Addar said:it is civil...WAR!!! />
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.
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.
fizzbizz said:One step forward, one roll backwards.
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.
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?
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.
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,
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.
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.
Technical:
I understand technical limitations and lack of engineering expertise to go and pull a Skyrim on last-gen consoles
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.