Why are The Witcher 2 fans so defensive?
- Thread starter remnant_phoenix
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I, personally, am intensely annoyed by this trend. Is it somehow wrong that I can like the Witcher 2 in spite of the fact it did everything in it's power to make me hate it during the first few hours? Yes the game gets easier when you figure out how to play. It would just be nice if the game taught me how to play rather than expecting me to just sort it all out myself. And to many of the people who point out that some critical piece of information was available for me to find, I am reminded of the opening scene in the Hitcherhiker's Guide to the Galaxy where Arthur admits the plan to demolish his house was available for him to view in the basement of a building behind a locked door in a file cabinet unhelpfully labeled.
And then there are the people who defend the difficulty itself of the opening bits. The problem I have with this defense is 1) The game is difficult largely because the game refuses to teach you how to play properly and 2) the game has a difficulty curve that goes the wrong way. The opening two hours of the game are far harder than the closing two hours. The latter isn't simply because I've figured out how to play but literally that my character became so very powerful that the very idea I might fail at a fight even if I used the worst possible tactics was almost laughable. There is a difference between being a difficult game and the game just being difficult. The latter is true in spades as far as I'm concerned.
And then there are the people who defend the difficulty itself of the opening bits. The problem I have with this defense is 1) The game is difficult largely because the game refuses to teach you how to play properly and 2) the game has a difficulty curve that goes the wrong way. The opening two hours of the game are far harder than the closing two hours. The latter isn't simply because I've figured out how to play but literally that my character became so very powerful that the very idea I might fail at a fight even if I used the worst possible tactics was almost laughable. There is a difference between being a difficult game and the game just being difficult. The latter is true in spades as far as I'm concerned.
Speaking AS a Witcher 2 fan, I can understand people getting frustrated with no tutorial, it's just that I never needed one, it took me one fight to get an understanding of all the controls.
I don't mind that other people didn't like the game, I can easily see why they won't like it as this game does not appeal to just anyone.
I don't mind that other people didn't like the game, I can easily see why they won't like it as this game does not appeal to just anyone.
because they`re PC gamers or they think that the reviewers missed the fun portions of the game and should give it a second look. or the`ye whiny fanboys
synobal said:
personally if i were the editor i'd have just rejected that as a 'review' on the grounds that half of it's content is factually inaccurate, and the game wasn't even 1/3 completed so it isn't a review, by definition it's a 'zp first impression' it is however true that witcher 2 suffers from a few bugs... like seeing through the world in a certain cave, pieces of loot-able equipment not being attainable except from very obtuse angles, the movement granularity being far too low to comfortably interact with some small elements and a sticky combat bug where you can be chain stunned or knock-backed into corners ( but the argument is don't stand in the corner to begin with, and you can see where this goes... ) and does not give the user any kind of decent tutorial past second long pop-ups and a centimetre thick user manual, honestly who reads manuals? seriously when was the last time you read a game manual
i feel my experience of the first hour or two of game-play was less than optimal because of general un-intuitive combat but after that it's pretty easy unless you miss some of the core concepts and the time would have been better spent in a training area ( a dream of the witcher training someone else would have made sense considering the start of the game and due to a certain plot point that i won't spoil. )
fact of the matter is once you get into the game it grabs you by the toes and leads you on it's merry way, it's a very nice story, great rpg elements and mini-quests and side jokes it has a brilliant aesthetic and as many pretty leaves and textures as your overpriced graphics cards can handle so it ticks pretty-much every box in the fan-boy awe list
and it has boobies, i mean, who doesn't like those?
so when people claim it sucks hard for x y and z reasons expect to see a flame-war of epic proportions!
( and the fact that both sides have a point for once just adds fuel to the fire. )
W2 fans (I am one) are no different from other fans, they defend what they like.remnant_phoenix said:
I have no problems seeing that some people get frustrated with W2...but then again I think...how long have they been gamers? What are they used to? Some people complain about dying a few times...when that was mostly all you did in older/retro games. Hows about a bit of a challenge? Does eveything has to be STUPIDLY easy? Some people complain about dying when they could play on an easier setting for gods sake. This is inexcusible and I will forever believe that such people are UTTERLY retarded.
Some people complain that they dont understand the controls, when there is as has been pointed out a manual (and to be honest...they REALLY arent that complicated...this is no Blazblue we're talking about...).
Witcher 2 is one of the best games I've played in ages. My only real complaint is that the last chapter felt rushed and too small and that the ending was nowhere near as good as in the first game.
There is nothing about the Witcher 2 that is hard enough to warrant any whining from gamers...imo. Even stuff like the potion drinking...they fail to realize that the way of consuming potions have to do with the game world and not accessibility. Would it be possible to program drinking potions in combat? Yes. But in the witcher universe Geralt sits down to meditate and prepare before big fights this is when he has to consume toxic chemicals. Just because people are used to drinking health potions in combat does not mean that thats is the only way to do it...how about running away if you get overpowered, meditate, prepare and return to kick ass!!.
Honesly...it seems some gamers are so used to the extreme rails in most games today that its impossible to think of such a basic idea as run to fight another day.
Witcher 2 is a DAMN good game, thats all there is to it. Its main problem is a fucking stupid audience.
That wonderful pic of yours made me feel all sorts of things...rage...nostalgia...happiness...sadness...fantastic stuff...and SO true. The honorable exception to the rule being Demons SoulsDexter111 said:
I myself being a retro gamer feel only one ananagly that is fitting.
Have you ever played that hard game that at least decided to give you a decent or good tutorial on core mechanics and let you figure out the rest, super meat boy, great example, starts off slow, then adds danger, more danger, HOLY SHIT BALLS ON FIRE IN SATANS BASKET HOLDER THAT IS SOME DANGER, but the witcher 2 says "FUCK YOU, YOU WANT A TUTORIAL, READ THE MANUAL YOU MAJOR PUSSY CAT!" And storms off without a goodbye, and let me try to say this, if I have to search up how to use something, when I shouldn't HAVE to, its pretty ridiculous. What it lacks, it lacks pacing, starts you off at the end difficulty and doesn't build up on it, story is paced well but gameplay is in the backseat of the car tied up not allowing to do much else but one thing, and story is everything else. Look at any good game from the past, my favorite comparisons are Mario for pacing, and river city ransom for difficulty, neither tell you anything, but you know what to do because its simple and makes sense...... And how is it a "Adult themed world." Because you can get boob and ass shots? I haven't played it, but from everything I hear, its only for pc gamers, which in that case I think you should give it a try, but anyone that isn't a pure breed pc gamer, stay far away, I myself are a mixed breed of console and computer.
Zero Punctuation is a review show, but Yahtzee is a critic, look up critic if you don't know it.
Have you ever played that hard game that at least decided to give you a decent or good tutorial on core mechanics and let you figure out the rest, super meat boy, great example, starts off slow, then adds danger, more danger, HOLY SHIT BALLS ON FIRE IN SATANS BASKET HOLDER THAT IS SOME DANGER, but the witcher 2 says "FUCK YOU, YOU WANT A TUTORIAL, READ THE MANUAL YOU MAJOR PUSSY CAT!" And storms off without a goodbye, and let me try to say this, if I have to search up how to use something, when I shouldn't HAVE to, its pretty ridiculous. What it lacks, it lacks pacing, starts you off at the end difficulty and doesn't build up on it, story is paced well but gameplay is in the backseat of the car tied up not allowing to do much else but one thing, and story is everything else. Look at any good game from the past, my favorite comparisons are Mario for pacing, and river city ransom for difficulty, neither tell you anything, but you know what to do because its simple and makes sense...... And how is it a "Adult themed world." Because you can get boob and ass shots? I haven't played it, but from everything I hear, its only for pc gamers, which in that case I think you should give it a try, but anyone that isn't a pure breed pc gamer, stay far away, I myself are a mixed breed of console and computer.
Zero Punctuation is a review show, but Yahtzee is a critic, look up critic if you don't know it.
Since you didn't play the game, let me explain:Aprilgold said:
It's a more adult like world because it doesn't treat the player like a child, it handles major themes such as betrayal,racism,sex with maturity and more importantly, you actions have consequences(and most times they aren't immediate consequences) that almost always fall in the gray area(as in real life) whereas most RPG's get into the whole black and white thing(where you can be either an angel or satan), even the RPG's that show boobies.
I really liked it, actually. Even though it forced me to switch to easy in Act 1, there are a few games like that that I've played and I'm determined to get better and play again through a harder difficulty, because being skilful is really fun. UNLIKE in say CoD where the hardest difficulty makes it impossible to move without getting sniped from an AK47 a mile away.
Yahtzees review was wrong that it was so long, and seriously the 'click right mouse button' prompt didn't appear? After 15 times of watching a cutscene?? It was funny though about the two swords, I agree with that, but now he's just poking fun at the RPG mechanic in general. I take it as comedy, rather than actual advice on which game to buy.
Yahtzees review was wrong that it was so long, and seriously the 'click right mouse button' prompt didn't appear? After 15 times of watching a cutscene?? It was funny though about the two swords, I agree with that, but now he's just poking fun at the RPG mechanic in general. I take it as comedy, rather than actual advice on which game to buy.
I cant say this game was good or bad, but I can say for me I uninstalled it halfway through. If you play it get the weightless mod though or suffer shitty inventory management.
Graphics, beautiful.
Story, interesting (although a bit too political and drawn out ).
Combat, initially so hard and fun, but also slow and unresponsive and buggy.
Inventory, nightmare.
Guidance, nightmare.
Menu/Interface, horrible.
Setting up graphics and controls was a pain in the ass too since u cant do it ingame...
This game was so fun at first till ch.2 but then it got bogged down into boredom. The combat became broken with shielding and the endless dialogue made me stop caring. I ended up reading dialogue because listening to it would take FOREVER and this further diminished the quality and immersion. I don't need a 10page speech for each quest. Fetch this do that collect this kill those. Put up Quen and press heavy attack a bunch. Upgrading weapons and armor doesn't matter as you get stuff for free anyway thats close enough and the combat is already easy. Make arbitrary decisions about characters you don't care about. Story doesn't really advance. Keep doing boring fetch quests and not progress your own story. If you support humans first you are racist herp derp.
It felt like I was gonna learn something about Geralt and then they just kept taking it away again and again till I didn't even care anymore. It felt like Halo 2 how you never got the info you wanted. I do realize the game might end with info but it wasn't delivered to keep me interested. You really don't learn ANYTHING except witchers are killing kings, which was revealed at the end of witcher 1 anyway.
Graphics, beautiful.
Story, interesting (although a bit too political and drawn out ).
Combat, initially so hard and fun, but also slow and unresponsive and buggy.
Inventory, nightmare.
Guidance, nightmare.
Menu/Interface, horrible.
Setting up graphics and controls was a pain in the ass too since u cant do it ingame...
This game was so fun at first till ch.2 but then it got bogged down into boredom. The combat became broken with shielding and the endless dialogue made me stop caring. I ended up reading dialogue because listening to it would take FOREVER and this further diminished the quality and immersion. I don't need a 10page speech for each quest. Fetch this do that collect this kill those. Put up Quen and press heavy attack a bunch. Upgrading weapons and armor doesn't matter as you get stuff for free anyway thats close enough and the combat is already easy. Make arbitrary decisions about characters you don't care about. Story doesn't really advance. Keep doing boring fetch quests and not progress your own story. If you support humans first you are racist herp derp.
It felt like I was gonna learn something about Geralt and then they just kept taking it away again and again till I didn't even care anymore. It felt like Halo 2 how you never got the info you wanted. I do realize the game might end with info but it wasn't delivered to keep me interested. You really don't learn ANYTHING except witchers are killing kings, which was revealed at the end of witcher 1 anyway.
I will concede the bullet points,but I will point out that you are complaining about dialogue..in an RPG.AN RPG! Yes,instead of the game telling you to blow up some nests with a particular type of bomb and boom,you're off,it tells you there are monsters that have been mucking about,people have gone missing,we think it's x type of monster,can you check it out.ploppytheman said:
As for the upgrading weapons seem pointless,I would like to direct you to my runed silver sword that increased sign damage and set monsters of fire.Nuff said.
If you don't care about the characters,why even bother play an rpg? I highly doubt choosing sides is something you should not care about,nor is it arbitrary.
Finally,you learn nothing in game? I think you missed as entire subplot about Geralt's past,which is odd because it's one the of the driving points of the game,and has an entire main quest dedicated to it in chapter2.
PS:I love it when you say that the story is interesting in a bullet point,then say it's boring during your rant.
Why does everybody see TW2 as a PC game? Just cause GTA4 was released on xbox first doesn't mean it is a console game. It's a damn good game. that's it. Everybody sees this as an "Us vs. them" , "PC vs. console" thing. I like Yahtzee and some things he complains about i agree with. Hell, except on the part with the cutscene, I agree with him. The game is not very user-friendly, but the worst thing he did in his career is he created this whole "PC gaming master race" concept that I am sad to admit actually has some weight in gaming forums. Why for the love of god does everybody see this and ignore the actual game content?TheHardcase said:
I haven't played it myself (still have to play the first one), but just to jump in quickly -
A) I hate in-game tutorials. The only time they are acceptable are when they can be turned off. If a developer ever thinks of utilising an in-game tutorial their next thought should be to make the game ask you, right at the start, if you've played before, so that if you have, or you've played a previous game, or you're a seasoned enough gamer to figure it out for yourself, or if you're willing to check the manual if you can't figure it out, you can just proceed without any patronising information about how look up and down, move forwards, run or pick up or use stuff. Likewise, it annoys me when a game continuously reminds you of how to do things - like having 'X = Use' hover over anything that's usable when you approach it.
Case in point - I picked up Red Faction Armageddon this morning and am, according to the menu, 25% of the way through already. It only recently taught me how to sprint - something that I figured out in the first 5 minutes by holding down the left thumbstick, which I assumed would be sprint based on playing past games that used that control, such as Call of Duty.
What I'm basically saying is that the controls should be kept separately. By all means have a tutorial, but don't make it an integral part of the game. Constantly reminding players of the controls breaks the fourth wall and reminds people they are playing a game. A game like GTA - which doesn't keep reminding you what button to press to get into a vehicle, is far more immersive.
I also like it when there's some reading to do regarding the plot. I do agree that it should be contained in the game - you shouldn't have to read a tie-in novel or anything like that to appreciate it, but I don't mind picking up information by reading journals and whatnot in the game itself. Again, that makes it more immersive than having cutscenes that force exposition down your throat.
B) I totally agree with that, though. If people have gripes about the game, they can't be told they're 'wrong' about them. But there are obviously different kinds of people who prefer different uses of the video game medium.
A) I hate in-game tutorials. The only time they are acceptable are when they can be turned off. If a developer ever thinks of utilising an in-game tutorial their next thought should be to make the game ask you, right at the start, if you've played before, so that if you have, or you've played a previous game, or you're a seasoned enough gamer to figure it out for yourself, or if you're willing to check the manual if you can't figure it out, you can just proceed without any patronising information about how look up and down, move forwards, run or pick up or use stuff. Likewise, it annoys me when a game continuously reminds you of how to do things - like having 'X = Use' hover over anything that's usable when you approach it.
Case in point - I picked up Red Faction Armageddon this morning and am, according to the menu, 25% of the way through already. It only recently taught me how to sprint - something that I figured out in the first 5 minutes by holding down the left thumbstick, which I assumed would be sprint based on playing past games that used that control, such as Call of Duty.
What I'm basically saying is that the controls should be kept separately. By all means have a tutorial, but don't make it an integral part of the game. Constantly reminding players of the controls breaks the fourth wall and reminds people they are playing a game. A game like GTA - which doesn't keep reminding you what button to press to get into a vehicle, is far more immersive.
I also like it when there's some reading to do regarding the plot. I do agree that it should be contained in the game - you shouldn't have to read a tie-in novel or anything like that to appreciate it, but I don't mind picking up information by reading journals and whatnot in the game itself. Again, that makes it more immersive than having cutscenes that force exposition down your throat.
B) I totally agree with that, though. If people have gripes about the game, they can't be told they're 'wrong' about them. But there are obviously different kinds of people who prefer different uses of the video game medium.
