Shadowstrider

Sure, if the Witcher had only just been announced. First glimpses of Oblivion were pretty much the same as those at release. On the other hand, the Witcher has been in the public eye for at least 2 years, and I've seen very little progress. Beginning to see the difference?

The problem with comparing it to Oblivion, at all, is the announcement to release timeline. Witcher was unveiled as early as E3 2004. I have seen no progress in the game, and it is 2 years later. The information regarding the game is sparse in terms of substance. Sure, we've seen dozens of "Action" and "Ambience" shots and clips, but I am only aware of the one instance of dialogue, which was far from substantial. The E3 video of Oblivion had more dialogue, and I'm sure I could dig up videos or screens with more substance than the Witcher's, but I'm a bit busy at the moment (packing to go out of town). I'm 99.999% sure that I knew more about Oblivion in November '05 than I know about the Witcher now, and I had much less interest in Oblivion in November '05 (almost 0) than I have for the Witcher now.

You should get the PR dept. at Beth to teach them about regular updates and press releases of substance! (It was there! I had too!) Seriously, they said in the interview that they would release a bunch of new info/images pre-E3. So, I guess we see if your point stands up then. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> There was nothing in my post about "regular" press releases. As for press releases of substance, there was plenty of information out there about Oblivion. At E3, a year before release, there was demo movie revealing how dialogue would work, what the interface looked like, how combat handled and tons of other schtuff. The information continued to roll out, perhaps not steadily, but certainly continued to roll out. P.S. Not a thread about Oblivion.

STAND TRUE! DEFEND THE CAUSE! Sorry, not buying it. You can dress an announcement up in any fancy title or adornment, it is still an announcement. What sort of progress am I expecting to see? How about any? I've seen several screenshots of ambience and action, but none of how dialogue will work. How about character management? I'd settle for a single, placeholder interface screen saying "this is what it might look like." Tons of concept art and "ohhhh look at this" but nothing of substance. This is the most substance I've seen from the game: http://www.thewitcher.com/inc/show.asp?n=365&t=1 "A local harlot helped us with distracting one of the guards. Now it's gonna be easier to complete the quest." At least I can get the ladies of the evening to help me! Does the game look bad? No. Does it look good? Kinda. Is there enough information readily available to make any judgments on the game? Not by a long shot. When a game is delayed and the information is already sparse, it doesn't inspire confidence.

Darque doesn't think like you and me. Years of killing zombies with poor controls schemes have left her bitter at the world. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You win, Darq has been OWN3D. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Says the person who ran around the thread clueless yelling "I still do not understand"! " <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Point not found? Do not be mad that you were OWN3D, it happens to everyone. Plus I do not understand the short hand version of all of the names here. DQ <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Stop spamming in the thread. Back on topic: The Witcher has been in development for several years, and I have seen very little evidence of progress. This means, at least to me, that the game's preliminary announcement was too early and full of hype, or that the game has progressed very little since the original anouncement. I'm inclined to believe the first over the second. In either case, I am going to wait for reviews and user-feedback before even considering a purchase.

Odds are I won't be buying this game.

In real life, what level are you? Roflcakes, anyone?

Regardless of character skill? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes, that's why it is a *gasp* opshunal min-gaym! If you want to rely on character skill, auto-attempt. If you want to attempt the mini-game, you're free too. Also, there are at least 2 ways to attempt the lock picking game...

Who says I didn't? Besides, the Dev got the joke. The warcry folks just had a huge stick up their collective rears.

Comparing Troika to Ferrari lost you all credit.

I love how when a big company uses an idea from a small company it is stealing, but when a small company uses an idea from a big company it is alright.

Jews don't do pork bacon. Muslims don't do pork bacon. I'm sure there are others out there who might not like pork. I'd have some turkey bacon on hand to cook for any of them, or something.

"New Christ."

It depends on what you're comparing. If you want to say "bows made of iron makes no sense and isn't realistic," I'd agree. However, the implementation of horses isn't really unrealistic, as much as it is just plain flawed. Ask any developer here what functionality has been the most problematic, you'll probably hear "horses" more than anything. The unrealistic implementation of horses has more to do with tech issues than design. I didn't say they purposefully split from realism. I said their goal isn't realism. You keep making these overly large bounds. I say something about apples, you interpret it as a statement about all fruit. Boggles the mind.

Where did I say Oblivion was realistic? Once again, you're taking leaps and bounds nowhere in my posts. I said the leveling system in Oblivion is more realistic than traditional RPGs. Not the scaling system. Not the crime and punishment system. Not the horse-riding system. Not the equipment. Just the leveling up.

How do i get the damn thing? I haven't been able to find it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually, the black horses from Cheydinhal, or are the fastest horses in Oblivion.

My error. Not being interested in enchanting until you pointed out its importance, I hadn't looked into it. The manual has one line on the subject of sigil stones, which I overlooked. Actually, I think that's enough for me. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It isn't really important, unless you're playing a character who casts no spells or use scrolls. You said you play a sneaky character, the illusion school not only makes life easier for a sneaky character, it can greatly increase the overall effectiveness of combat. That said, I know the pains of a sneak all to well. My first character was a magic-less sneak and I regretted that decision soon. Very difficult to win a battle, but not impossible as some here would have people believe.

Maybe I should just go ahead and put it in my signature, but the mage's guild is not the only way to enchant items. You can use sigil stones.

It is true, if you want to be a gimp who doesn't drink potions, use ingredients or use any magic items you can. The game will just be REALLY tough. Go try to play a fighter in BG2 without using any magic items, or drinking any potions. See how tough it is.

*I* had nothing to do with Oblivion or its gates. It is entirely possible to run through several gates without leveling. Cast invisibility, run through, repeat. I think you need to look up the definition of pure fighter if you think it includes casting spells (thats a fighter/mage). " <{POST_SNAPBACK}> There is no definition of pure fighter, first of all. Not in any dictionary I have available. Second of all, reread the quote. I included casting spells because that includes scrolls. A pure fighter who doesn't drink potions, use magic items or eat ingredients is what we would call gimp. Addendum: Conan was a barbarian.

I'm not a member of the mage's guild, and use sigil stones. In fact, I prefer sigil stones. So, no, I stand by this:

I was replying to this: He has a problem with using magic for anything, apparently. I can only assume this means spells and scrolls, witht he possibility of potions. I wasn't replying to points you were raising (haven't read them). I'd say that, yes, as in any fantasy game it is "strongly adviced that you enchant your gear, whether it be with sigil stones or otherwise." It isn't mandatory, but if you don't your life is much more difficult. I can get by with my unenchanted glass axe just fine, but if there were 3 foes it would likely be a different ball game (as it should be). I don't know what you mean by "getting by comfortably," but if it means cruise through 2 enemies without losing half your health, the answer is definitely no.

You cannot armor the unicorn.

It isn't unplayable for a "pure fighter." It might be unplayable for "a pure fighter who outright refuses to use magic items, including drinking potions, eating ingredients or cast spells." Just to test this theory, I made a fighter whose primary skills were blade, block, and heavy armor. The rest were arcane spells that I used to power level myself (auto cast spells), and walked away from the keyboard. When I came back I was level 13, with rusty iron equipment from the Char Gen dungeon. Proceeding with the main quest, I went to Jauffre and met bandit. Guess what he had... a glass axe and a rag tag combination of mithril and orcish armor. Somehow, by the grace of god, through the use of potions and my rusty equipment, I won the fight. Was it easy? No, and I eventually had to retreat and spam my healing spell for a second go. Went back and finished him off. With this new gear, I had no problem taking down single opponents without the use of spells, but only using potions. P.S. Ive done some further investigating and my table still applies to ARMOR. Weapons are available using the following chart: Iron 1 Steel 2 Silver 4 Dwarven 6 Elven 9 Glass 12 Ebony 16 Daedric 20 That is why you are getting elven weapons, and not armor, prior to 15.

Horse armor is simply the first. There is more content coming that is much more worthwhile. That said, if your horse was dying too quickly before, horse armor will help. It increases the survivability of the horse wearing the armor.