well your statement was frankly ridiculous and ungrounded, so i wasn't sure. :|Kodaemon said:
They've been saying practically from day one that they want to bring the game to consoles, and are designing the engine accordingly. The game mechanics have been streamlined and the controls overhauled to use a gamepad (and that's what they use for previews). Combat is now more akin to a console slasher game, and the game features silly console mechanics like QTE.The aspect ratio was just the last straw. The game only runs natively in 16:9 aspect ratios (common for TVs, uncommon for PC monitors), but doesn't in 16:10 and 4:3 (common for PC).Tell me that's not a sign of treating the PC as an afterthought.
Well, 16:9 has been common resolution for PC for the past 3 years or so. And it's also one that makes sense. Why make 16:10 ratio when most movies and other widescreen media use 16:9? It makes sense to use the same format and thus remove the black bars. That is why 16:9 has been what most new monitors and TVs support natively.Kodaemon said:
sure, they're going to bring it to consoles, or they'd like to. but instead of making it for consoles first, they've made their engine for PCs first. hex-core scaling, amazingly-detailed characters, and huge textures aren't something that you get from an engine (or game) designed for consoles first.i don't understand how the mechanics have been simplified from the first game. they've changed, sure, but the old combat wasn't inherently more complex or engaging. TW1: pick sword style, pick sign, pick target. proceed to stand in one place clicking every few seconds. half the PC gamers i know who OWN the first game never got past the prologue because the combat, in their words, was "awful". TW2 combat combines the same tactics (strong/quick sword strikes, signs, targeted opponents) and gives you a lot more mobility. even if a console version was deemed impossible, TW1's combat system would still have to be overhauled, because it turns off a significant portion of people who try it. the new one has the same complexity as the old one and it's implemented better.regarding the use of a controller: again, the witcher 1's controls were not more complex. i could use a mapping program and map all the keys i'd need to various controller buttons and still have buttons left over. bottom line: if consoles never existed, and the witcher franchise was going to be PC exclusive FOREVER, the changes made in TW2 would have still been made.Kodaemon said:
Anyone who thinks the new combat system is inferior to the last is just looking for ways to bash the game. Seriously, complain about QTE, while praising a game that's combat was entirely QTE...I also was annoyed with the interface, which definitely looks consolized, as well as the aspect ratio support, but these are extremely superficial issues with what will be an amazing game. Gorgeous graphics, non linear story with REAL consequences to your choices, and on top of that, a totally revamped combat system that looks extremely fun to play. And if you buy from GOG, you get a free classic game thrown in too. I can't see why anyone would choose not to purchase this game, especially for such superficial reasons as the interface and some small black bars on launch day.
Did I say I'm not buying? Hell no, I have the CE ordered. Am I frustrated by the things I listed though? Yes, I am.
I would have loved to have proper gamepad support for TW1 (my tries with Xpadder & co. did not work out). If you can't use WASD for movement, you are totally f*cked in this game. You are basically fighting, sitting in a wheelchair. I did play it half a dozen times anyway (incl. Flash & FCR), but it's still frustrating. So I'm all for gamepad support - why do people complain when they get something additional to the former system? I think the combat looks brilliant in the previews (discounting flawed AI's which they said would be fixed). And they said that they used the pad for presentation, because it's obviously easier to use standing up. Well, duh!Only beef is that they don't allow for simultaneous use of keyboard and controller (I see no reason to do that, it works with other games).The interface... I will judge that when I've seen and tried it out. It might not be as artistically precious as the old one, but I'm sure it's better sorted and with better functionality.The resolution? Not qualified to say anything about that, my screen is 16:9. I do find it odd though, to be only supporting one resolution on release day. But if time got short, I get that they prioritised something more important to fix over that and they did say they'll provide a patch eventually.So right now, as a pc only gamer, I'm looking forward to a definitely better looking and better handling TW2. 
If because of time constraints, yes there is a point where the company has to release the game to stay in business, that they could only support 1 native aspect ratio, 16x9 makes the most sense. With 16x9 the 4x3,5x4, and 16x10 people will have black bars on top and bottom. Supporting 4x3 or 5x4 as native would make no sense since nearly everyone has Wide screen monitors. Supporting 16x10 as the native aspect will make it so information lost on top and bottom of screen, or they have to scrunch it down and make Geralt look like a Dwarf on 30% of gamers monitors.It is better to have a better looking picture for 100% of your player base, over getting rid of black bars for 40% of your player base.
PC is in any way much better platform than consoles in my opinion. I am fine if the game will be ported to be Consoles because even so it's going to look top-notch because of current consoles hardware specifications, it's in no way matching the PC.However IF it's the other way round that games were developed in Consoles and later on ported to PC, it definitely not going to be outstanding and probably quite bad just to squeeze out extra $ from the existing product.
Inconvenient. I often alt-tab in and out of games to do other stuff. Don't know why they can't even release a Mac version in a Cider wrapper. More and more games these days are available on Mac. =[ I'd totally buy a proper desktop gaming PC - if my parents wouldn't rawr.I do really want to play Witcher 2 though. T_T Maybe if they release a demo and I fall in love with it too much to pass it up.
Yes it has been confirmed by CVG too. We are sold out by CDPR for being PC exclusive!. I don't have the problem if the original plan was including the release of consoles but don't market it saying it's PC exclusive which is clearly not.frontovika said:
"exclusive" now often doesn't mean "exclusive" later.see: mass effect, etc.
But even then it usually doesn't mean 4 months later. If that article is in any way true. That kind of cuts it so close that it basically says the console versions were in development parallel to the PC version. An so some resources or design decisions along the way had to have affected the version we will get which disappoints me. It's basically going to be like Battlefield 3. Better on the PC but not entirely free of the console touch since that console version had to be catered for somewhere in the design.Seriously it makes me sad because outside of MMO's an RTS there are no games anymore on PC that can escape the touch of the consoles. Even Diablo 3 is rumored to be going to console in some way which makes me worried that will cause Blizzard to **** up that game too.curlyhairedboy said: