they disabled it but here the twitterTezJaggs said:How do you comment on that site without registering? [...]
The troll in game is probably a lot smarter than the reviewer, too.KnightofPhoenix said:The troll in game can create a better review.
THERE IS NOTHING WORSE THAN BAD CONTROLS! Bad controls are the best reason to give bad marks for games. The fact that they did NOTHING to fix that in the "Enhanced Edition" makes it even worse. 10 GB download and the massive flaws with the controls are still there.secondchildren said:You're right but I wouldn't give such a bad rating to a game becoz of the laggy controls etc. Every game has its flaws and bugs and so on, some are really really nasty...
Who said he only played it once? I can understand newcomers that get pissed of at the game because of the shitty combat that they only finish the game once maybe even don't finish the game at all. And the review was written for newcomers to the Witcher 2. It makes no sense to write a review for the fans of the Witcher 2. They already own the game. He has to advice people on whether the game is a good purchase or not.secondchildren said:...I cannot even imagine how you could shoot a rating\opinion after playing it only once.
There is a basic rule in visual media: "Show it, don't tell it." The journal and the last dialogue in the game with Letho is complete and utterly violating that rule. It is horribly bad story telling.secondchildren said:People need to learn to read the damn journal.....
You clearly heard of "show don't tell" somewhere, thought it was cool, and repeated it like a parrot without reflecting on it because you evidently do not grasp the concept. That phrase applies to examples like introducing a character with the narration saying he is intelligent but without us seeing anything regarding said character's wit or wisdom; that it's better to convey emotions through the dialogue itself rather than simply saying "X character spoke with apparent stoicism but an anger could be felt just beneath the surface"; etc.There is a basic rule in visual media: "Show it, don't tell it." The journal and the last dialogue in the game with Letho is complete and utterly violating that rule. It is horribly bad story telling.
You are an idiot you mug, don't like the game? What are you doing on this site. Jog on son, you have been warned.Kashrlyyk said:THERE IS NOTHING WORSE THAN BAD CONTROLS! Bad controls are the best reason to give bad marks for games. The fact that they did NOTHING to fix that in the "Enhanced Edition" makes it even worse. 10 GB download and the massive flaws with the controls are still there.
Who said he only played it once? I can understand newcomers that get pissed of at the game because of the shitty combat that they only finish the game once maybe even don't finish the game at all. And the review was written for newcomers to the Witcher 2. It makes no sense to write a review for the fans of the Witcher 2. They already own the game. He has to advice people on whether the game is a good purchase or not.
There is a basic rule in visual media: "Show it, don't tell it." The journal and the last dialogue in the game with Letho is complete and utterly violating that rule. It is horribly bad story telling.
BTW I only use the number to look up what the magazine means with it. For example 4players.de has 75-85 as meaning "good game". That is the only thing you need to get out of the numbers. Anyone who starts discussion about the numbers being too low is to immature and probably to young to be allowed to play the Witcher 2.
Grown up players know that only the text is important and both reviews mentioned in this thread are pretty accurate with their review texts.
No one gives warnings but the moderator crew . Either stick to the topic or it will be locked .TezJaggs said:You are an idiot you mug, don't like the game? What are you doing on this site. Jog on son, you have been warned.
Excellent post, thank you +1Anglachelh said:You clearly heard of "show don't tell" somewhere, thought it was cool, and repeated it like a parrot without reflecting on it because you evidently do not grasp the concept. That phrase applies to examples like introducing a character with the narration saying he is intelligent but without us seeing anything regarding said character's wit or wisdom; that it's better to convey emotions through the dialogue itself rather than simply saying "X character spoke with apparent stoicism but an anger could be felt just beneath the surface"; etc.
As you can see it has to do with the narrative telling the reader/gamer/etc how to interpret something as a cheap way of avoiding the hassle of executing the scene properly to give the same information. Nothing to do with background lore and additional information which provides a context for the action and enriches the world (the journal) nor with an "all pieces coming together" moment such as the last conversation with Letho - ´plus in this last case we do see all the stuff that Letho says he did, we just now fully understand his motivation and how everything fits together. It's possible that you missed the extensive and well executed Foreshadowing that appears through the whole game and that's why you utterly misunderstood this scene, but that speaks of your own competence (or lack thereof) and not of the quality of the writing.
As the TvTropes article says "Now this line is sometimes quoted as an absolute gospel truth, which is not really true. It's certainly a good habit to get into (particularly in character writing; nobody likes being told what they're supposed to think of someone), but it's not an ironclad rule, and knowing when to break it to quickly explain minor details is a major aspect of learning to write."
You cannot talk about storytelling when you do not even know the real meaning of the phrases you are using...
Oh and your talk about "grown up" people is just flaunting your ignorance.
Haha! I remember this one; a true classic suitable for the Hall of Shame of game reviews.4ad said:Sometimes sites use unsuitable reviewers ,i still remember a 3/10 for a football manager game because the reviewer thought it is stupid you can not controll your players with a controller ....
You're missing the point. The review has nothing to do with the game. That site gave the game a bad review to generate more traffic and raise awareness of their site. It's a calculated PR move, it has nothing to do with The Withcer 2 in any way.eisberg1977 said:I think you people are getting to worked up over 1 persons opinion. Soo, 1 person did not like the game, who the frak cares?
Shitty combat? Really? Some people are just impossible to please. I would really like to know what constitutes your lofty definition of good combat.Kashrlyyk said:THERE IS NOTHINGI can understand newcomers that get pissed of at the game because of the shitty combat that they only finish the game once maybe even don't finish the game at all
Ironsights and cover-based shooting, I'd wager.LoboLawNM said:Shitty combat? Really? Some people are just impossible to please. I would really like to know what constitutes your lofty definition of good combat.
lol-I was going to make a snide FPS comment, but you beat me to it.Duskey said:Ironsights and cover-based shooting, I'd wager.