Forums > Game Forums > The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings > Who's playing Witcher 2?
Unicorn Lynx (181769) on 5/27/2011 7:35 AM · Permalink · Report
Me :)
By the way, can you capture screenshots as you advance? No screenshot-grabbing software works for me with this one, for some reason... so I won't be submitting any.
Patrick Bregger (303246) on 5/27/2011 12:23 PM · Permalink · Report
I am, too. Unfortunately I am in my "spamming MobyGames queues" and not in my "playing games" mood right now which means progression is slow. I am still not finished with exploring the whole map of Chapter 1.
St. Martyne (3648) on 5/30/2011 2:43 PM · Permalink · Report
I'm playing too. Among everything else it made me remember all the fun I had discussing the original here. )
Anyway, the game is awesome. I'm currently in the middle of the final chapter. It's a great game, much better than either Mass Effect 2 or Dragon Age 2.
But I still prefer the original over the sequel.
Jeanne (75931) on 6/15/2011 9:52 AM · Permalink · Report
Slow going for me too, since I'm still in Chapter 1. I'm playing "normal" difficulty.
Got through the Nekkers and Endrega quests (finally! .. I thought I'd never kill those Bodacious queens. Got the 2nd one yesterday). Quite a lot of strategic planning and darting around to out-maneuver the monsters.
I guess my biggest frustration has been the lack of explanation on some things. Like the mutagens and how to use them. It's rare for modern RPGs not to have cheat codes, so there's no help there. But info has erupted all over the Net, so help info can be found if you search hard enough.
Just installed Patch 1.2 so now have new armor and can get my hair restyled (oh boy .. LOL).
Still don't like the way games are saved .. at least old ones can be deleted in-game now. (highlight and press the 'delete' key) They're still too big though.
So far I like the game .. but I haven't seen Geralt's real personality come out much yet, so I haven't formed the same attachment as in the 1st game. I'm not sure I like his new face.
Unicorn Lynx (181769) on 6/20/2011 6:41 AM · Permalink · Report
It's a great game, much better than either Mass Effect 2 or Dragon Age 2.
Beg to differ... I think they are all ultimately great, but all have irritating flaws that prevent me from putting them in the same league as their respective predecessors (well, except ME, because there, the first one was also as flawed).
ME2 has no coherent world and its role-playing is negligible.
DA2 has locations made by random generator bots and is confined to one city only.
Witcher 2 has boring hack-and-slash combat and infuriating artificial paths with tiny populated areas instead of a true open world. That doesn't prevent it from having fantastic writing and TRULY mature themes in the narrative, but purely from a gameplay standpoint, it's as disappointing as the other two.
All in all, I love all the three games, but mostly for their writing and characters rather than for their gameplay.
St. Martyne (3648) on 7/2/2011 2:06 PM · Permalink · Report
Well, for me it just depends on the intent behind the all the faults.
I'm not completely sure that CD Projekt RED realizes what exactly makes The Witcher 2 worse than the original game. They experimented, they tried to improve every element of the game. It might just be that they haven't noticed that they've lost something in the process.
While, Bioware's missteps is an entirely different story. You can always feel a cold calculating intent behind their offerings, first idea is to find a cheapest way to make a $60 RPG and second is how to make more it "accessible" for a "wider range of gamers". The first idea results in neverending assets duplication, the second - in bastardizing a game to a point where even hardcore RPG gamers have a trouble understanding the reasoning behind the game system.
Patrick Bregger (303246) on 6/2/2011 10:14 AM · Permalink · Report
I just finished it and it is an awesome game. Progress was slow in the first chapter but once I reached Chapter II I was really hooked. Fortunately my initial complaints about the worse handling proved to be the only major ones. I am a bit disappointed that there is not even a single mentioning of Shani.
I am definitely going to play it a second time (in a year or so) - I suspect there is a lot of additional backstory to be learned by choosing the Squirrels path. But all in all I think the first Witcher is a better game. Not by very much but still.
St. Martyne (3648) on 6/2/2011 11:28 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Patrick Bregger wrote--]I am a bit disappointed that there is not even a single mentioning of Shani. [/Q --end Patrick Bregger wrote--]
I wonder, would it be different if you loaded your Witcher 1 savegame, where you had chosen Shani over Triss?
Did you do that?
Patrick Bregger (303246) on 6/2/2011 11:40 AM · Permalink · Report
Yes, I did.
St. Martyne (3648) on 6/4/2011 6:49 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Patrick Bregger wrote--]Yes, I did. [/Q --end Patrick Bregger wrote--]
Yeah, it sucks then.
Were there (if any) memorable instances where you thought the tie-ins with the original Witcher were great?
Patrick Bregger (303246) on 6/4/2011 7:55 PM · Permalink · Report
Not really. The meeting with Siegfried was potentially good but his English voice is so much different to his his German voice from the first Witcher that I couldn't relate. That his face was covered during the dialogue didn't help.
Other than that there were a few mentioning in passing which related to my choices in The Witcher, but nothing special.
Slug Camargo (583) on 7/2/2011 8:01 PM · Permalink · Report
So I just bought this in the not-really-all-that-crazy summer Steam sale.
Now, I'm going to buy the first one as well soon, so I have a question: Should I absolutely play them in chronological order? I did playtest both and I'm fairly aware of all the gameplay differences between them, but I mean story-wise, characters and such: Is there anything that I'm gonna see in 2 and I should avoid seeing if I plan on playing 1, or are they independent enough to play in any order safely?
I ask because, from what I've seen, 1 seems to be more interesting in terms of gameplay complexity, but 2 seems to be way more interesting as a story, which automatically makes it the one I really really want to play first.
To put it bluntly, the bits of story I saw in 1 were just way too adolescent, generic and at times even plain stupid for my liking, whereas 2 seemed slightly more down-to-earth (dragons and magic spells notwithstanding), and definitely had a more involving storytelling --the bit where you see exactly why Geralt ends in jail was awesome in seven different ways, and there was nothing remotely close to that in 1 as far as I went.
St. Martyne (3648) on 7/3/2011 8:01 PM · Permalink · Report
I believe, it's a good idea to play them in chronological order. The second game relies heavily on the story of the original game. Plus, you get to use your save-games in the sequel, even though the impact of that is negligible, as we have established in this thread.
Still, yeah, definitely play the original game first. I'm sure the story will develop in something to your liking.