Witcher 2 Again

[Nepenthe]

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.

You gotta give it CDProjekt's PR management, though. Anyone else would've been torn to shreds for betatesting the xbox version with their PC customers, yet they have most people fawning over their "brilliant support".

[HoonDing]

Witcher 2 combat made Risen combat seem like Ninja Gaiden.

[Gorgon]

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.

Yes, but that works about a third of the time. Mostly you fail the counter, even with perfect timing.

[HoonDing]

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.

Yes, but that works about a third of the time. Mostly you fail the counter, even with perfect timing.

Yeah, which made that dream sequence where you had to play as random footmen and the mighty hero of Aedirn, so much fun.

[Hassat Hunter]

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.

Ehm, there was a skill for that, you know. Then you even parried guys behind you.

I got it ASAP, and yes, I used parry throughout the entire game.

 

Only used runes when forced (blocked passages), they seemed utterly a waste compared to sword damage to me...

[Malcador]

You gotta give it CDProjekt's PR management, though. Anyone else would've been torn to shreds for betatesting the xbox version with their PC customers, yet they have most people fawning over their "brilliant support".

 

Well, maybe if the game was shipped in a tremendously broken state, they could be considered to beta-testing it. Ah well, will have to give it a go, some of the changes look neat. Pausing the game when doing a finisher is a bit of a plus.

[Nepenthe]

Well, maybe if the game was shipped in a tremendously broken state, they could be considered to beta-testing it. Ah well, will have to give it a go, some of the changes look neat. Pausing the game when doing a finisher is a bit of a plus.

 

Version 2.0 Corrections/Amendments

Corrections and improvements to combat:

1. Numerous improvements have been made in the targeting system.

2. Parrying is now unlimited (even when Vigor is completely depleted), though parries no longer cancel all damage (maximum 50% reduction once the relevant ability has been acquired).

3. Responsiveness of game controls has been improved. This includes but is not limited to casting Signs, parrying, and attacking immediately after evading an opponent?s assault.

4. Geralt?s attacks are no longer interrupted by attacking opponents. Attacks are now contiguous and foes cannot interrupt Geralt?s attacks by landing a blow.

5. Assorted fixes now prevent opponents from incessantly attacking Geralt after he has been knocked down. Geralt can no longer be knocked down repeatedly in quick succession. Also, he rises quickly while evading subsequent attacks.

6. Geralt no longer attacks opponents located behind other opponents positioned nearer to him.

7. The target locking system has been improved. Preference is now given to previously highlighted targets.

8. Target selection has been improved. Priority is now given to foes affected by a critical effect facilitating the completion of a finishing move.

9. The additional two steps Geralt took after mounting an attack with the W, S, A or D key depressed have been eliminated.

10. Attacks can now be continued even when a key controlling Geralt?s movement (e.g. W, S, A, D) is depressed.

11. Attacks can now be continued if the attack key is depressed immediately after the final strike of an attack animation sequence.

12. Geralt can now pivot 180 degrees immediately after completing an attack.

13. Assorted problems with key responsiveness have been resolved. Keys no longer need to be depressed twice or more to trigger a given action.

14. A distance attack problem has been resolved. Geralt now mounts distance attacks (lunge with sword in hand in the Fast style) when opponents were located at a suitable distance from him.

Other corrections and amendments:

15. Casting several bombs no longer blocks further inputs.

16. An option has been added to the configuration tool enabling aspect ratio to be set independently of resolution.

17. The amount of disk space required for game patching has been reduced.

18. The loading of selected Witcher 1 game saves no longer causes the game to crash.

19. A greater number of monsters now appear in the cave leading to Loc Muinne.

20. Improvements have been made in the manner in which monsters are spawned in the mist in Chapter 2.

21. The visual effect accompanying Adrenaline use no longer disappears prematurely.

22. Archers now draw their swords more quickly when Geralt approaches.

23. Mages no longer automatically cast shield spells when Geralt casts daggers at them.

24. The game is now paused when Geralt executes a finishing move in combat.

25. The troll in Chapter 2 has been corrected. Previously, in some circumstances he could not be attacked.

26. Physics on cast daggers have been improved.

27. The site for aiming daggers is now more visible.

28. Geralt?s animation when he dies while casting the Axii Sign has been corrected.

29. An exploit in the fight against Letho has been eliminated. Previously, this foe could be killed by casting bombs in quick succession.

30. An exploit related to the

[Malcador]

You've never seen a tremendously broken state then. It's decent support for the game, but I wouldn't say I was a beta tester. Either that or they've adopted Google's concept of beta. The game's now $29.99 on GOG, hm, I knew I should have waited for a price cut

Edited September 29, 2011 by Malcador

[WorstUsernameEver]

 

That's a weird way to look at it, basically, the bigger a patch is, the more broken is the game before it? I'm starting to understand why Bethesda doesn't actually release patch notes.

[Nepenthe]

 

That's a weird way to look at it, basically, the bigger a patch is, the more broken is the game before it? I'm starting to understand why Bethesda doesn't actually release patch notes.

I'd say that's a very common way of looking at it instead of being "weird", but wasn't really my point. I won't go through the criticisms leveled at the game, the comments that how a lot of the failings (relative and minor as they may be) were blatantly obvious (like lack of tutorial), apparently repeated iteration of combat subsystems and rolling these into the test ^H^H^H^H PC version etc.

 

Of course, New Vegas saw a lot of tweaks for an SP game, as well, and there was no (more or less) obvious link to a new release to be made.

[Malcador]

That's a weird way to look at it, basically, the bigger a patch is, the more broken is the game before it? I'm starting to understand why Bethesda doesn't actually release patch notes.

 

Well it is sort of proper, not accounting for the amount that are actual bugs or ones that are just features customers didn't like. Although not so much as to claim the game is a beta, which players call games that are busted and suffer from significant bugs (see Arma 2 on launch) or so I've seen over time. Although I guess Arma 2 was a beta for OA, which is a beta for Arma 3.

 

Much ado over nothing, I guess.

Edited September 29, 2011 by Malcador

[Gizmo]

Version 2.0 Corrections/Amendments

Corrections and improvements to combat:

...

4. Geralt?s attacks are no longer interrupted by attacking opponents. Attacks are now contiguous and foes cannot interrupt Geralt?s attacks by landing a blow.\

5. Assorted fixes now prevent opponents from incessantly attacking Geralt after he has been knocked down. Geralt can no longer be knocked down repeatedly in quick succession. Also, he rises quickly while evading subsequent attacks.

...

 

A few of those fixes I'd rather do without (Like #4 & 5 for instance). IMO this is cheating.

 

I don't recall ever doing a finishing move (yet), but it sounds like Geralt could get bashed or stabbed at while completing the animations... I would probably have preferred a check that prohibited the move if opponents were too close to attempt it safely. Pausing the game for showing off is also a kind of cheat IMO; and it ensures that Geralt never in his life gets snuck up on and bonked on the head while doing a finishing move.

Edited September 29, 2011 by Gizmo

[WorstUsernameEver]

I'd say that's a very common way of looking at it instead of being "weird", but wasn't really my point.

 

Common fallacies are common, but no less wrong. A lot of games are published with things that, on retrospect, may seem obvious to gamers, see Deus Ex and its boss fights. Why the hell they published it with those? Why? Why the Mako in Mass Effect? All betas?

 

I'm not a fan of CD Projekt's "awesome" coat of paint on patches (NEW! IMPROVED!), and I think that on the gameplay side The Witcher 2 was a bit weak (clunky combat, dull minigames, bad context-sensitive stealth and a robust crafting system that kind of quickly fell on the side), but it was hardly a beta, and hardly the worst RPG players have ever praised.

[Nepenthe]

Common fallacies are common, but no less wrong. A lot of games are published with things that, on retrospect, may seem obvious to gamers, see Deus Ex and its boss fights. Why the hell they published it with those? Why? Why the Mako in Mass Effect? All betas?

Interesting choice of examples. I consider the blowback from both Deus Ex boss fights and the Mako to be more a case of Internet Bandwagon Jumping syndrome (IBJ), which just runs in two directions; in the case of the (t)witcher 2, the IBJ absolves it of all sins. Or, neither the Mako nor the DX Boss Fights were anywhere near the level of "bad" the IBJ has claimed them to be.

 

Of course, neither Eidos Montreal nor Bioware continued the development of the game for another platform, removing the "tests" you mentioned.

 

Edit: I think you guys are getting too hung up on "Beta" as in broken, and not the way I mean it, a prototype for the console version. A prototype tested, and then improved on, based on the feedback from PC players.

Edited September 29, 2011 by Nepenthe

[Malcador]

Well, you're just on a different strand of IBJ then, no ? I've never ever seen a beta used as a prototype though, usually it's a more broken version of whatever you end up releasing. It has all planned features in, is somewhat stable, so on. Maybe it's different in game development than here though.

 

I think the reason people aren't raging on about this sinister conspiracy by CDPR is that well there's nothing there.

Edited September 29, 2011 by Malcador

[WorstUsernameEver]

Common fallacies are common, but no less wrong. A lot of games are published with things that, on retrospect, may seem obvious to gamers, see Deus Ex and its boss fights. Why the hell they published it with those? Why? Why the Mako in Mass Effect? All betas?

Interesting choice of examples. I consider the blowback from both Deus Ex boss fights and the Mako to be more a case of Internet Bandwagon Jumping syndrome (IBJ), which just runs in two directions; in the case of the (t)witcher 2, the IBJ absolves it of all sins. Or, neither the Mako nor the DX Boss Fights were anywhere near the level of "bad" the IBJ has claimed them to be.

 

Of course, neither Eidos Montreal nor Bioware continued the development of the game for another platform, removing the "tests" you mentioned.

 

Edit: I think you guys are getting too hung up on "Beta" as in broken, and not the way I mean it, a prototype for the console version. A prototype tested, and then improved on, based on the feedback from PC players.

 

Sorry but they just don't have a team big enough to go multiplatform, and they would have been burned alive if they decided to publish it for Xbox 360 first (not to mention that, since they didn't get the first one, going for that platform first didn't make a whole lot of sense), so they basically.. can't win for you?

 

P.S.: Actually, by the way, Mass Effect was originally an Xbox 360 exclusive and then was ported to PC. Same with Mass Effect 2 with its late port to the PS3, so uh.. I guess BioWare like making us beta test a lot?

Edited September 29, 2011 by WorstUsernameEver

[Tale]

neither the Mako nor the DX Boss Fights were anywhere near the level of "bad" the IBJ has claimed them to be.

I tend to run against the bandwagon, I think. I might even be considered contradictory, sometimes. I mean, I like Dragon Age 2.

 

But the Mako is worse than the bandwagon claims. It's awful. I'm still waiting for the UN to hear my petition to have it declared a crime against humanity.

[Nepenthe]

P.S.: Actually, by the way, Mass Effect was originally an Xbox 360 exclusive and then was ported to PC. Same with Mass Effect 2 with its late port to the PS3, so uh.. I guess BioWare like making us beta test a lot?

You're right, there were significant changes between the different versions that were initially tested as "patches" for the versions released first. Oh, wait, no there weren't. But this isn't about Bioware, Eidos Montreal, or even the raw deal Obsidian (mostly) got in New Vegas feedback.

 

Sorry but they just don't have a team big enough to go multiplatform, and they would have been burned alive if they decided to publish it for Xbox 360 first (not to mention that, since they didn't get the first one, going for that platform first didn't make a whole lot of sense), so they basically.. can't win for you?

Am I really this obtuse or is it really necessary to twist my point to these lengths to come up with a counter-argument?

 

I'm hardly "blaming" CDProjekt for their actions, in fact I admire the brilliance (and audacity) of their project funding plan. I'm just surprised everybody eats it up with fistpumps and a merry grin on their face when gamers as a group tend to jump at conspiracy shadows given the slightest opportunity. Like the ones who would've burned them alive, in your words, for releasing first on the xbox.

 

The Mako suffered from absolutely **** level design outside the crit path. I found it to be fundamentally a lot sounder than that idiotic platformer they replaced it with in ME2.

[Tale]

Yeah, but the idiotic platformer was still a rarity. The Mako was required for just about every single side mission in the game and for longer stretches of time. I'd say that planet exploration with the mako is nearly, or maybe even in excess of, half the content to be found in a full run of ME1.

[Malcador]

I tend to run against the bandwagon, I think. I might even be considered contradictory, sometimes. I mean, I like Dragon Age 2.

 

How dare you break from the Hive Mind.

[HoonDing]

It's all about expectations. I expected a lot of Twitcher 2, and it turned out a major disappointment. I expected nothing from DA 2 and Deux Ex, and enjoyed both greatly.

[Nepenthe]

Yeah, but the idiotic platformer was still a rarity. The Mako was required for just about every single side mission in the game and for longer stretches of time. I'd say that planet exploration with the mako is nearly, or maybe even in excess of, half the content to be found in a full run of ME1.

Well, I have a great respect for independent thinking, even when it disagrees with mine.

[WorstUsernameEver]

I just find it funny that you'd complain about twisting points when you basically tried to point out that consistently supporting a game post-release is evil.

[Nepenthe]

I just find it funny that you'd complain about twisting points when you basically tried to point out that consistently supporting a game post-release is evil.

No.

[Zoraptor]

Your 'argument' is a case study in self defined victory, because whatever they do you can claim they're wrong to. Charge for any xbox improvements? Bad! Don't make them available? Bad! Make them available for free? Badbadbad! Pay attention to feedback? Bad! Don't pay attention to feedback? Bad!

 

I have no idea what is it about CDPR that attracts this sort of rubbish but with TW1 there was a lot of 'oh noes, an enhanced edition, it'll take me days on my 9600 baud modem to download the free patch and how dare you publicise it CDPR you ripoff merchants badbadbad' so I can't say it's surprising.

 

Using patch notes as a metric for bugginess is particularly bad too, as by that metric the two least buggy Obsidian games are... Alpha Protocol and Kotor 2.

Edited September 29, 2011 by Zoraptor