about him. Auckes could actually succeed in persuading Elves (or even bewitching them using upgraded Axii sign + rose of rememberance [foreshadowing FTW]) after Letho failed. Logical, makes sense in the face of gameplay and narrative present. It's a good solution in my book.

Unless there's a traitor in the mist, but I doubt that. Iorweth is their hero.

I'm still going for ACID IN THE FACE! move, when Letho loses in gameplay.

Nah, again - gameplay mechanics subverted for the purpose of cutscene. We need either third agent or C&C.

 

[Havoc]

Quite interesting, but...

Nah, again - gameplay mechanics subverted for the purpose of cutscene. We need either third agent or C&C.

So wait... how come acid in the face is subverting gameplay mechanics, but a squad of elves with bows isn't? Remember that they fallen in a hole. Nobody knew where they went. Only after the fight was over.

 

[Captain Shrek]

I am sick of this entire argument.

Realism is NOT a necessary thing for games. Fun is. Also, it is IMPOSSIBLE for games to have perfect implementation of c&c.

 

[Mrowak]

Quite interesting, but...

Nah, again - gameplay mechanics subverted for the purpose of cutscene. We need either third agent or C&C.

So wait... how come acid in the face is subverting gameplay mechanics, but a squad of elves with bows isn't?

Acid to the face - you usually dodge all bombs, flasks and even fists during gameplay. Taking away control from the player so that Geralt is hit with the acid bottle == subverting gameplay (I grant you - it's still better than what we have now).

Remember that they fallen in a hole. Nobody knew where they went. Only after the fight was over.

Auckes finding you takes place outside of the gameplay within the frame of the story. Auckes could outsmart Iorveth by essentially doing what Iorveth was planning to - watching the whole battle from the shadows, following Letho's and Geralt's fall and then pushing through the where they were (which takes time, waiting for Iorveth and Roche to bleed out).

This would be merely a plot development and no gameplay would be denied in this way. This is entirely fair and accounts for player's accomplishment without killing off the antagonist (in fact this would allow a character development for his lackey).

 

[Mrowak]

I am sick of this entire argument.

Realism is NOT a necessary thing for games. Fun is. Also, it is IMPOSSIBLE for games to have perfect implementation of c&c.

I fear it is for one reason only - stories are all about believability of events. A leads to B, B leads to C or to D (depending on player's choice). When C is subverted because GM (designer) decides to use reversed Deus Ex Machina the credibility is lost.

Stories are to be believeable - otherwise it's bad storytelling. And we all know Witcher 2 designers put the story in the game on the forefront of their product.

It's not that this scene destroyed the whole game or the themes the story touched upon. But it's important to recognise weak point when it is as opposed to clapping to it and claiming it's a 'good design decision'. No it was not. It was contrived.

Bioware didn't suck arse on day 1. It was only after bunch of rabid fanboys came along who started to extol the most awful rubbish there was as quality. This totally forced them to change their focus. That's why knowing what;s really good and what's really bad is vital.