Really? That's what I was afraid of lol, they should've just added those two quests to every quest line... that's really a dissapointment.paulcz said:Well the "problem" is that it is more like 3 hours, and only 1.5 hours in one playthrough...those two quests are exclusive to each quest lines (roche/iorveth). So it beefs up the third act, but it still falls short of first two.
But I am fine with third act even as it was before EE...I just want fullblown expansion or sequel already. Jeeeeeez.
Dunno man, passed it on version 1.0 Iorveth path, on the Hard difficulty, 20 hours to get to the second chapter? That's impossible man. Only if you are really stretching it and wasting time looking at every texture in the forest, well then it can be 20 hours I guess...paulcz said:Yeah I do not understand the complaints about game being 20 hours long, WTF ? 20 hours it took me just to get to second chapter, the game lasted about 40 hours for me and that was version 1.0 when the game was released.
You know, I would pay for an extra 10-15 hours with joy. I'm a huge W1 fun, I enjoyed the books about the Witcher as well, I just feel that this game needed much more hours of gameplay and much more content. It is a good game, but because of it's lenght, because a player forced to lose about 5-6 hours of gameplay due to a gamedesign decision in an already short adventure, because of that it felt unfinished, rushed for me. I wanted to enjoy it much more, but I couldn't.paulcz said:Nice review.
How can people be dissapointed with extra content? It is also free. So don't complain, be glad you wonderful idiots! Lots of additional cinematics and added stuff like more animals, sounds and even more fixes!
This is a great time to be a RPG dark fantasy fan. Did the Roach path almost a year ago now it is time for Iorveth path! Bring it!
Exactly what I wanted to say my friend! If the game was 50 hours long in any branch, no one would dare to say something bad about the branching idea. Of course that essentially means making like 3-4 different games in one box, so it's unwise to demand that. But the problem is stated correctly!TSHost said:Well, the Witcher 2 is a short game for an RPG that aims so high with its story and characters. Also, the seperate questlines is not something I'm fond of, especially because it's the reason the game is so short.
Next time, please, give us choices but don't make us miss entire sections of the game. Many people play this games as stories, role playing them, and are not inclined to stray from their choices in order to see extra content. On the other hand, make the game 50 hours and have as many branching as you like, no one would feel the game was small.
I'm a huge TW1 fan too and I would pay for a 10-15 hours expansion easy. TW2 is about half has long as TW1 that is true.Ganishka said:You know, I would pay for an extra 10-15 hours with joy. I'm a huge W1 fun, I enjoyed the books about the Witcher as well, I just feel that this game needed much more hours of gameplay and much more content. It is a good game, but because of it's lenght, because a player forced to lose about 5-6 hours of gameplay due to a gamedesign decision in an already short adventure, because of that it felt unfinished, rushed for me. I wanted to enjoy it much more, but I couldn't.
That's just my feelings man, I love CDPR, they have a really good attitude towards their audience and I pay them back for it, I bought the first Witcher the day it came out, I pre-ordered my collectors edition of the W2 as soon as it was available for pre-ordering in Russia. I just wished the game had more content, that's all. Unfortunatly it seems I'll have to wait till W3 ):
Exactly, the point of separated questline is to show that your decision MATTERS. It only adds to replay value since you get to play a whole new chapter and get new perspective. While chapter 3 isn't exactly that different, there are minor subtleties that make them distinct enough.Killduke said:I don't understand the disappointement of some people on the seperate questlines.
I loved the seperate questlines too much because I can replay the game. This is the only action/rpg that I replayed like it was a new game.
I have to disagree, CD has far too many problems in their games as a rule that detract from the experience, and ignoring them does them an injustice.lliam said:Started playing it yesterday took me about 12 hours at work to get 2/3 of the way through chapter one. I was not messing about just playing it normaly. I never use mods (even though I have nothing against them).
I have played the game through about 10-15 times since it was first released (May 17, 2011).
Im guessing the game would have a 30/40 hour play through which is exactly the same time Mass Effect 3 had if you played it unmoded and all side quests. All games can be rushed through and that is completely the purchasers right.
People played Mass Effect 3 in under 20 hours but they either did almost no side quests (thus missing out majorly IMO as I have saves from Mass Effect 1-3) or they used a gibbed editor to doctor thier saves to pretend they did more side quests.
I am loving the game so far passes the day at work so I am happy.
If chapter 3 gets a extention to playtime then thats a bonus as it was enjoyable in its old state so it will be more enjoyable now.
CD Projekt RED (and its sub company Good Old Games) attitude to its customers is a tribute to gaming and can not be praised enough in comparison Origon's (Mass Effect 3) is not should I say.. worth any tribute.
If you have just bought The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Enhanced and are about to play it for the first time you are in for a treat. You will also see that this gaming company has the most outstanding attitude to customers in the entire gaming industry.
I have purchased roughly about 300 - 500 games in my time and have had experience in gaming on all formats and with online and single player games too CD Projekt RED are a standout. Arena Net Guild Wars 2 for example have a decent ethos but dont back it up on the levels CPD do and joining with Nexon is a bit worrying.