Why I hate Witcher 2

+
ryannberg said:
You don't need to print the manual, or have a second screen. Instead of being lazy, you read the manual first, so you can understand the game mechanics. All I am getting from you is that you want hand holding through the UI. You don't get a UI if you played Dice poker in real life, instead you will be expected to know the hierarchy of winning rolls. You blame the developers for not holding your hand through the UI, when in fact the Developers gave you a manual to read to know how to play the game. Don't be lazy and read the manual.

Perhaps I wasn't clear in specifying what kind of functionality is lacking.

After a poker match concludes, the player should see why he lost or won. Specifically extend the "You win/you lose" dialog by showing what the opponent had versus your own hand.

This is a post-match summary, not handholding. This serves to explain why the player won or lost. This way a player could completely skip the manual and still learn the mechanics of the game via trial and error. It's not handholding, it's meaningful feedback.

An example of hand-holding would be if the game automatically highlighted which dice to reroll. And it would be a terrible idea. Stop confusing the two concepts.

Besides, for me it's more convenient to alt-tab and google it up on the witcher wiki than use the manual. 3s for the wiki, 10s for the manual.
 
Could we just say that, yeah op's concerns are mostly legit, let's hope that cdpr improve in their next game and call it a day?
 
fizzbizz said:
Perhaps I wasn't clear in specifying what kind of functionality is lacking.

After a poker match concludes, the player should see why he lost or won. Specifically extend the "You win/you lose" dialog by showing what the opponent had versus your own hand.

This is a post-match summary, not handholding. This serves to explain why the player won or lost. This way a player could completely skip the manual and still learn the mechanics of the game via trial and error. It's not handholding, it's meaningful feedback.

An example of hand-holding would be if the game automatically highlighted which dice to reroll. And it would be a terrible idea. Stop confusing the two concepts.

Besides, for me it's more convenient to alt-tab and google it up on the witcher wiki than use the manual. 3s for the wiki, 10s for the manual.

how can you not see why you lost or won? The dice are right there in front of you at the end of the game.

Sorry, but I still see that as hand holding. The developers are not obligated to teach you how to play the game when there is a manual for that. I remember the days when games actually had a useful manual, back in the day when games were more complex. Witcher 2 is a more complex game then the average RPG out there now, they give you a worth while manual so you can learn the game so they don't have to throw it in your face and be annoying when you are playing the game. Tutorials are annoying in games, I'll read the manual and let me get started in playing. The developers do not need to create a way for you to learn the game without reading the manual, it is much better that they don't.
 
ryannberg said:
how can you not see why you lost or won? The dice are right there in front of you at the end of the game.

Sorry, but I still see that as hand holding. The developers are not obligated to teach you how to play the game when there is a manual for that. I remember the days when games actually had a useful manual, back in the day when games were more complex. Witcher 2 is a more complex game then the average RPG out there now, they give you a worth while manual so you can learn the game so they don't have to throw it in your face and be annoying when you are playing the game. Tutorials are annoying in games, I'll read the manual and let me get started in playing. The developers do not need to create a way for you to learn the game without reading the manual, it is much better that they don't.

Witcher 2, when released, did not have inventory sorting. Now the player can effortlessly and automatically sort items based on weight or name.

What is your opinion on this functionality?
 
fizzbizz said:
Witcher 2, when released, did not have inventory sorting. Now the player can effortlessly and automatically sort items based on weight or name.

What is your opinion on this functionality?

Not comparable at all. With Dice Poker you want the game to tell you how to play, despite it being in the manual.

You want the game to tell you, "You lost because 3 of a kind is better than a 2 of a kind" or something like that. You read the manual, find out what the hierarchy is, and then use that information while you play the game, to help you decide what dice to keep, how much to bet, decide to resign or not. You see both set of dice the whole time. And in the end, you can look at the dice again to see why you won or lost. You don't need the game to tell you the hierarchy is when it is in the manual.
 
ryannberg said:
Not comparable at all. With Dice Poker you want the game to tell you how to play, despite it being in the manual.

I refer you to my previous post. Reread it please.
 
Kudos said:
TW2 should have come with a "Must be played at least TWICE!" sticker on the box, because I think the majority of gamers now do not think to play a game more than once... just finish it & move on to the next release,

This is why I've always thought that all versions of TW2 should have an achievement system (not just Steam/XBOX). There should be a list of trophies on an intro screen sub-menu clearly showing players that they've only seen a fraction of the game. There are people out there who complain that the game is too short or too linear, and yet they're not even aware of the two paths.
 
Thothistox said:
This is why I've always thought that all versions of TW2 should have an achievement system (not just Steam/XBOX). There should be a list of trophies on an intro screen sub-menu clearly showing players that they've only seen a fraction of the game. There are people out there who complain that the game is too short or too linear, and yet they're not even aware of the two paths.

I agree completely that something should be done to subtly encourage repeat playthroughs. I have been thinking about this a little myself, and drawing on CDPRs past updates and the fact that TW3 imo should have an ending (I believe they are discussing it internally - but how could a story like Geralts not have a definitive end?), I think a great idea would be for "lateral dlc".

I mean by that that all additions should add laterally to the existing story, expounding on it, rather than tacking stuff on to the end. Imagine Shani, or other favourite characters from the past, as a dlc, not in original game but folded completely into the game as a dlc, with CDPRs excellent characterisation - this could lead to amazing variations in playthroughs.

I'd rather play again than see Uber Geralt arise.
 
Kudos said:
I agree completely that something should be done to subtly encourage repeat playthroughs. I have been thinking about this a little myself, and drawing on CDPRs past updates and the fact that TW3 imo should have an ending (I believe they are discussing it internally - but how could a story like Geralts not have a definitive end?), I think a great idea would be for "lateral dlc".

I mean by that that all additions should add laterally to the existing story, expounding on it, rather than tacking stuff on to the end. Imagine Shani, or other favourite characters from the past, as a dlc, not in original game but folded completely into the game as a dlc, with CDPRs excellent characterisation - this could lead to amazing variations in playthroughs.

I'd rather play again than see Uber Geralt arise.

An insightful observation. I like your idea. RPG DLCs have the problem of introducing power creep. By the time you reach the final boss you're rocking the +65535 searing excalibur of deityhood you looted from Jesus Christ. You want to reward the player for completing DLCs with cool items and abilities, but you don't want to rebalance the whole game due to some munchkin combinations.

The estimated playtime for W3 is about 100h, which is IMO the sweet spot for RPGs. It would make more sense to introduce DLC content as alternatives to existing quest lines.
 
If I were Emhyr (emperor of Nilfgaard) cut your head for make this post.... Just kidding :D

I disagree in the most cases. You may not like the game but ...hate it?
 
I think people are too extreme nowadays. Or you 'love' something or you 'hate' it. Why can't you create an opinion based on the point you've pointed instead of 'why I hate?'
You just gave some good points but totally forgot the good ones. Wouldn't be easier to create an opinion based on good/bad points instead of just on the bad ones?
 
I
I mean by that that all additions should add laterally to the existing story, expounding on it, rather than tacking stuff on to the end. Imagine Shani, or other favourite characters from the past, as a dlc, not in original game but folded completely into the game as a dlc, with CDPRs excellent characterisation - this could lead to amazing variations in playthroughs.

Making a DLC just for a favorite character seems like a shit idea. Story DLC's that exist in another time from the vanilla game are a good idea just like the past W1 DLCs.
 
Yeah. Yeah I agree with basically all points.

I could write a long post where I explain why *some* aspects are ok but yeah some things are just unacceptable. Like the whole "I'm kicking Letho's ass but through the power of cutscenes, I lose." That's awful game design...

But hey, none of those points really drag the game down because the game is never broken by them, merely hampered. For me, personally, the story, characters and the atmosphere, is the focus here. Therefore it needs to be top notch. Which it is. Which is why The Witcher 2's shortcomings, aren't a dealbreaker for me. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not making excuses here. I'm merely saying that I appreciate the game for certain aspects and the negative aren't detracting from the overall experience.

Am I making any sense? Hopefully I am. It's late and my brain is a bit fuzzy :p
 
Top Bottom