Witcher 2 Again

[Nepenthe]

While in the good ol' days they would be free too, the additions they do (missions, skins) do get knickled and dimed these days, making it an actual boon to get them free.

Either I completely missed that aspect of the good old days, or they just never existed.

[Meshugger]

While in the good ol' days they would be free too, the additions they do (missions, skins) do get knickled and dimed these days, making it an actual boon to get them free.

Either I completely missed that aspect of the good old days, or they just never existed.

 

The amount of mods, addons and gamemodes added by Epic for Unreal Tourmanent 1 is a good example.

[Nepenthe]

While in the good ol' days they would be free too, the additions they do (missions, skins) do get knickled and dimed these days, making it an actual boon to get them free.

Either I completely missed that aspect of the good old days, or they just never existed.

 

The amount of mods, addons and gamemodes added by Epic for Unreal Tourmanent 1 is a good example.

All right, that would've been the time period I was essentially completely away from gaming, so it's possible I actually did miss them.

 

That, or everybody in this thread will be able to put ~5 examples together, after thinking really hard.

[Orogun01]

Part of this might be sequel baiting/making sure that they can have a franchise. Consider just how much work is going to have to be put into TW3 just to fit in all the paths in TW1 and TW2 and have them be slightly significant (well... more significant than "did I pick Shani or Triss?" was). With Bio's method (which is being tweaked to be a weee bit more freeform than before) they can at least make sure that they have a concrete set of "what happened" that doesn't MASSIVELY change the current political landscape of their personal world.

 

 

Ok, Saskia is a perfect example of this. She's under the spell, or the spell is broken, or she's dead... Any one of these three creates an issue the writers will have to deal with if they intend to have Iorveth as a character in the future (although how he's treated in the epilogue doesn't really bode well for that) because that fight and political situation directly affects him as a character. Although they do seem to be aiming to paint the current path of our albino sex machine south into the Empire rather than stick around where the consequences are, but there are still some significant issues. Like Letho. Is he alive or dead?

As Kalimeeri said they probably aren't going to put much work into it and definitively not as much as they should to make consequences of previous games. I think they hit something gold with the TW2 C&Q, it was a linear but highly reactive story and it made sense. They knew how to control events while leaving the player with the choice of illusion, if they continue along that line and if they improve it, I'm going to be singing praises to TW3.

 

My fear continues to be the great fear of alienating the audience that permeates the industry, and they are not trying to please "their" audience they are trying not to alienate the ones that may be picking up the series at a latter point. I haven't seen that from CD Project, (specially since TW2 continued the cliffhanger of TW) but its something that often seems to keep developers from going the distance with their ideas.

[Zoraptor]

I don't think there's too much to work on, since it appears likely that TW3 will not take place in the same area.

Whatever you do the North is in a mess and you can probably cover the possibilities with a few differing lines of recording for whether Henselt/ Radovid/ no-one ended up on top. Similar with Saskia really, there are three possibilities (dead, controlled, free) and it's easy to imagine that the circumstances of her showing up would be very similar whether she's free or still controlled. As for Letho, he says you'll never see him again if you let him go and on that I think we can take him at his word.

 

 

i.e., much like Yaevin and Sigfried, Saskia, Letho, Iorvath, and Roche are unlikely to follow Geralt in any case, so their fates don't really pose a big issue.

 

Siegfried does show up in TW2, though you have to have been Order in TW1 to see him, obviously

 

 

I presume that there is a possibility of a ME3 (well, presumably) style meet up where your accumulated friends/ enemies show up to help/ hinder you at the series' denouement.

[Serrano]

While in the good ol' days they would be free too, the additions they do (missions, skins) do get knickled and dimed these days, making it an actual boon to get them free.

Either I completely missed that aspect of the good old days, or they just never existed.

 

The amount of mods, addons and gamemodes added by Epic for Unreal Tourmanent 1 is a good example.

All right, that would've been the time period I was essentially completely away from gaming, so it's possible I actually did miss them.

 

That, or everybody in this thread will be able to put ~5 examples together, after thinking really hard.

[Hassat Hunter]

That, or everybody in this thread will be able to put ~5 examples together, after thinking really hard.

Aforementioned UT1 (all UT's though, really, to be true)

Aforementioned Morrowind

BG2's special vendor got added in the patch.

Heart of Winter for Icewind Dale

Multiplayer for Deus Ex (it sucked, but was free!)

DLC maps for Majesty and X-pack (you asked which I remembered)

The Sims got free stuff. Now even these are paid, if you don't include the dozens of x-packs

Dungeon Siege and expansion got bonus missions.

 

That's all I can think of right now around the 2000 timeline.

Edited September 4, 2011 by Hassat Hunter

[Gorgon]

Well that was all before micro transaction dlcs and reliable broadband connections. A dlc type pioneered in part by Morrowind on the xbox.

[meomao]

Patching a bug or refining a feature that it's not working like it's supposed to be is a must, not a bone that you throw to your customer like a bonus.

Sadly enough, that's not even a given these days. Plenty of titles that still needed patches never got any. Or inferior ones. We even seen it with The Sith Lords, right?

 

I'm just saying that it would be more elegant and a lot more in line with their "indie" and "hardcore" branding if they patch the game and offer small features for free without announcements and acts. Good actions and good will speak for themselves and word of mouth do the rest. At the long run, when they could not play the "indie" card anymore, when they inevitably jump in the consolle market and play on the same ground of the big names, that whole process of turning patches in to marketing will backleash to them. I would like them more keeping it low key.

 

The skill system is flat, gives only passive bonus

More RPG's should do this IMO. I am always getting stuck with dozens of useless skills cluthering up whatever it is you need to cycle through skills (taskbar for Divinity and Drakensang, menu for TSL, etc.)

 

Personally, I hope not. I believe that there is still some place left for multi-stats and in-depth skill/rule system in RPGs and that they will not play all like action games with dialogues and branching plots.

 

Having said that, even for streamlined action rpgs standard, I think that TW2 has gone too far with its "all passive bonus" system . It kills of sense of meaningfull and structured progression typical of RPGs and as a result combat plays out exactly the same from the beginning to the end. Let's take a look at the games that inspires TW2 gameplay: Batman Arkham Asylum and Assassin Creed (there is even a funny reference in game).

 

In those games there are levels too (explicit or not), in BA:A there are even experience points but you learn new moves and new skills along the way, you have not just passive bonus. That way, you have a feeling of progression and the combat does not stale (at least in B:AA). There are allways new tecnique to use and incorporate in your strategies and combos. Instead, in TW2 you allways play the same. You just become less crappy along the way.

 

Btw, if the skill system is flat, you should do something to balance the loss in term of depth with pure "fun" factor and addictivity. Let's allways use B:AA and AC as a reference, since the dev have used those games as a reference themselves. Play those games and then try TW2 combat. The only possible reaction is LOL. I mean, if you remove all depth with a flat passive skill system, your combat should be fluid and addictive, like ME2 ones for example. It should not play like a clumsy rpgish version of an action game but should try to rival with their action games counterpart on their terms.

 

Last criticism: what is the point of 51 skills with two levels each, if the point is to "keep it simple", to streamline and to avoid useless skills? I think that a skill system with say 8-10 more general skill (steel sword, silver sword, atlethics, alchemy + the signs) with 4 levels each would have been more than enough.

 

Sorry for the lenght !

[Hassat Hunter]

Well that was all before micro transaction dlcs

My point exactly (you did realise that, right?)

ersonally, I hope not. I believe that there is still some place left for multi-stats and in-depth skill/rule system in RPGs and that they will not play all like action games with dialogues and branching plots.

True, but some games have just so much action skills, which are pretty much useless soon after you buy them I rather have passive skills that are active throughout the entire game. DX and Vampire: Bloodlines did it great here according to me.

in BA:A there are even experience points but you learn new moves and new skills along the way, you have not just passive bonus.

The first thing I bought was "hang on a gargoyle and hook up people".

I've never EVER used it throughout the entire game. Just never got the option to, how much I tried.

Talk about an useless skill...

The "take out many enemies" was nice though. Especially since it could actually happen, unlike the "X" in Witcher II, which I have gotten about 2 times totally in the game... (1 on a bunch of harpies. *sigh*)

That way, you have a feeling of progression and the combat does not stale (at least in B:AA).

Actually, the progression came from new tools added from time to time on set points. The skills really had nothing to do with it. And I could have lived without people with electric prods, especially seeing how hard they are to distinguish frighting a crowd. Oh well... They were pretty uncommon aside from challenges.

Play those games and then try TW2 combat. The only possible reaction is LOL.

It's harder. Nothing wrong with that. B:AA's regular combat is sooo easy. They only pose a challenge due to weapons or artifical means (insane immunity, weapons that can instant block etc.)

I think if CDProject added these it would have only added more complains from the RPG crowd, that skill was meaningless and it all depends on human action. Like the boss of ACT 1. Didn't it suck?

Last criticism: what is the point of 51 skills with two levels each, if the point is to "keep it simple", to streamline and to avoid useless skills? I think that a skill system with say 8-10 more general skill (steel sword, silver sword, atlethics, alchemy + the signs) with 4 levels each would have been more than enough.

So you hate passive bonusses, and your solution would be to... make it even less passive bonusses (as was the case with Witcher 1), which allow no choice at all?

"This game lacks depth"... "It would be better if we took some depth of it"... that's how it reads to me...

Sorry for the lenght !

That's what RPG boards are for .

[meomao]

True, but some games have just so much action skills, which are pretty much useless soon after you buy them I rather have passive skills that are active throughout the entire game. DX and Vampire: Bloodlines did it great here according to me.

 

I'm not questioning the fact that an action RPG should keep skills to a reasonable limit. DX is very good in that sense (never played Bloodlines: I will sooner or later). But I think that there is a middle ground between a system with the right amount of skills gained while levelling and a system where you start with all the relevant stuff and you level just to add 36 out of 51x2 skills of passive and redundant bonus that never affects the gameplay (if not for Whirlwhind, wich is still a passive, Knives and the Awesome Button X).

 

The first thing I bought was "hang on a gargoyle and hook up people".

I've never EVER used it throughout the entire game. Just never got the option to, how much I tried.

Talk about an useless skill...

 

I abused the gargoyle move you are talking about, nearly spammed it. It was the best way to thin enemy numbers in stealth areas. You add to use the sonic batarang or other means to lure enemies.

 

Actually, the progression came from new tools added from time to time on set points. The skills really had nothing to do with it.

 

I'm not sure to understand here. The skills in the "combo upgrades" makes combat way more interesting and fluid along the way and pushes you to improove your combat skill adding an optional level of challenge. Most tech and batarang upgrades were mostly usefull in stealth missions and exploration.

 

And I could have lived without people with electric prods, especially seeing how hard they are to distinguish frighting a crowd. Oh well... They were pretty uncommon aside from challenges.

 

Oh, those sucker with electric prods . But it was fun learning to deal with them: at the beginning it was reall hard to remember to use the "A" button on my gamepad without breaking the combo.

 

It's harder. Nothing wrong with that. B:AA's regular combat is sooo easy.

 

Harder? I'm not that sure. B:AA is quite easy to learn and to get into but it's difficult to master and the game pushes you to master the freeflow combat and to learn building combos while not punishing you during the learning phase. While TW2 is harder to grasp (because it's less intuitive) but if you survive the unfamous wave in the prologue and learn that basically it's all about dodging like crazy, it's way easier during the rest of the game.

 

They only pose a challenge due to weapons or artifical means (insane immunity, weapons that can instant block etc.)

I think if CDProject added these it would have only added more complains from the RPG crowd, that skill was meaningless and it all depends on human action. Like the boss of ACT 1. Didn't it suck?

 

The QTE boss at the end of act 1 is an abomination to gods and man... Having said that, even TW2 artificially hardened difficulty with immunities and auto-parry weapons (like shield fighters or Letho and his Quen). But it allready depends all on human action, doesn't it? The point is that you can choose to go action all the way like TW2 and remove most kind of classic RPG feature from the gameplay, but then the combat must be as fun, as addicting and as fluid as a AAA action game. Otherwise you got the "worst of both words".

 

So you hate passive bonusses, and your solution would be to... make it even less passive bonusses (as was the case with Witcher 1), which allow no choice at all?

"This game lacks depth"... "It would be better if we took some depth of it"... that's how it reads to me...

 

That's not what I'm saying. Was it for me, TW2 gameplay would have been an improved, more tactical and less twitchy version of TW1. TW1 was not perfect but show promises. Instead the devs choose to go action all the way and applied the unfamous "stramline treatment" to TW1 system. So, I'm just saying that starting from the goals that the devs have in mind, a levelling system with 51*2 redundant and passive bonus does not add any kind of real depth, just the illusion of it. And that it's in contrast with the overall goal they were trying to to achieve. I'm not excited by that kind of design, but if you have a vision, stick to it.

[Nepenthe]

That, or everybody in this thread will be able to put ~5 examples together, after thinking really hard.

Aforementioned UT1 (all UT's though, really, to be true)

Aforementioned Morrowind

BG2's special vendor got added in the patch.

Heart of Winter for Icewind Dale

Multiplayer for Deus Ex (it sucked, but was free!)

DLC maps for Majesty and X-pack (you asked which I remembered)

The Sims got free stuff. Now even these are paid, if you don't include the dozens of x-packs

Dungeon Siege and expansion got bonus missions.

 

That's all I can think of right now around the 2000 timeline.

I'm still under the impression that the extra vendor for BG2 wasn't included in an official patch, but both of them had to be added via unofficial hacks (then from Baldurdash, now via weidu).

 

Heart of Winter was a paid expansion. Trials of the Luremaster wasn't, but I believe riots were breaking out over HoW's shortness, which is why it was done.

 

I don't think we've exactly blown my prediction of ~5 out of the water, here, certainly not in a scope that would say that in the good old days, dlc was free, certainly not in a scale that would be significant in any way.

[Hell Kitty]

I'm confused about his listing of The Sims. The Sims series has always featured both paid and free stuff, most of it user created. Hell, Sims modders were doing buyable downloads before it was even known as DLC.

 

All up, that's a pretty crappy list.

[entrerix]

combat in the witcher 2 was pretty close to the worst of both worlds imo.

 

combat in the witcher 1 wasn't great either, but i was more patient back then.

 

i'd rather a game be turn based, or at least baldurs gate style semi-turn based. but if it HAS to be an action game with some rpg elements, then make it fun to play first and foremost.

[Hassat Hunter]

2.0 should be out tomorrow. Sounds a lot to me like the game is simplified... a lot! though with the various combat changes. Oh well...

 

Version 2.0 (Arena, Tutorial, and Dark Difficulty Modes)

Arena - is a new gameplay mode that is separate from the main adventure and narrative of The Witcher 2. In this mode, Geralt of Rivia duels a variety of foes to the death in a gladiatorial arena located in an unnamed town somewhere in the Northern Kingdoms. In addition to winning gold and valuable items, players also receive points for their wins. They can then post their point totals on-line to compare their achievements against those of other blood sport enthusiasts around the world. Geralt can encounter both foes and allies in the arena. He can recruit the latter for a fee to assist him during his most challenging clashes.

To post your point totals to the forum, you must be registered and have a forum account! Register and establish your account directly through the game launcher or go to www.thewitcher.com. You can then log in to your account via the launcher.

IMPORTANT: Players using mods to alter their character attributes and statistics will not be able to post their point totals from the arena to the server. This is a necessary precaution to prevent any attempts at distorting competition or misrepresenting player achievements.

Tutorial - The game tutorial takes the form of a brief adventure during which players learn how to use a range of game mechanics and functionalities. Assuming the role of game protagonist Geralt of Rivia, players save a wounded knight named Bolton of Ironford while learning game controls as well as the basics of combat and alchemy. This transpires step by step as the tutorial guides players through a series of minor missions. Upon completion, based on demonstrated abilities, the tutorial recommends the difficulty level which the player should choose in embarking on the main adventure of The Witcher 2.

Dark Difficulty - The

[Gorgon]

Parrying didn't work before unless you were up against a boss. No point in just standing there expending resources while you hope for a lucky counter when you could be using signs.

[Tale]

Parrying didn't work before unless you were up against a boss.

Yes, it did. I used it pretty much all of the time. It kind of stunk when you fought more than one at a time, still, because you could only parry the guy you're targeted.

[Gorgon]

Well sure, if you wanted the fights to last longer than they needed to, you could.

[Gorth]

If the fight is such a visceral, immersive experience, why wouldn't you want it to last as long as possible?

[Gorgon]

Good swordsmen kill quickly and effectively, they don't stand around enjoying the scenery.

[Gorth]

Tune in on channel 7 on your sarcasm detector

[Gorgon]

It's hard to spot in type.

[Tale]

Well sure, if you wanted the fights to last longer than they needed to, you could.

They seemed to do increased damage. Or instant kills.

[Orogun01]

Well sure, if you wanted the fights to last longer than they needed to, you could.

They seemed to do increased damage. Or instant kills.

Agreed parry could take out a quarter or more of HP, it was actually one of my favorite skills.

[WorstUsernameEver]

Taking out the capability for enemies to block Geralt's moves risks to make the combat a little bit too easy but the rest are all things that should have been in the game in the first place. I'll repeat it again: making the combat unresponsive and clunky is not good, especially if by design.