TW2 - Assassins of Kings "leaked footage"

[56236]

or maybe the creators copied the point? I hope they give credit man.... like they'll tell us. eace:

More likely one of the eight hundred million fan guesses happened upon a piece of the story that CDPR had already planned.

More likely. But, imagine they really did take the idea from one of the earlier posts. Can you imagine CDPR admitting their story is based on a fan's guess? I don't think so.

 

[petra_silie]

So....I noticed the heraldry on the uniforms of the soldiers in this leaked video for The Witcher 2 and I'm 99% sure they are from Kaedwen.This is the kingdom in which Kaer Morhen is situated, yes?

Yes, it is. As we know from "Price of Neutrality" the witchers don't interfere with politics. If this assasins' *whatever* happens in Kaedwen it could be unavoidable they don't get involved... :hmmm: we need the official statement to know what's going on in TW2.

 

[eldrim]

http://tweakers.net/nieuws/62562/cd-projekt-kondigt-the-witcher-2-assassins-of-kings-aan.htmlhttp://tweakers.net/nieuws/62562/cd-projekt-kondigt-the-witcher-2-assassins-of-kings-aan.htmlhttp://tweakers.net/nieuws/62562/cd-projekt-kondigt-the-witcher-2-assassins-of-kings-aan.htmlhttp://tweakers.net/nieuws/62562/cd-projekt-kondigt-the-witcher-2-assassins-of-kings-aan.html 8)

 

[godkingofdivineroad]

At long last. I thought this game hadn't progressed beyond scripting and concept art, so I was pleasantly surprised when my brother informed me of this. Development started barely a year ago; they probably made this level only to show off the game to potential publishers, they probably haven't finished much else.I'm loving every second of the video(especially the super-Aard; How I hated not being able to throw people over cliffs in the original!), and I will buy it at launch unless it's buggy, but I have a few nits to pick.1)Even in the Alpha build graphics look better than the original, but are still dated in this era where Crysis and UT3 are old news. From the looks of it they're still using the Aurora engine, or one like it, which puts a damper on my dream of a much larger game world. Physics have improved, so I hope they'll be able implement things like jumping and swimming that the engine has trouble doing.2)I dig Geralt's new hairstyle. What I don't dig is the fact that his face looks so wrinkly(this isn't Vesemir!). And that so many models have been imported from the first game(especially the swords; they always looked cheaply done).3)Dunno about the 'Quicktime Events'. I saw no problems with the combat in the original game despite all the complaints about mouse-button-mashing(what's wrong in being able to see a variety of combat emotions without having to strain myself typing complex keyboard combos?). All I want is the ability to execute a running/leaping charge attack on the opponent for a higher initial hit. And maybe some similar attacks for monsters.4)I see a dragon. Did CDP take my suggestions for a dragon quest? Doesn't look very intimidating though. Hopefully Geralt will be able to speak and receive quests from it instead of it simply being another boss monster.

 

[dezired]

The graphics are DEFINITELY not dated. At all. Look at Dragon Age: TW2 has like three times better graphics at Alpha stage and about equal graphics with ME2.Quicktime events.. I see no problem with them. In the demo, you had plenty of time to complete it and the only button you had to press is left mouse button.. easy. I guess they just wanted to make the boss fights more cinematic with mo-capped fighting in between in-game fighting.. and wanted the player to be involved somehow.Dragon.. I very much doubt CDP needed anyone to tell them to add a dragon as they were present in the lore in TW1... and to me, at least, seemed like the ultimate monster.

 

[Eriash]

As i did in the news section of the forum, I would like to thank you for you opinions on this movie, however unfortunate's the way it was published.What i want to point out is, the voices in the movie are of course placeholders. This is an internal presentation based on early alpha of the game.

 

[mysterd]

As i did in the news section of the forum, I would like to thank you for you opinions on this movie, however unfortunate's the way it was published.What i want to point out is, the voices in the movie are of course placeholders. This is an internal presentation based on early alpha of the game.

That's what I figured -- since it was an Alpha and all. I really hope for The English version, you bring back the same voice-actor that did Geralt in Witcher 1 -- I thought he was excellent. I really can't wait until you guys officially can talk to us more about the great stuff you guys are doing w/ Witcher 2. For an Alpha, it looks awesome. Can't wait to see the finished product on the shelves of stores, once it comes out.

 

[hamenaglar]

Unlike the rest I really, really dislike the new hairstyle and geralt's look. Would it be possible for geralt's appearance to be a bit more customizable than in original. The fight sequnce look nice and I actually liked how QTE increased the drama in fights.

 

[56236]

Unlike the rest I really, really dislike the new hairstyle and geralt's look. Would it be possible for geralt's appearance to be a bit more customizable than in original. The fight sequnce look nice and I actually liked how QTE increased the drama in fights.

I love the new hairstyle, but also don't like the pony-tails position. In the Hexer series, it was not sticking out, barely visible and yet clearly evident. Could it not be done like this for the TW2? That would be awesome. Oh, and thank greatness that voices were placeholders... I simply hated 'em. eace:

 

[username_2061180]

So it's a different dev team working on TW2?

 

[lannister]

I second the notion of placing the ponytail/braid lower on the backside of the head so that it doesn`t stick up that much....

 

[56236]

I second the notion of placing the ponytail/braid lower on the backside of the head so that it doesn`t stick up that much....

Thank you. You are like the 5th person remarking upon this. Hope they learn something from this as this would really lag if it don't swing the right way, get it? eace:

 

[petra_silie]

4)I see a dragon. Did CDP take my suggestions for a dragon quest? Doesn't look very intimidating though. Hopefully Geralt will be able to speak and receive quests from it instead of it simply being another boss monster.

I agree with you... dragons as bossmonsters or mount are mainstream and nothing special Geralt isn't a dragon slayer, I hope CDPR integrate dragons similar as Sapkowski did it

 

[Arkray_gog]

As i did in the news section of the forum, I would like to thank you for you opinions on this movie, however unfortunate's the way it was published.What i want to point out is, the voices in the movie are of course placeholders. This is an internal presentation based on early alpha of the game.

I'm sure we all assumed that but thanks for the clarification. :wave: Geralt's voice was too perfect in the game (english one).

 

[56236]

4)I see a dragon. Did CDP take my suggestions for a dragon quest? Doesn't look very intimidating though. Hopefully Geralt will be able to speak and receive quests from it instead of it simply being another boss monster.

I agree with you... dragons as bossmonsters or mount are mainstream and nothing special Geralt isn't a dragon slayer, I hope CDPR integrate dragons similar as Sapkowski did it

I too think the dragons should not count for boss monsters alone. But, what if there were 2 dragons, a quest-giving one and a boss monster? That would be sweet. Geralt, in the Hexer series, did mention that he does not take on all jobs and does not do certain creatures... dragons being one of them. Now, what if he were forced to make a choice between slaying a dragon, or returning its heart or something like the Striga choice. That would be a good option. A better one would be 2 twin dragons, 1 good & 1 bad that Geralt has to slice one side or bring peace between 'em like the choice in Murky Waters. Man, options are too good to think about... But, I hope the game is not based around the dragons..... I want more, man... eace:

 

[mjordan79]

The problem is not the graphics. The problem is the level of performance they will achieve. The Witcher 1 has some serious performance problems in some points of the game. I don't use an uber system but I have a card that is able to play the game at 30fps (medium) with all max settings. With this card there are some points in the game that are unplayable and I have to lower the settings to the minimum. Quite unacceptable. I hope they will consider performance more seriously this time. I hate having some points that go at 60fps and some points that go at 5fps...Personally speaking, I'll buy this title only when I'm sure it has acceptable performance levels (medium settings at 30fps with a Geforce 8600M GT at 1280x800). Not a powerful configuration, but I'm playing Batman Arkham Asylum and I have played Fallout 3 and Far Cry 2 decently with this system plus a ton of other games from 2007 to now without problems and with settings from medium to high. So there is no reason to kill such a card with a game of this generation.

 

[infernox3470]

I always found that most of my lag issues came from the effects (Fire, magic etc) which couldn't be changed at all with settings.

 

[56236]

The problem is not the graphics. The problem is the level of performance they will achieve. The Witcher 1 has some serious performance problems in some points of the game. I don't use an uber system but I have a card that is able to play the game at 30fps (medium) with all max settings. With this card there are some points in the game that are unplayable and I have to lower the settings to the minimum. Quite unacceptable. I hope they will consider performance more seriously this time. I hate having some points that go at 60fps and some points that go at 5fps...Personally speaking, I'll buy this title only when I'm sure it has acceptable performance levels (medium settings at 30fps with a Geforce 8600M GT at 1280x800). Not a powerful configuration, but I'm playing Batman Arkham Asylum and I have played Fallout 3 and Far Cry 2 decently with this system plus a ton of other games from 2007 to now without problems and with settings from medium to high. So there is no reason to kill such a card with a game of this generation.

You know, this is the exact reason people want a console version of the game... the consoles never give you such problems.I found that on high settings with low detail on shadows boosts my performance, then I updated and the problems with performance were fixed.Hopefully developers are working on the matter as we speak, but personally... I would rather have a uber game for a uber computer.I mean, I dedicated my laptop to this game alone... I use a desktop for all the rest... and, its worked well so far.

 

[prince_of_nothing]

The problem is not the graphics. The problem is the level of performance they will achieve. The Witcher 1 has some serious performance problems in some points of the game. I don't use an uber system but I have a card that is able to play the game at 30fps (medium) with all max settings. With this card there are some points in the game that are unplayable and I have to lower the settings to the minimum. Quite unacceptable. I hope they will consider performance more seriously this time. I hate having some points that go at 60fps and some points that go at 5fps...Personally speaking, I'll buy this title only when I'm sure it has acceptable performance levels (medium settings at 30fps with a Geforce 8600M GT at 1280x800). Not a powerful configuration, but I'm playing Batman Arkham Asylum and I have played Fallout 3 and Far Cry 2 decently with this system plus a ton of other games from 2007 to now without problems and with settings from medium to high. So there is no reason to kill such a card with a game of this generation.

The Witcher 2 is a next generation RPG game. I think it's unreasonable to expect it to run on a 8600M (a midrange laptop GPU that isn't suited for gaming), which is based on the G80 core that is 3 years old now! For the Witcher 2 to run on that, the graphics and special effects would need to be reduced dramatically (to levels similar to what we see in the original Witcher), which would lessen the immersion of the game and perhaps outright ruin the intent of the developer; which is to make a next generation CRPG.Games like Batman Arkham Asylum, Fallout 3 etc were made for consoles first, so they are much more versatile as to what systems they can play on. However the Witcher, and the upcoming Witcher 2 are games that are designed to run on PCs primarily.The question is, is it reasonable to expect CDPR to support older hardware instead of advancing the game's technology to next generation status? My answer is no. You shouldn't expect to play the latest games (especially PC oriented ones) on hardware that is damn near obsolete..

 

[mjordan79]

The Witcher 2 is a next generation RPG game.

No, The Witcher 2 is a sequel of The Witcher 1, not a "next generation" thing. A "next generation" game doesn't use a prehistorical game engine and doesn't implements normal mapping in 2009. So The Witcher 2 is simply a sequel. You eat too much marketing claims.

I think it's unreasonable to expect it to run on a 8600M (a midrange laptop GPU that isn't suited for gaming),

You probably have no idea. Unsuited for gaming? I have played more than 30 titles on it, from 2007 till now. Titles like Far Cry 2, Gears of War, Prince of Persia, Assassin's Creed, Resident Evil 5, Batman Arkham Asylum, Mirror's Edge, FEAR 2, Fallout 3, Bioshock, Unreal Tournament III, Street Fighter IV. All with decent framerates and reasonably high settings. You can't really evaluate hardware performance, you clearly have no idea.

which is based on the G80 core that is 3 years old now! For the Witcher 2 to run on that, the graphics and special effects would need to be reduced dramatically (to levels similar to what we see in the original Witcher), which would lessen the immersion of the game and perhaps outright ruin the intent of the developer; which is to make a next generation CRPG.

The first The Witcher has a graphics who can't really have a reason to run bad on an 8600M GT. Really. So the problem is not having a graphics like the first episode. The problem is having a graphics who run smoothly. Because you see, The Witcher graphics really can't afford to run badly on that card, considering it makes Far Cry 2 run at 30fps with high settings. CD Projekt has a wonderful game in their hands. They have to work on technical aspects a little bit more. A fire that kills performance is unacceptable. And it doesn't mean a card is "unsuited for games".

Games like Batman Arkham Asylum, Fallout 3 etc were made for consoles first, so they are much more versatile as to what systems they can play on. However the Witcher, and the upcoming Witcher 2 are games that are designed to run on PCs primarily.

Wrong. They're not versatile. They're optimized because of the cross platform needs. And they have a superior graphics combined with superior performance. Being "PC only" doesn't justify that a game must run like crap. Also, they're not made for console first, because the PC version (for example Fallout 3) has been released the same day of the console version. So they're not made "for consoles first". They have been engineered to be "cross platform" from the start, with good scalability in mind. Being cross platform imply they're more optimized (and scalable). The common misconception that a pc game should run on high end hardware only (because unoptimization) must end.

The question is, is it reasonable to expect CDPR to support older hardware instead of advancing the game's technology to next generation status?

Sure. Because to support it they don't have to sacrifice quality. They have just to optimize the whole thing. Also, don't expect the world have powerful videocards. Just look at the Steam hardware survey. I repeat: adding normal mapping in 2009 doesn't really mean "advancing the game technology to next generation status". "Next generation" is a marketing claim. But I see you can't understand reasons that go beyond the marketing claims.

My answer is no. You shouldn't expect to play the latest games (especially PC oriented ones) on hardware that is damn near obsolete..

Your answer worth nothing. You're just an ignorant kid who can't really evaluate nothing. You just say an 8600M GT is three years old card and you don't consider the Aurora engine is even more obsolete than that (and that the newer cards are just die-shrinks of the older ones). They've added normal maps in 2009 and this game shouldn't run on a 8600M GT? Ahahahah. Kids. Crap games comes when people justify unoptimized PC Games. Look at what they can do with a console (graphically speaking). Crytek has ported Crysis to the consoles. And The Witcher 2 shouldn't run on a "3 years old" card?The facts are: this is a card who will run Bioshock 2 (a game that will be released in 2010) at 35fps with all settings maxed out. This means 2 things: 1) You have no idea. 2) There is no reason a PC game shouldn't run on it, expecially when technologically is more obsolete than the card it will run. Also, don't underestimate the fact The WItcher 1 had serious performance problems even with powerful hardware. So the problem is not the card. The problem is a fire can't kill the performance.